University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Building Leadership Capacity From the Top:
How Superintendents Empower Principals to Lead Schools
Veronica Maria Perez
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2023

© Copyright by Veronica Maria Perez 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Veronica Maria Perez certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Charles Hinman
Christina Kishimoto
Gregory Franklin, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This dissertation explores the ways superintendents build leadership capacity among principals
to improve student performance. Drawing on existing literature regarding educational leadership
development, this study involved employing a qualitative research design and data gathered
through surveys and interviews of 10 superintendents of public school districts in Southern
California. The study yielded (a) an in-depth understanding of the leadership skills desired by
these superintendents in principals in their district, (b) the reported actions taken by
superintendents to build leadership capacity among those principals, and (c) the superintendents’
understanding of the critical components of attracting, developing, and retaining administrators
in their districts. The skills most desired by the superintendents in their school leaders were
ability to foster a positive culture and climate, instructional leadership skills, effective
communication, strategic management, and ability to organize forward-moving professional
learning communities. The various strategies employed included coaching/mentoring, fostering a
culture of collaboration, and providing opportunities for professional development. The critical
components mentioned by the participating superintendents were leadership academies, stretch
opportunities, tapping, and teachers on special assignment. These findings have significant
implications for educational policy and practice because they suggest ways to build leadership
capacity from the top, potentially improving school performance and ensuring student success.
By providing practical recommendations for superintendents and other educational leaders, this
study contributes to the ongoing conversation about how to build effective and sustainable
leadership practices in schools.
Keywords: leadership capacity, principal pipeline, professional development

v
Dedication
To my dad, thank you for always pushing me to strive for excellence and for instilling in me a
strong work ethic. Your support and encouragement have helped me reach this point in my
academic career.
To my mom, your faith in my abilities has helped me push past challenges along the way. I am
thankful for your love and support.
To my brothers, your dedication to your own passions and pursuits have motivated me to strive
for excellence in my own career.

vi
Acknowledgements
Dr. Franklin, your encouragement, patience, and support helped me navigate the
challenges of this dissertation. Thank you for your willingness to give so generously of your time
and energy. Dr. Kishimoto, your insightful comments and critical feedback have helped me to
produce work of the highest quality. Dr. Hinman, your expertise in education and your
dedication to your students and staff have been an inspiration to me. Your willingness to share
your insights, your encouragement, and your support is the reason I took on this challenge.
Finally, I would like to thank all the University of Southern California faculty and staff who have
supported me throughout my academic journey. Your commitment to excellence and your
passion for learning have been motivational. Thank you all for your contributions to my success.
Fight on!

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study.............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem.................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 4
Limitations and Delimitations............................................................................................. 4
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 5
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 10
Identified Principal Leadership Skills............................................................................... 11
Principal Programs, Practices, and Professional Development ........................................ 18
Principal Pipeline.............................................................................................................. 22
Easton’s Model and the Human Resources Theoretical Framework................................ 25
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 29
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 29
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 30
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 31
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 34
Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 35

viii
Summary........................................................................................................................... 36
Chapter Four: Findings................................................................................................................. 37
Overview and Organization .............................................................................................. 38
Demographics of the Participants..................................................................................... 40
Coding of Data.................................................................................................................. 45
Presentation of Findings ................................................................................................... 46
Research Question 1 Findings .......................................................................................... 46
Research Question 2 Findings .......................................................................................... 57
Research Question 3 Findings .......................................................................................... 64
Comparative Data ............................................................................................................. 69
Summary........................................................................................................................... 74
Chapter Five: Summary ................................................................................................................ 76
Findings............................................................................................................................. 77
Limitations........................................................................................................................ 85
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 86
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 87
Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 88
References..................................................................................................................................... 89
Appendix A: Superintendent Presurvey...................................................................................... 110
Informed Consent Form.................................................................................................. 110
Survey Items ................................................................................................................... 111
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 115
Appendix B: Superintendent Interview Protocol........................................................................ 116
Setting the Stage ............................................................................................................. 117
Heart of the Interview ..................................................................................................... 117

ix
Closing Question............................................................................................................. 119

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Participants and Their School Districts 41
Table 2: Participating District Demographic 43
Table 3: Superintendent Top Five Skills From Survey (Small Districts) 48
Table 4: Superintendent Interview Responses on Culture and Climate (Small Districts) 50
Table 5: Superintendent Interview Responses on Instructional Leadership (Small
Districts) 51
Table 6: Superintendent Interview Responses on Communication (Small Districts) 53
Table 7: Superintendent Interview Responses on Strategic Management (Small
Districts) 55
Table 8: Superintendent Interview Responses on PLCs (Small Districts) 566
Table 9: Responses to Questions 5–6 From the Small District Superintendent Survey 577
Table 10: Superintendent Interview Responses on Programs, Practices, and Professional
Development (Small Districts) 60
Table 11: Responses to Question 7 From the Small District Superintendent Survey 62
Table 12: Responses to Question 8 From the Small District Superintendent Survey 64
Table 13: Superintendent Interview Responses on Critical Components of a Successful
Principal Pipeline (Small Districts) 65
Table 14: Responses to Questions 9–10 From the Small District Superintendent Survey 69
Table 15: Top Five Skills From the Superintendent Survey (Small and Medium-Sized
Districts) 70
Table 16: Responses to Questions 9–10 From the Superintendent Survey (Small and
Medium-Sized Districts) 74
Table 17: Research Question 1 Themes 79
Table 18: Research Question 2 Themes 81
Table 19: Research Question 3 Themes 84

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 26
Figure 2: Superintendent Gender and Age 42
Figure 3: Superintendent Ethnicity 42
Figure 4: Types of Programs, Practices, and Professional Development Opportunities
Provided to Principals in the Last Year (Small Districts) 58
Figure 5: Types of Programs, Practices, and Professional Development Opportunities
Provided to Principals in the Last Year (Small and Medium-Sized Districts) 72
Figure 6: Final Conceptual Framework 78

1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The evidence that school leadership plays a significant role in students’ learning has been
growing (e.g., Hallinger & Heck, 1996; Leithwood et al., 2004; Youngs et al., 2021). The
number of students an average principal can potentially impact is far greater than that for an
average teacher because of the sheer differences in exposure involved (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2017). Support for school principals has unfortunately only recently become
a priority of school districts (DeMatthews et al., 2021; Goff et al., 2014). District office
supervisors’ primary focus should be on building leadership capacity in principals (Honig &
Rainey, 2020). Schools have reached a point at which it is crucial that superintendents make
building the capacity of their school leaders urgent, according to Grissom et al. (2021):
Foremost, our results on the importance of principals’ effects suggest the need for
renewed attention to strategies for cultivating, selecting, preparing, and supporting a
high-quality principal workforce. The payoffs to successful strategies appear very large
for student learning and for other important outcomes, such as student attendance and
teacher turnover. (p. xvii)
For a superintendent to be able to appropriately address the needs of principals, existing
literature also indicates the superintendent must be able to develop and nurture professional
relationships and have the skills and expertise needed to develop a culture that can adapt to the
continuous cycle of change (Glass et al., 2000).
Background of the Problem
Educational policies at the federal, state, and local levels have undergone many changes
over the years. The position of a school principal as a middle manager implementing these
policies and responding to external and internal demands to improve student learning has

2
remained constant (K. Rousmaniere, 2013). In addition to effective policy implementation,
principal longevity is important because school-wide initiatives take an average of 5–7 years to
implement (Wallace Foundation, 2013). High principal turnover has a negative effect on school
conditions academically (Walsh & Dotter, 2020), socially (Bartanen et al., 2019), and financially
(Edwards et al., 2018). Schools have recently had to contend with a decrease in the level of
administrator experience (Grissom et al., 2021; Heffernan, 2021). Levin et al. (2019) found 21%
of new administrators in high poverty schools left their positions after their 1st year. Two of the
five most cited reasons for departure were inadequate preparation and poor professional
development. Absence of a standard administrator training program invites inequities to grow
among districts and schools. According to Turnbull et al. (2021) professional development
directly influences the practices of school principals when it is relevant, timely, and high
quality—entailing consistent follow up and coaching—resulting in enhanced teaching practices
and student learning outcomes.
Statement of the Problem
Since the establishment of California’s state department of education in 1921, educational
leaders in the state have provided numerous resources, implemented policies, and used
multitiered systems of support to meet the needs of students, with a focus on building and
sustaining improvement to address inequities in student learning (Darling-Hammond & Plank,
2015). Day and Gu (2018) found that principals of “successful schools” influenced the
implementation of policy reforms in such a way that their student reality was different from that
of principals of “ordinary” schools. A principal’s perception of their control over policy
implementation influences not only student learning but also teacher turnover (Printy &
Williams, 2015). Schools have recently had to contend with a decrease in the level of

3
administrator experience (Beckett, 2021; Grissom et al., 2021; Mininger, 2022). Given the
influence a principal has over the students and staff members on their campus, it is imperative
that the principal’s superintendent be extensively involved in the principal’s development as a
leader in addition to other responsibilities of the principal (Kowalski & Bjork, 2014).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to understand how 10 superintendents made sense of their
social responsibilities to create instructional leaders—specifically, the skills they deemed
essential for effective principals and their methods of building capacity for these skills in their
current administrations. I and another researcher worked in a team of two gathering data from
superintendents of five small and five medium-sized school districts. I began with a focus on the
five small districts and then stepped back to include the five medium-sized school districts, in
search of similarities and differences in processes based on district size. This study has the
potential to provide insight into how some superintendents build effective programs for
enhancing skills they find desirable in school principals by acknowledging existing skill sets
considered essential and the district-level supports perceived as fruitful for developing
principals’ leadership skills. Bolman and Deal’s (2017) human resources framework coupled
with Easton’s (1953) political systems framework formed the lens for understanding the data
gathered via surveys and interviews.
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals?
2. What programs, practices, and professional development opportunities do district
leaders provide to principals?

4
3. What do superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop
future administrators?
Significance of the Study
This study adds to the existing literature on superintendents’ impact on development of
effective principals. I looked deeply into the perceived efforts of 10 superintendents to provide
leadership development opportunities and the reported impact of these efforts on the professional
growth of their school leaders. I identified the skills most valued in principals by the participants.
Although not generalizable, this information serves as an initial bank of skills for current and
future school leaders to work toward strengthening. This study also contributes to understanding
of the epistemology of superintendents at all levels of experience regarding the best professional
development practices for principals impacting pedagogy.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study had the following limitations:
1. Items in the survey were tested in Spring of 2022, but because of time restrictions,
experts were not consulted in creation of the survey.
2. The limited time frame restricted the study to a presurvey and one interview per
participant.
3. Use of snowball sampling may have limited the distribution of the sample, thus
introducing the possibility of sampling bias.
The study had the following delimitations:
1. This qualitative study was not designed to be generalizable; rather, it was designed to
obtain insight into the understandings and experiences of the participants. A small
group of 10 superintendents were thus used.

5
2. The small sample made the quantitative data collected susceptible to Type I and
Type II errors.
Definition of Terms
Book clubs are a model of professional development that provides members with
opportunities to examine their knowledge, beliefs, and professional practices as they read about
alternative perspectives and personally connect with texts in a supportive context (George,
2002).
California Professional Standards for Education Leaders: California’s expectations for
school administrators, based on six broad evidence-based leadership categories: shared vision,
instructional leadership, management and learning environment, family and community
engagement, ethics and integrity, and external context and policy (Commission on Teacher
Credentialing, 2014).
Climate is the attitude, mood, and morale of a school as an organization (National
Association of Elementary School Principals, 2008).
Coaching is the practice of providing guidance and support, through a thought-provoking
and creative process, to another individual that inspires them to achieve their goals and maximize
and reach their full potential (Bloom et al., 2005; International Coaching Federation, 2023;
Sheridan & Johnson, 2021).
Communication is the process of reciprocation conveying information from one person to
another; however, communication is effective only when a sender’s intended message is
received, accurately interpreted, accepted, and acknowledged by the receiver through a response
or feedback (Ezenwafor, 2013).

6
Conference is a professional-development opportunity for leaders to increase their
learning of the latest innovative research-based strategies, common practices, and ideas that
expand their personal and professional skill sets (Tingly, 2023).
Culture is the common set of expectations and rules that members of a school (as an
organization) conform to when assimilating (National Association of Elementary School
Principals, 2008).
External validity is an estimate of the extent to which an effect is valid beyond the sample
of observations included in the analysis establishing the existence of the effect.
Fit is the match between the values of a school organization and a candidate’s
educational philosophy, presence, and embodiment of community values and methods of
operation (Baltzell & Dentler, 1983; Walker & Kwan, 2012).
Improvement, for the purposes of this study, is engagement in learning new practices that
work, based on external evidence and benchmarks of success, across multiple schools and
classrooms and in a specific area of academic content and pedagogy, resulting in continuous
increase in students’ academic performance over time. Improvement corresponds to measurable
increases in the quality of instructional practice and student performance over time. If quality
and performance are on the vertical axis of a graph, and time is on the horizontal axis,
improvement is movement in a consistently northeasterly direction (Elmore, 2002).
Instructional leadership is a model of school leadership that entails a principal actively
collaborating with teachers to cultivate high-quality instruction practices that are critical to
student learning and achievement (Brolund, 2016; Kolbe & Strunk, 2012).

7
Instructional rounds are a professional-development practice, adapted to education from
the field of medicine, involving a network of educators working together to identify and solve
issues focused on the improvement of teaching and learning (City et al., 2009).
Job-embedded professional development is a continuous, ongoing process of professional
learning, application, and inquiry-based work drawn from professional knowledge that exists
within an educator’s own school and among their colleagues; an educator integrates this process
into their workday with the intent of building capacity (Croft et al., 2010; Wei et al., 2009).
Leadership capacity focuses on the ability of a person to effectively engage with and
apply the knowledge, skills, abilities, and values of leadership (Dugan, 2011; Dugan et al., 2013;
Owen, 2012; Seemiller & Murray, 2013).
Mentor is someone who shares their knowledge, skills, and experience to help another to
manage their own learning to develop the other’s skills and improve the other’s performance and
growth (Metros & Yang, 2006; Sheridan & Johnson, 2021).
Peer observation is a professional-development strategy that involves peer partnerships
engaging in continual authentic professional-development opportunities that facilitate increased
learning for both partners (Shortland, 2004).
Principal is the chief instructional leader of a school who has full authority over the
school and is responsible and accountable for every aspect of the school (Kafka, 2009).
Principal networks consist of a group of administrators organized for purposes related to
learning, inquiry, support, or school improvement (Niesz, 2007).
Principal pipelines are a district-wide systematic continuum strategy used to attract,
prepare, develop, and retain an ongoing pool of effective school leaders (Gates, 2020).

8
Professional development is the set of knowledge- and skill-building activities that
increase the capacity of teachers and administrators to respond to external demands and to
engage in the improvement of practice and performance (Elmore, 2002).
Professional learning communities are a facilitation of collaboration of committed
educators through a systematic data-driven approach, which uses the PLC cycles of collective
inquiry and action research to increase a team’s effectiveness (Grissom et al., 2021).
Site visit involves a brief physical walk-through of a campus; is conducted for purposes
of observation, evaluation, and collection of data; and is followed by an adult-to-adult model of
discourse that involves professional conversation about practice (Downey et al., 2004, p. ix; see
also AdLit, 2023; Workplace Testing, 2018).
Skill is the capacity to do something successfully as a result of acquired information or
training (Huse, 2010).
Strategic management skills consist primarily of those needed to conduct strategic
management of tangible resources, such as planning, organizing, structuring, managing
budgets/resource allocations, using data, and hiring, placing, and retaining personnel (Anderson
et al., 2010).
Superintendent is a school district’s educational leader and acting chief executive officer.
A superintendent is a symbolic figure representing the educational interests of their district’s
community (Powers & Constance, 2019).
Workshop is an educational professional-development experience designed to be hands
on, providing participants with practical skills and techniques they can apply in a safe supportive
environment (Center for Community Health and Development, 2023).

9
Organization of the Study
This dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 presented an overview of the study
and included the background justifying the statement of the problem and laying the foundation
for the purpose and significance of the study. The chapter also addressed the research questions,
limitations, delimitations, and definitions of key terms. Chapter 2 presents a review of literature
relating to the following three areas: the history of public school principals, characteristics of
effective principals, and “good” professional development and principal pipelines. Chapter 3
describes the methodology of this study, including sample and population selection,
instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis. Chapter 4 reports the research findings based
on the analysis of the surveys and interviews. Chapter 5 consists of a summary of the findings
and discussion of the limitations, implications for practice, recommendations for future research,
and conclusions. The dissertation ends with references and appendices.

10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
A novice principal’s inability to positively affect pedagogy in their school has a
detrimental impact on the development of teachers and students (Béteille et al., 2012; Grissom et
al., 2021). The investment a superintendent makes into a principal’s ability to lead effectively is
important to study, because a principal’s influence on student learning is second only to that of
classroom teachers (Day et al., 2009; Harris et al., 2007; Leithwood et al., 2004). Schools have
historically struggled with high administrative turnover that has largely resulted from principals
feeling inadequately prepared (Battle & Gruber, 2010; Béteille et al., 2012; Jacobson, 2005;
Levin et al., 2019; MetLife, 2012). The high rate of turnover and its negative impact on students
and teachers (DeMatthews et al., 2022) has necessitated new principal training and empirical
literature on how to build leadership capacity at the administrative level of education. Most
superintendents are former principals who understand the demands of the position and possess
the experience and knowledge needed to strengthen principals’ instructional leadership
capabilities (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2015). In this chapter, I first highlight the
essential skills that effective principles should possess, as determined by trends in existing
literature. Next, I review what existing literature suggests are effective leadership professionaldevelopment practices. Following that is a discussion of formal and informal methods of
succession for the principal position. Throughout, I include literature relating to superintendents’
influence on leadership in education, with respect to district policy, and their efforts to build
capacity in principals. I complete the chapter by explaining how to view existing literature
through a theoretical framework combining Bolman and Deal’s (2017) human resources
framework with Easton’s (1953) political systems framework.

11
Identified Principal Leadership Skills
Many leading educational experts have published work detailing the essential skills
school leaders should possess to lead their schools effectively. This section reviews the work of
many of these experts and highlights the essential skills that overlap among them. Included in
these skill sets are culture and climate, instructional leadership, communication, strategic
management, and PLCs.
Culture and Climate
According to Center for Educational Leadership (2012), an effective principal
understands that it is their responsibility to create and maintain school climate and that to do so
they must be committed to transforming their school’s culture into one that is reflective, equity
driven, and achievement based. The academic success of every student must be at the core of
school climate. A principal achieves this by bringing together staff, students, and the school
community to adopt a mindset of high expectations, results-driven actions, reflection practices,
and responsiveness to the needs of every student (Center for Educational Leadership, 2012). An
effective principal is one who can create the conditions necessary for a school to thrive and is the
center of leadership influence on their campus (Wallace Foundation, 2013).
An effective principal cultivates an inclusive, caring, and supportive school community
that engages families and the community in meaningful, reciprocal, and mutually beneficial ways
to promote each student’s academic success and well-being (National Policy Board for
Educational Administration, 2015). Bringing diverse school communities together to create
cultures of caring, communication, and collaboration enables success for all. An effective leader
creates conditions for learning and cultivates a culture that values learning among both students

12
and teachers (Grissom et al., 2021). They emphasize a culture of learning for all and strategically
provide opportunities for teachers to improve their teaching practices (Ash & Hodge, 2016).
A caring culture and positive climate cannot prevent differences of opinion and
unexpected challenges. For this reason, according to Bennis and Thomas (2002), it is important
for a principal to be able to “conquer adversity and emerge stronger and more committed than
ever” (p. 2). An effective principal works with all stakeholders to create expectations, develop
goals, create processes that monitor their action plan, and provide feedback, direction, and
support necessary for continuous improvement (Ash & Hodge, 2016). They work with
stakeholders to ensure the stakeholders understand that student learning should be at the
forefront of everything the stakeholders do.
The decisions made by an effective leader who acts with moral purpose demonstrate their
intention of having a positive impact on the people in their organization. They act in a manner
such that the decisions they make are always in the best interest of the students the organization
serves. They bring the group together to make critical decisions and hold each other accountable
by assessing themselves and their progress toward an intended goal. They cultivate moral
purpose in others, enable others to be part of the solution, and recognize others for their work.
They strive to improve the quality of life of individuals in the organization and how they interact
and work with one another. Ninety percent of employees who worked for leaders who were rated
as having a high moral purpose said that they felt seen, heard, and respected and, as a result,
were inspired and motivated to contribute to the goals of their organizations (Fullan, 2010).
Instructional Leadership
School leadership is second in importance only to teaching because principals have the
ability to create, support, and sustain school climates that focus on learning and student

13
achievement school wide (Louis et al., 2010). Researchers have recognized that the key
ingredient in school performance is a skilled and committed instructional administrative leader,
because such a leader can impact students’ outcomes, such as academic achievement and
graduation and attendance rates (Darling-Hammond et al., 2022; Krasnoff, 2015). Such a leader
shifts their focus from teaching to learning. They focus on the future and encourage risks,
remove barriers, and coach others to act outside their comfort zones to impact student learning
(Ash & Hodge, 2016).
Principals with effective instructional leadership skills are intentional with their time.
They understand how critical it is to engage in instructionally focused interactions with teachers.
Such interactions fall into three categories: teacher observation and evaluation, feedback and
coaching, and establishment of data-driven instructional programs. Effective principals
understand the elements associated with high-quality instruction and make the time to actively
participate in their classroom teachers’ growth by providing valuable feedback that impacts each
teacher’s teaching practice. Effective principals motivate teacher learning and can connect
teachers with high-quality, relevant professional development opportunities that impact
instruction (Grissom et al., 2021). Principals who are good instructional leaders also obtain
teacher buy-in through the evaluation process because they can provide constructive feedback
coupled with professional development opportunities to support skill development. Such
principals understand that coaching is valuable and impacts teacher efficacy and student
achievement more than informal classroom walk-throughs. All school leaders should use datadriven instructional leadership practices. Effective principals use data to set educational goals,
determine resources, make strategic decisions, and monitor progress (Grissom et al., 2021).

14
Communication
According to the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2015), an
effective principal develops, advocates for, and enacts across their school a mission, a vision, and
core values that reflect the school’s fundamental role of providing a high-quality education that
supports the academic success and emotional well-being of every student. Regardless of title, all
members of an organization must have a strong understanding of the vision and mission of the
organization and what their role is in supporting accomplishment of the goals set (Fullan, 2001).
Principals are active participants in leading their stakeholders to understand the student-focused
decision-making process (Ash & Hodge, 2016). In addition to communicating school values and
education philosophies to teachers (Ruliana, 2016) a principal should motivate and encourage
continuous improvement in performance (Murniati et al., 2021). To accomplish such a feat,
principal communication should include the creation of a family atmosphere and multiple
methods of communication (Maulidin et al., 2022).
Principals need to be transparent, include all stakeholders, clearly communicate
processes, and use data to evaluate existing systems and make decisions about allocation of
resources (Center for Educational Leadership, 2012). A principle must be a skilled
communicator with an open-door policy, share information often and regularly with all
stakeholders, build agreed-upon expectations and commitments, recognize their organization’s
talent, and be able to have tough conversations when necessary. The complexities involved in
evaluating a teacher with the goal of improving student learning require principals to clearly
communicate school-wide expectations and goals (Pujianto et al., 2020). Principals with good
communication skills shift organizations toward practices that clarify and deepen learning.

15
Principals who effectively communicate have the ability to cultivate trust and are easily
accessible and visible to all stakeholders (Grissom et al., 2021).
Strategic Management
An effective leader understands that to achieve the results they desire, they must first
focus on the people and relationships in their organization. They are skilled in personnel
management. They understand the importance of having the right people on their team.
Recruitment and selection of new teachers—while also training, retaining, and developing
existing staff members—are their top priority (Center for Educational Leadership, 2012).
Employees thrive when leaders provide supportive conditions and create cultures of caring and
emotional team commitment. An effective principal understands the importance of strategically
managing scarce resources, the most important of which are time and social capital. A principal
with good strategic management skills understands the value created by managing their time and
protecting the time available to their staff to focus on teaching and learning. Successful
principals understand they must spend the majority of their time investing in people, creating
relationships, building trust, and connecting people to resources (Grissom et al., 2021).
According to Fullan (2001), effective leaders understand that change is difficult, but they
welcome the challenge posed by change. They respect resistance, embrace differences, and invite
the opinions of others who disagree with them. When making a decision, such a principal gathers
all the facts and opinions, listens to and learns from those who have been in place the longest,
carefully diagnoses the problem, is sincere about the change process, addresses group concerns,
gets buy-in, and develops a rational plan to fix the problem (Herold & Fedor, 2008). The
principal understands that most people resist change and that developing new skills is not a linear
process. An effective leader is heavily involved in the change process as both leader and learner.

16
They focus on the “how” and “what” of change and cultivate others’ skills so that those others
can become the experts.
PLCs
An effective principal secures internal and external accountability by ensuring that all
members of their school hold themselves to high standards and have accountability measures set
in place so that members reflect and respond to what data tell them (Fullan, 2001). Such a
principal focuses on the continuous cycle of improvement and uses data, evidence, and inquiry to
develop the adults in their organization because they have the greatest impact on the achievement
of the students. Effective principals create cultures of learning and implement processes that
monitor their progress along with cycles of continuous improvement. They establish, protect, and
foster the development of effective PLCs as they work to support strengthening of teacher
instructional practices that enhance student learning (Ash & Hodge, 2016). To effectively
establish a PLC, a good principal builds a system of trust in which observations and cycles of
inquiry are normal and research-based supports improve the professional practices of all in the
organization (Center for Educational Leadership, 2012). Creation of a team-focused culture
stems from an administrator who values collaboration and understands the impact of collective
efficacy.
The results of a meta-analysis of teaching practices with statistically significant effects on
learning suggest that individualistic efforts produced minimal results, but collective efforts
produced statistically significant results (Donohoo et al., 2018). An effective principal focuses on
the group and creates the conditions necessary for the group to elevate and support the growth of
each member as well as seek out talent in others to become the next leader of learning. Principals
should encourage and engage in conversations about issues that arise and seek innovative

17
solutions. A principal should also build the skill sets of the members of their organization to
allow them to tackle issues quickly and effectively. An effective principal creates a culture of
shared decision making and uses evidence-based models of organizational diagnosis: data
gathering, analysis, action plan, implementation, evaluation, and revision. Elmore and Burney
(1999) stated that the driver of instructional change is the shared expertise of talented people
working together in a collegial, caring, and respectful manner. Everyone should be involved in
the work to create an action plan so that both administrators and teachers understand their role in
ensuring its effectiveness (Ash & Hodge, 2016).
Effective principals facilitate collaboration through a systematic data-driven approach
that uses the PLC cycles of collective inquiry and action research to increase team effectiveness.
They understand how critical it is to consistently make use of key data and expose their staff to
relevant research focused on improving student learning. According to Schlectly (2005), “it is
essential that leaders work to establish a culture where results are carefully assessed and actions
are taken based on these assessments” (p. 11). Decisions should be data driven, and an effective
leader makes it a priority to model the process and ensure stakeholders understand how to use
data in their continuous learning cycles by using relevant data and identifying a need for
improvement (planning), committing to an action plan and assessing the effectiveness of this
change (doing), analyzing the results and identifying the successes and failures of the plan
(studying), looking at the results and revising or implementing new structures for continuous
improvement (acting), and repeating the cycle.
Many educational experts have studied successful school leaders and created lists of what
they believe to be the essential skill sets that an effective leader must possess to make an impact
on their school and its community; however, it is the superintendent who sets the tone and

18
ultimately holds their school leaders accountable for what they perceive to be the critical
qualities of effective leaders. With the growing demands on, and expectations of, principals, it
has become critical to know what specific skill sets superintendents intentionally foster to
develop the leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals.
Principal Programs, Practices, and Professional Development
As already discussed, principals play a significant role in school outcomes (Leithwood et
al., 2004), and supporting these leaders with training may yield the greatest school improvement
per dollar invested (Grissom et al., 2021). Existing literature indicates there is still much to learn
about the use and effects of administrator professional development (Darling-Hammond et al.,
2007; Davis et al., 2005; Dempster et al., 2011). For the purposes of this study, professional
development is the “set of knowledge- and skill-building activities that raise the capacity of
teachers and administrators to respond to external demands and to engage in improvement of
practice and performance” (Elmore, 2002, p. 7). Much of the reason for the limited
understanding regarding the most appropriate training pathways for administrators is the wide
variety of matters to be addressed throughout the school day and year, which causes some
principals to question how they can best take professionalization into their own hands
(Macpherson, 2009). It is also difficult to be certain how much any particular skill learned via
professional development contributes to the successes of a principal, because principals use so
many skills, often concurrently (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Despite the ambiguity
presented by existing literature, scholars have continued to widely accept that professional
development benefits the skill development of school leaders (Grissom, Mitani, & Woo, 2019).
According to Elmore (2002), investing in a principal’s “skill and knowledge” through good

19
professional development “is the imperative” if superintendents are to bridge the gap between
standards and achievement.
Elmore (2002) highlighted ineffective practices that may prevent delivery of good
professional development. If a superintendent relies on consensus building to determine the
professional development implemented, they run the risk of reinforcing existing behaviors
regardless of their effectiveness. If volunteerism determines who attends professional
development, superintendents may never reach the administrators in greatest need. If a
principal’s professional development goals are connected to their evaluation, the misaligned
purposes of the two objectives only serve to confuse the principal with respect to expectations. In
addition to implementation errors, Elmore emphasized that funds needed for professional
development exist but are mismanaged and misspent. When adequate professional development
is lacking, principals often seek other sources to help them fulfill their many obligations and
responsibilities (Jiang et al., 2017; Ng & Szeto, 2016).
Providing Skills and Knowledge
Principal professional development—such as coaching and mentoring—allows principals
to develop more effective leadership skills and improve their instructional practices (Herman et
al., 2017). As previously mentioned, the effectiveness of a principal is important because they
have the potential to increase student achievement and reduce teacher turnover (Gates et al.,
2019; Herman et al., 2017). A principal primarily receives offers of professional learning
opportunities at the start of their career (Gates et al., 2020; Herman et al., 2017). Although
national surveys show that most principals participate in professional development (Lavigne et
al., 2016; Taie & Goldring, 2019), they still feel ill prepared for the job (Battle & Gruber, 2010;
Béteille et al., 2012; Jacobson, 2005; Levin et al., 2019; MetLife, 2012). This implies that not all

20
professional development is created equal. For example, Grissom and Harrington (2010) found
that activities such as taking university courses were not associated with leader effectiveness, but
principals who participated in mentoring or coaching programs were more effective leaders than
those who did not. Superintendents could provide the experience and knowledge needed to
strengthen principals’ instructional leadership capabilities because most superintendents are
former principals who understand the demands of the position of principal (Council of Chief
State School Officers, 2015). Liljenberg (2021) cautioned that high expectations and relations
between principals and their superintendents can hinder or encourage professional development
of administrators. A relationship between a principal and superintendent that lacks trust and is
built on fear interferes with collaborative work settings, making it difficult to drive positive
change. Because building constructive relations takes time, patience is needed (Liljenberg,
2021).
Identifying Lead Learners
For professional development to be effective, a superintendent must make “public and
authoritative distinctions among teachers and administrators based on quality, competence,
expertise, and performance” (Elmore, 2002, p. 26). Following this advice means identifying
principals who know what to do, empowering principals to build their capacity to learn what to
do, and designing places in which, and events at which, people who know what to do teach those
who do not (Elmore, 2002).
Training on the Job
Asking principals themselves, Westberry and Horner (2022) identified three preferences.
First, principals preferred a focus on information and skills that they could implement
immediately. V. M. J. Robinson et al. (2009) supported this claim with their finding that

21
principals needed translation of strategic goals into routines they could practically apply. Second,
principals preferred professional development organized in cycles so that training could be
revisited throughout (Westberry & Horner, 2022). Third, principals wanted opportunities to
confront and overcome knowledge gaps (Westberry & Horner, 2022). Perez et al. (2011) also
highlighted that new principals who had participated in internships had stronger understanding of
their work than those who had not participated in internships. The internships likely provided the
on-the-job training other new administrators were requesting.
Collaboration and Reflection
Cunha et al. (2020) found principals preferred professional development that included
collaboration and reflection. Principals could better handle the complexities of their positions
with a framework for reflection on how leadership preparation works (Murphy, 2020). Principals
have also expressed a desire for opportunities to become involved in a community of practice
(Westberry & Horner, 2022). Research on leadership preparation programs relates not only to the
use of instructional strategies and relevant content but also to cohort membership to improve
leadership (Orr & Barber, 2006; Orr & Orphanos, 2011).
It is important to note that good professional development cannot overcome the low
capacity of an organization. Elmore (2002) defined this kind of low capacity as “the inability of
the organization to support the [leader] in navigating the complex interactions of the new skills
and knowledge with existing patterns of student engagement, curriculum, content, and setting”
(p. 25). A superintendent must consider the level of financial support needed and the baseline of
the organization and individual principals to ensure that professional development leads to
school improvement. Elmore (2002) said, “Teachers and administrators learn this culture of
passivity and helplessness as a consequence of working in dysfunctional organizations, not as a

22
consequence of choosing to think and behave that way. Improving the organization will change
what adults learn” (p. 30).
Principal Pipeline
The important role a principal plays in their school is well documented. A principal has
influence over student achievement (Grissom et al., 2021; Leithwood et al., 2004), school
environment (Branch et al., 2013), student attendance (Bartanen, 2020), student matriculation
(Sorensen et al., 2022), and teacher turnover (Boyd et al., 2011). However, few data collected
and assessed relate to formal succession management plans (Perrone et al., 2022). Existing
research also indicates a principal’s ability to positively influence their school’s community,
staff, and students depends on their preparation for the role (Gates et al., 2014; Orr & Orphanos,
2011).
Formal Succession Management Programs
Schools have typically not had formal recruitment processes in place (Grunow et al.,
2010). If policymakers do not understand how to create a systemic principal pipeline, they
reduce their ability to give every child access to quality principals and teachers (Fuller et al.,
2019; Grissom, Bartanen, & Mitani, 2019). Snyder (2015) argued, “Unless [teacher preparation]
candidates have opportunities to learn, practice, and assess their development in understanding
how teaching and leadership are inextricably intertwined, they may be less likely to do either of
them well” (p. 11). One way for teachers to explore the connection between teaching and
leadership is a principal development program. Darling-Hammond et al. (2007) suggested:
Recruitment and selection are central to program design, not incidental activities. The
knowledge and skills of those who enter a program determine to a great extent what kind
of curriculum can be effective and what kind of leader will emerge. (p. 19)

23
According to Darling-Hammond et al. (2007), recruited teachers should already have some
instructional leadership experience, because this is likely to support a move to principalship.
Davis and Darling-Hammond (2012) found model principal preparation programs had formal
university–district partnerships, allowing districts to have input into who became principal
preparation students, to financially support students with tuition assistance, to provide release
time for clinical activities, and to possibly offer paid full-time internships.
S. P. Gordon et al. (2016) found an ideal selection process would take place in two
phases. The first phase would consist of an application process; an essay on how each applicant,
as a principal, would help teachers improve instruction and assess their effectiveness; and the
Gallup Principal Insight test. Phase two would involve a smaller subgroup of applicants in a 2-
day face-to-face process. Day 1 would be an interview by faculty members and district
administrators, an in-basket activity, role-play, and group activity. On Day 2, applicants would
receive feedback on their performance the previous day and the final decision on who would be
admitted. Those admitted would be expected to help prepare those who were not for future
applications. S. P. Gordon et al. (2017) proposed eight topics for coverage in educational
leadership preparation: (a) democratic community; (b) school improvement; (c) instructional
leadership; (d) social justice; (e) school–community collaboration; (f) professional and ethical
conduct; (g) law, politics, policy, and governance; and (h) technical management.
Tapping
Tapping is a common informal method of identifying and encouraging teachers to
become principals (Lortie, 2009; Pounder & Crow, 2005). Although states have been certifying
more than enough administrators to fill principal vacancies (Lankford et al., 2003; Pounder et al.,
2003), and most open positions have been attracting multiple applicants (Roza, 2003), high

24
demand for school administrators has remained. Roza (2003) described this phenomenon not as a
labor shortage but as a skill shortage. An improvement on the informal recruitment method used
by most districts—tapping (Lortie, 2009)—could encourage more teachers with the right skill set
to pursue principalship. Tapping, or sponsored mobility, occurs when existing leaders, based on
their own criteria, encourage select teachers to follow a fast track to leadership (Turner, 1960).
Myung et al. (2011) found a substantial majority of principals reported having been tapped when
they were teachers. Principals tend to tap teachers who have participated in school-level
leadership and accurately recognize those who feel better equipped to take on principalship
(Myung et al., 2011). A negative attribute of tapping is that school leaders tend to tap teachers
who are male and share the leaders’ ethnicity (Myung et al., 2011). Goldring et al. (2014)
identified five major reasons principals did not use data to tap teachers: time, timing, technology,
training, and lack of trust. When principals did use data to tap teachers, they communicated the
kind of data used in decision making to staff, and those same data were made readily available to
staff. Evidence suggests that the informal practice of tapping can be systematized to reduce bias.
A common existing method is succession management, the need for which has been established
by the lack of talented applicants and the short time principals tend to spend in their positions
before moving up or moving on (Leibman et al., 1996).
Diversity
Many have described diversity in U.S. institutions of education as variation in race,
ethnicity, sexual orientation, and values and belief systems (Gao & Mager, 2011). The U.S.
public school student population has been growing in diversity every year, but teachers and
administrators have remained mostly White (Delpit, 2006; Khalifa et al., 2016). Percentages of
indigenous people, Black people, and other non-White people among principals have been

25
similar to those among teachers, but neither group has been reflecting the demographics of the
students served (Fuller & Young, 2022). Diversity on school campuses broadens the range and
variety of viewpoints collectively upheld by students and teachers, thus improving the quality of
education (Ryder et al., 2016). The lack of racial representation and its negative effects suggest a
need for restructuring of the recruitment and preparation of teachers and principals (Bartanen &
Grissom, 2019; Béteille et al., 2012).
Easton’s Model and the Human Resources Theoretical Framework
The conceptual framework underlying this study was created by combining Easton’s
(1965) political systems framework and Bolman and Deal’s (2017) human resources framework.
Easton (1965) developed the political systems framework to encourage a holistic approach to
understanding the human tendency toward equilibrium between interdependent elements
(Mohamed, 2021). A school district is a complex system with many moving parts working
together to educate children. Reaching a state of equilibrium is challenging for many reasons, but
a district’s superintendent is in a unique position to look at the system within their district and
help administrators work with stakeholders at all levels on their campuses to achieve a balance
between competing interests resulting in all students receiving high-quality education. Although
the primary audience for Bolman and Deal’s (2017) four-framework model consists of managers
and leaders, it is also applicable to the work of practitioner–scholars in education. The addition
of Bolman and Deal’s human resources framework enhanced Easton’s political systems
framework in this study because of its focus on aligning the needs of individuals within an
organization by engaging their talent and energy while meeting goals (Bolman & Deal, 2017). A
superintendent must invest the time and resources needed to develop a team of committed and
talented employees because their role includes recruiting, developing personnel, and

26
implementing effective evaluation structures (American Association of School Administrators,
2021; Syed, 2015). The building of capacity in a principal by a superintendent is a shift away
from compliance to relationships, knowledge sharing, coaching, and committing to the growth of
the principal, because culture and addressing the principal’s human needs largely influence
learning transfer (Brion, 2022). Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
Note. Adapted from “A Systems Analysis of Political Life” (p. 32) by David Easton, 1965,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

27
The conceptual framework underlying this study modifies Easton’s political systems
framework by combining stresses, demands, and supports and categorizing them collectively as
inputs. In Easton’s original framework, the stresses influence the inputs, and the inputs consist of
demands and supports. In addition, I replaced the concept of school systems as a political system
with the superintendent and principal. Although this is an oversimplification of what makes a
school system, for the purposes of this study, those two parties were the focus. Maxwell (2013)
stated that a conceptual framework both illuminates some areas and leaves others in darkness. A
deeper and more nuanced understanding of a superintendent’s influence on their administration
was possible because of this conceptual framework’s focus on the superintendent and principal.
It is also important to note that the conceptual framework has stresses and supports impacting
both superintendent and principal, because these have replaced the concept of school systems as
a political system. This conceptual framework rests on the assumption that a superintendent
influences a principal by relying on tools and techniques understandable through the human
resources framework. The principal then acts using the information or tools provided to
implement practices and policies. A feedback loop then exists because the principal reports
information back to the superintendent in the form of outcomes or new needs.
All four frameworks of Bolman and Deal’s model are valuable, but the human resources
framework was most applicable to this study because of the study’s focus on the skills and
empowerment of principals. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) said that a conceptual framework both
reveals and conceals meaning and understanding. Use of the human resources framework
addressed how administrators empower principals while meeting the needs of principals as
people and the needs of the organization. According to Bolman and Deal (2017), the basic
human resources strategies (after hiring staff) are keeping staff, investing in staff, empowering

28
staff, and promoting diversity. The human resources framework was thus the best tool with
which to understand how superintendents make sense of their role addressing the improvement
of leadership capacity.
Schools have been facing more and more varied internal and external pressures and
stresses. According to Ujifusa (2022):
the nation’s K–12 [kindergarten through 12th-grade] schools aren’t strangers to culture
wars and concerns about oversight. But new disputes about transparency in curriculum
and the role of the general public in what schools do every day have been supercharged
by prominent politicians, the pandemic, divisions about race, and other factors. (p. 1)
Schools need principals who can react to these stresses and demands, and in turn these principals
need superintendents who can mentor, guide, and build principals’ capacities for finding
solutions to these new, complex, and multifaceted challenges facing public education. According
to Fullan (2001), a more experienced superintendent has a system of pressure and support with
which to lead principals to intended goals. The combination of Easton’s political systems
framework and Bolman and Deal’s human resources framework allowed for interpretation and
understanding of such a system of pressure and support. This study included a theoretical
framework for interpretation of the data collected from superintendents on the skill development
of effective principals. The aims of this study were to examine the strategies used by
superintendents to build leadership capacity and to contribute to existing literature.

29
Chapter Three: Methodology
The leadership exercised by the principal of a school is crucial for realization of student
academic outcomes and improvement of a school’s environment (González-Falcón et al., 2020).
Despite the influence principals have on schools, 18% of new administrators leave their positions
after the 1st year (Levin et al., 2019). This change in leadership leads to a drop in students’
academic performance in mathematics and English, and it takes on average 3 years to close this
gap (Béteille et al., 2012). Two of the five most cited reasons for principals leaving their
leadership positions are inadequate preparation and poor professional development (Levin et al.,
2019). Superintendents must focus on building leadership capacity to meet the needs of new
principals and increasing their staying power to improve student learning (Institute for
Educational Leadership, 2000). Although a principal is in a critical leadership position
(Leithwood et al., 2004), little is known about how superintendents approach the task of
developing principals’ skills. Research is needed to determine the skills school administrators
possess and the leadership-capacity-building experiences that can support the development of
these skills. By examining the perceived effectiveness of five small and five medium-sized urban
districts’ practices for principal professional development and skill building, I sought with this
study to understand existing best practices as a contribution to future research that district leaders
can use to increase the effectiveness of principals leading their schools.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to understand how 10 superintendents were making sense
of their social responsibilities to create instructional leaders—specifically, the skills the
superintendents deemed essential for effective principals and the superintendents’ methods for
building capacity for these skills in existing principals. By acknowledging the skill sets

30
understood to be essential and the district-level supports perceived as fruitful for developing
principals’ leadership skills, this study had the potential to provide insight into how some
superintendents build effective programs for enhancing skills they find desirable in school
principals.
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals?
2. What programs, practices, and professional development opportunities do district
leaders provide to principals?
3. What do superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop
future administrators?
Sample and Population
I used a purposeful convenience sampling process to select superintendents from five
small and five medium-sized public school districts. Each of the five school districts located in
small urban areas enrolled no more than 22,300 students. Each of the five school districts located
in medium-sized urban areas enrolled more than 22,300 students. The selection process
depended on location and accessibility of a district to me (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). I
surveyed and interviewed superintendents who had demonstrated willingness to actively
participate in the capacity building of the principals in their district. The participants’ responses
were generalized to represent their collective perspectives and identify the strategies
implemented to develop the skills desired by the those in the target population.
Each participant in this study was serving as a superintendent in a California public
school district during the 2022–2023 school year. Participants were recruited via snowball

31
sampling. Survey data were collected through Google Forms, and interviews were conducted in
person. Only superintendents who were willing and able to commit to participating and were
able to both fill out the survey and meet for the interview were included as participants. Research
team members did not survey or interview participants in their own school districts.
Instrumentation
A qualitative instrument was the best choice for this study because I was interested in
superintendents’ visions and beliefs about the way to promote principal leadership development,
and such an instrument provided rich and specific insights (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). The
reason interviews were the right approach was that interviews are the only way to gain insight
into what people think, their opinions, and their perspectives. Prior to the interviews, participants
completed surveys; the combined data increased the credibility and internal validity of the
research (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals?
2. What programs, practices, and professional development opportunities do district
leaders provide to principals?
3. What do superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop
future administrators?
To answer these questions, the study relied on a tentative theory combining Bolman and Deal’s
(2017) human resources framework with Easton’s (1953) political systems framework. These
frameworks were used as the lens through which to understand the data gathered via surveys,
interviews, and artifacts. As presented in Figure 1, I contended that a systems approach to

32
education with a human resources frame model could guide interpretation of how effective
superintendents develop the skills principals need to effectively lead. Investment of time and
resources, according to Bolman and Deal (2017), communicates belief in an employee’s talent
and perseverance. This relationship produces feelings of shared success and reduces turnover
(Bolman & Deal, 2017). Superintendents must, with their leadership teams, work to build the
capacity of their principals with a focus on the principals’ needs as people; thus, the human
resources frame was relevant. Easton’s (1953) political systems framework allowed me to
consider how principals implement school policies and programs and return with outcomes and
new needs to their superintendents, creating a feedback loop.
Quantitative Instrument
The quantitative data were gathered through a survey created with Google Forms (see
Appendix A). The survey instrument was used to collect data not readily available (S. B.
Robinson & Firth Leonard, 2019) and inform the questions asked in the interviews that followed.
The survey is composed of four parts with a total of 10 questions. The first section collects
demographic information and information regarding past professional experiences. The second
section uses an open-ended question inviting the use of descriptive language to address desired
skills in principal leaders. The third section explicitly lists programs, practices, and professional
development options a district may provide its principal leaders, including the choice of “other.”
The “other” option does not provide a space for elaboration because that response necessitates a
more thorough follow-up during the corresponding interview. The fourth section addresses
impacts of actions taken by a superintendent’s district, as reported by the superintendent. The
response options are formatted as a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

33
(strongly agree). The choice among five points was necessary because neutrality with respect to
the statements was an appropriate feeling.
Qualitative Instrument
The qualitative data were gathered through in-person open-ended semistructured
interviews, with notes taken throughout (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Prior to its use in this
study, the interview protocol was field-tested in the spring of 2022. The use of interviewing
allows a researcher to gain insight into the thoughts and feelings of a participant that may not be
observable (Patton, 2002). The interview protocol consists of 14 questions and two scenarios
directly related to the research questions (see Appendix B). Approximately 90 min were allotted
for each superintendent to delve deeply in their responses. In the event that a superintendent did
not provide rich and descriptive data with their responses, optional follow-up questions included
for some of the questions in the protocol allowed the interviewer to gather that information
(Patton, 2002). Each interview began with a demographic question to gather background
information that later provided context for the collected data and allowed me to more fully
understand the participant and better analyze the data. The subsequent questions inquired about
leadership philosophy and expanded on information gathered in the survey. Next, the interviewer
addressed how the superintendent believed they built strong leadership in their district and the
professional learning opportunities they provided. The interview closed with two scenarios for
the superintendent to analyze and respond to. These thought experiments helped me better
understand the participants’ thought process and how they applied the information provided in
the interviews.

34
Data Collection
The basic principles of informed consent outlined by S. B. Robinson and Firth Leonard
(2019) were used. Participants were notified that their survey responses would be kept
confidential, that only the study team would have access to the information collected, and that
study data would be stored in a password-protected computer and destroyed after 3 years.
The first source of data collected was the presurvey. S. B. Robinson and Firth Leonard’s
(2019) checklist for quality question design was referred to during the design of the respondentcentered survey instrument, which provided useful and relevant data aligned with the research
questions. A cover letter preceded the survey and used Cialdini’s (2007) principles of persuasion
for writing compelling invitations. In addition to providing quantitative information, these data
served as a launching point for the gathering of rich descriptive data in the qualitative interviews
that followed (Patton, 2002). These surveys were made accessible to superintendents after the
superintendents had committed to participation, 1 month before their qualitative interview
appointments. Each participant also received weekly reminders to complete the survey until its
completion or the interview date, whichever came first.
The second source of data was the qualitative interviews, the protocol for which includes
14 questions and two scenarios. Patton’s (2002) guidelines for developing high-quality interview
experiences were used to design the interview protocol. I modified the protocol slightly to reflect
each superintendent’s responses on the quantitative survey, in addition to allowing for follow-up
questions. The in-depth interviews conducted provided the qualitative data needed to understand
the perspectives of the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The scenarios presented at the
end of each interview as thought exercises allowed the participant to provide hypothetical

35
responses and the interviewer to observe hypothetical applications of the philosophical
ideologies claimed earlier in the interview.
Data Analysis
This study involved the use of qualitative data from interviews and quantitative data from
surveys. The qualitative data served as the primary source of information. All interview
questions and survey items linked directly to the research questions.
The first research question relates to specific skills superintendents intentionally foster to
develop the leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals. This research
question is addressed directly in Question 2 of the survey and in a more nuanced way in
Questions 5 and 6. The research question is addressed in more depth in the interview protocol in
Question 3 and indirectly in Questions 4 and 5.
The second research question relates to the programs, practices, and professional
development opportunities provided by district leaders to principals. This research question is
addressed directly in Question 3 of the survey, and a very specific type of professional
development is covered in Question 2. The research question is addressed in more depth in the
interview protocol in Questions 8–13.
The third research question elaborates on Research Question 2 with a focus on the
impacts, as reported by superintendents, that programs, practices, and professional development
opportunities have on building the capacity of principals to lead their schools effectively.
Research Question 3 is indirectly addressed in the survey as part of Questions 8–10. The research
question is addressed in more depth in Questions 14–16 of the interview protocol. The scenarios
at the end of the interview protocol address both Research Questions 2 and 3.

36
Analysis of the data from the interviews was conducted using Creswell’s (2013) six steps
for data analysis. Interviews were recorded with the permission of the participants, and the
recordings were transcribed. The transcripts, researcher notes, and artifacts were then reviewed
to gain an overall interpretation of their meaning. These data were then coded by chunking the
information into categories. I took these categories and developed themes and descriptions for
analysis. I finally determined how these themes represented the qualitative narrative and the
interpretation of the findings. The quantitative data collected from the surveys were analyzed
using descriptive statistics to identify significant trends and correlations. The raw data from the
surveys were ordered and examined by computing modes to provide me with accurate and
relevant scores with which to describe the data set and measure variability from one participant
to another. I finally considered the relationship between the qualitative data and the quantitative
statistical findings, yielding a strong understanding of the research study results.
Summary
In summary, this study involved collection of data from two sources: surveys and
semistructured interviews. The data were collected from the superintendents of 10 urban public
school districts in California: five small districts and five of medium size. The study was guided
by three questions: What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals? What programs, practices, and
professional development opportunities do district leaders provide to principals? What do
superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop future administrators?
Chapter 4 presents the findings, and Chapter 5 discusses the findings.

37
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter examines the perceptions and practices of Southern California urban public
school superintendents with respect to leadership capacity building—specifically, the skills they
perceived as essential for principals leading urban public schools, the methods they used to build
capacity for these skills in their current administrations, and pathways for future administrative
candidates. Quantitative data were collected with a Google Form survey (see Appendix A).
Qualitative measures consisted of individual face-to-face interviews. The purpose of considering
both sources of data was to answer the following research questions:
1. What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals?
2. What programs, practices, and professional development opportunities do district
leaders provide to principals?
3. What do superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop
future administrators?
This study was conducted with an emphasis on qualitative interviews of five
superintendents from small urban public school districts and five superintendents from mediumsized urban public school districts. Although this study incorporated a qualitative presurvey to
gather demographic information from each of the participants and foreshadow themes identified
from the qualitative interview data, the study was not a mixed-methods study, because the
sample was small. The quantitative data in a true mixed-methods study must be generalizable,
and the sample of 10 superintendents in this study was too small to allow generalization.
The findings of this study provide valuable insight for superintendents who aspire to
improve, incorporate, or implement systems within their organizations to develop and refine the

38
skill sets of existing school leaders and increase leadership capacity among aspiring
administrators within their districts. This study adds to the existing literature on the impact of
superintendents on development of effective principals and construction of effective school
principal pipelines.
Overview and Organization
This study involved examination of the perceptions of 10 Southern California urban
public school superintendents regarding the building of leadership capacity; the study also
involved exploration of the formal and informal job-embedded practices that superintendents
intentionally fostered to build capacity among their school leaders. According to the Wallace
Foundation (2013), “Effective leadership is vital to the success of a school. Research and
practice confirm that there is a slim chance of creating and sustaining high-quality learning
environments without a skilled and committed leader to help shape teaching and learning” (p. 1).
Although researchers have found that it takes approximately 5 years for a principal to make a
significant impact on their school campus, only one in every five principals actually remains in
their position after a 5-year span (School Leaders Network, 2014; Wallace Foundation, 2013).
The most common reasons for a principal leaving their school after less than 5 years have been
inadequate preparation and poor professional development (Levin et al., 2019).
The correction of inadequate preparation and poor professional development requires a
district’s leaders to increase the capacity of people within the district by developing the
knowledge, skills, and attitudes that build and impact a culture of learning within schools
(Flanary, 2011). Fullan (2001) defined capacity building as a policy, set of strategies, or actions
intended to increase the efficacy of a group to improve achievement, increase resources, and
boost motivation both individually and collectively:

39
Individual capacity building is part of the development, but at the end of the day only
capacity building counts if you want whole-system reform. The pressure and support of
two-way partnerships across and within each of the three levels of schools and
communities, districts and states are required. Coordination, focus, easy access to best
ideas, the press of collaborative competition, and ultimately win-win outcomes are the
drivers. There is simply and flatly no other way to get whole-system reform. (Fullan,
2010, p. 15)
The Wallace Foundation conducted a 5-year study of educational leadership and its
impact on student achievement. The results of this study, described by Leithwood and Louis
(2012), indicated that impactful leaders contribute to their organization in four areas: setting
directions, developing people, organizational redesign, and improving instructional programs.
Researchers have recognized that the key ingredient in school performance is a skilled and
committed instructional administrative leader, because such a leader can impact student
outcomes such as academic achievement and graduation and attendance rates (DarlingHammond et al., 2022; Krasnoff, 2015). Most superintendents are former principals who
understand the demands of the position of principal and possess the experience and knowledge
needed to strengthen principals’ instructional leadership capabilities (Council of Chief State
School Officers, 2015). Superintendents must rely on their principals to support their
instructional visions and missions and possess the skills to implement them successfully
(Marzano & Waters, 2009). Improving the recruitment, training, evaluation, and development of
school leaders can strengthen school leadership (Syed, 2015). According to Fullan (2001), a
more experienced superintendent has a system of pressure and support with which to lead school
administrators to intended goals.

40
The intention behind this study and its findings is to add to existing research on the
building of leadership capacity and principal pipelines. In addition, it serves to inform multiple
stakeholders: existing and aspiring superintendents and administrators responsible for the
cultivation and development of leadership skills in existing and future administrators; aspiring
administrators seeking to fill principal positions and desiring the skills necessary to lead a
school; and universities responsible for the training and development of existing and aspiring
administrative candidates enrolled in their administrative services credential programs and
administrative masters and doctoral programs.
This chapter begins with an overview of participant demographics and continues with a
description of the qualitative coding process, analysis of the findings for the three research
questions for the small districts, comparative analysis of both the small and medium-sized
districts, and a summary of the findings.
Demographics of the Participants
The survey was sent to 12 superintendents, 11 of whom completed the survey and
consented to an interview. Of those 11, 10 scheduled interviews and participated in the study to
completion. Eight of the districts included in the study were unified school districts, one was a
high school district, and one was an elementary school district. In total, 10 districts were
included in the study. Table 1 characterizes the districts of those invited to participate.

41
Table 1
Participants and Their School Districts
District type Invited to participate Participated to completion
n %
Unified school district 9 8 80.0
Elementary district 1 1 10.0
High school district 2 1 10.0
Total 12 10 a
100.0
a 83.3% of participants invited to participate actually participated.
The study had an 83% overall response rate (N = 10) when taking both the survey and
interviews into consideration. Of the 10 participants, eight (80%) were unified school district
superintendents, one (10%) was an elementary school district superintendent, and one (10%) was
a high school district superintendent. Four participants (40%) identified as female, and the
remaining six (60%) identified as male. Seven (70%) of the participants were aged 50–59 years,
one (10%) was older than this (at least 60), and two (20%) were younger (30–39). Figure 2
provides the self-identified gender and age of the 10 participating superintendents. Of the 10
participants, five (50%) identified as Caucasian, one (10%) identified as African American, and
four (40%) identified as Latino or Hispanic. Figure 3 provides the ethnicity data for the 10
participating superintendents.

42
Figure 2
Superintendent Gender and Age
Note. Left panel: Self-identified gender of participants. Right panel: age of participants in years.
Figure 3
Superintendent Ethnicity

43
The 10 participants were from five small and five medium-sized school districts in
Southern California. The size labels were determined based on the numbers of students in the
districts. A district classified as small served fewer than 22,500 students, and one classified as
medium sized served at least 22,500 and fewer than 66,000 students. Table 2 provides the
characteristics of the districts.
Table 2
Participating District Demographic
District Principals Students Size
1 5 3,448 Small
2 7 13,372 Small
3 24 15, 612 Small
4 28 16,209 Small
5 21 22,216 Small
6 28 22,761 Medium
7 35 24,954 Medium
8 66 40,124 Medium
9 54 44,271 Medium
10 84 69,413 Medium

44
This dissertation is one half of a larger thematic dissertation and focuses on the five small
districts participating in the study, which each served fewer than 22,500 students. The findings
for those five small districts are compared with the findings for the five medium-sized districts
and the overall findings for the 10 districts of both sizes. The following information was gathered
from the survey and presents a brief background of the superintendents from the small districts
who participated in the study.
Superintendent A was superintendent of a unified district serving approximately 3,448
students with a minority enrollment rate of 50%; 7.7% of the district’s students were considered
economically disadvantaged (U.S. News and World Report, 2023). Superintendent A had had a
traditional career pathway to the superintendency, serving as an elementary school teacher,
elementary school assistant principal, middle school assistant principal, assistant superintendent
of human resources, and local district superintendent. Superintendent A had earned their
doctorate.
Superintendent B was superintendent of a high school district serving approximately
13,372 students with a minority enrollment rate of 86%; 40% of the district’s students were
considered economically disadvantaged (U.S. News and World Report, 2023). Superintendent B
had had a traditional career pathway to the superintendency, serving as a middle school teacher,
high school teacher, high school assistant principal, middle school principal, director of
curriculum and instruction, assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction, and local
district superintendent. Superintendent B had earned their doctorate.
Superintendent C was superintendent of an elementary district serving approximately
15,612 students with a minority enrollment rate of 100%; 84.3% of its students were considered
economically disadvantaged (U.S. News and World Report, 2023). Superintendent C had had a

45
nontraditional career pathway to the superintendency, serving as an elementary school teacher,
elementary school assistant principal, middle school principal, coordinator, specialist,
instructional director, and local district superintendent. Superintendent C had earned their
doctorate.
Superintendent D was superintendent of a unified district serving approximately 16,209
students with a minority enrollment rate of 90%; 48.2% of the district’s students were considered
economically disadvantaged (U.S. News and World Report, 2023). Superintendent D had had a
traditional career pathway to the superintendency, serving as an elementary school teacher, dean
of students, elementary school principal, middle school principal, director of human resources,
assistant superintendent of human resources, and local district superintendent. Superintendent D
had earned their doctorate.
Superintendent E was superintendent of a unified district serving approximately 22,216
students with a minority enrollment rate of 100%; 40.8% of its students were considered
economically disadvantaged (U.S. News and World Report, 2023). Superintendent E had had a
traditional career pathway to the superintendency, serving as an elementary school teacher,
middle school assistant principal, elementary school principal, middle school principal, high
school principal, assistant superintendent of human resources, assistant superintendent of
curriculum and instruction, deputy superintendent, and local district superintendent.
Superintendent E had earned their doctorate.
Coding of Data
Each question on the survey instrument used to collect data aligns with one or more of
the study’s research questions. In addition, the survey questions were intended to inform the
interviews that followed the survey. The Likert-scale survey questions, with response choices

46
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), were intended to ascertain the skills
superintendents desire in principal leaders and provide contextual understanding of the
perceptions superintendents have of programs, practices, and professional development provided
in their districts. After the transcription of each interview, I listened back to the interview while
reading the transcription; the transcription was then read through and coded a second and third
time for accuracy. Maxwell’s (2013) strategies for qualitative data analysis were used to find
passages relevant to the three research questions and to the study’s conceptual framework. Using
an analytical coding method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), the data aligned with each research
question were analyzed further for themes and subthemes supported by the literature that
emerged across the participants.
Presentation of Findings
The findings of this study are organized by research question. Tables in the sections that
follow include quantitative data from the presurvey and qualitative data from the interviews. The
initial findings presented are those for the five small districts. The section after that compares the
five small districts with the five medium-sized districts. The final section in this chapter
summarizes the findings.
Research Question 1 Findings
Question 2 of the superintendent survey requests the top five skills superintendents
believe are needed to be a principal and begins the exploration of Research Question 1: What
specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the leadership capacity,
confidence, and expertise of their principals?
The top five skills listed in the survey by the superintendents were grouped into the
following categories: communication, culture and climate, instructional leadership, strategic

47
management, and PLC. These categories derived from a combination of the views of many
experts who highlight essential leadership skills in their research, along with a systematic
synthesis of 2 decades of research commissioned by the Wallace Foundation (Grissom et al.,
2021). The classification process used the following definitions. Communication skills include
making oneself available to others, varied methods of disseminating information, recognition of
others, and willingness to have difficult conversations (M. F. Gordon & Louis, 2009; Grissom,
2021; Hollingworth et al., 2018; Jacobson et al., 2005; Price, 2012). Building a positive culture
and climate requires a principal to develop relationships based on trust, facilitate regular
collaboration, and inspire continuous improvement and optimism (Adams, 2013; Brown &
Wynn, 2007; Grissom, 2021; Handford & Leithwood, 2013; Hollingworth et al., 2018; Jacobson
et al., 2007; Khalifa, 2012; Louis et al., 2016; Moye et al., 2005; Price, 2015; Tschannen-Moran,
2001). A skilled instructional leader conducts effective teacher observations and evaluations,
provides forward-moving feedback and coaching, and uses data to drive instructional programs
toward student success (City et al., 2009; Grissom, 2021; Grissom & Loeb, 2017; Johnson et al.,
2011; May & Supovitz, 2011). A leader with strong managerial skills thinks strategically,
effectively allocates resources, can hire and retain good teachers, and is organized (Anderson et
al., 2010; Bloom et al., 2015; Finnigan, 2012; Grissom, 2021; Horng et al., 2010; Lorton et al.,
2013; Sebastian et al., 2018). The ability to foster a fruitful PLC includes creating a space with
coequal parties collaborating toward a common goal with shared resources, responsibilities, and
accountability.
Table 3 illustrates which of these five skill categories superintendents valued most based
on the frequency with which each occurred in the survey responses. For example, the top five
skills listed by Superintendent C were “communication,” “listener,” “visionary,” “student

48
centered focus,” and “collaboration.” These skills were classified as follows: “communication”
and “listener” were both classified under communication, “visionary” was classified under
culture and climate, “student centered focus” was classified under instructional leadership, and
“collaboration” was classified under PLC.
Table 3
Superintendent Top Five Skills From Survey (Small Districts)
Superintendent n Communication Culture and
climate
Instructional
leadership
Strategic
management
PLC
f % f % f % f % f %
A 5 1 20 1 2 2 40 1 20 0 0
B 5 0 0 5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 5 2 40 1 20 1 20 0 0 1 20
D 5 1 20 2 40 1 20 1 20 0 0
E 5 0 0 2 40 1 20 2 40 0 0
Total 25 4 16 11 44 5 20 4 16 1 4
Note. PLC = professional learning community.

49
The overall data were heavily skewed toward culture and climate being the most valued
skill because Superintendent B listed only skills under that category. Looking at Table 3 as a
whole suggests that the superintendents were fairly mixed in terms of which category of skills
they valued most, with two of the five valuing culture and climate most. The second most valued
category was instructional leadership. Communication and strategic management were tied for
third most valued category, each mentioned by four superintendents. Nearly all of the five smalldistrict superintendents, the exception being Superintendent C, omitted skills classifiable under
PLC. It is unclear whether this was because superintendents did not value development of
effective PLCs or because their districts had such well-developed PLCs that such skills were no
longer top priorities. It is worth noting that none of the superintendents mentioned a skill from
every one of the five categories.
Culture and Climate
The quantitative and qualitative data showed that superintendents valued a principal’s
ability to build and maintain a positive culture and climate (44%, n = 11). Three of the five
superintendents valued this as the most important skill a principal could possess. Interestingly the
superintendents differed with regard to how to build and maintain a good culture and climate.
Superintendents A and D said the ability to do so is evident in how a principal handles difficult
conversations or repairs and moves forward from challenging situations. Superintendents B, C,
and E spoke about how a principal could facilitate creation of a positive culture and climate by
creating a safe place for curiosity, emphasizing kindness, or maintaining positive relationships.
Table 4 presents relevant quotes from the participants.

50
Table 4
Superintendent Interview Responses on Culture and Climate (Small Districts)
Superintendent Quote
A The reality is in education, we are going to have professional discourse. Not all
our teachers are on the same page. And you need to be able to manage that.
B [I’m] trying to cultivate [asking why] as a healthy thing, like an okay thing, like
nobody’s in trouble. So, I am overtly modeling that level of curiosity and
creating a safer place for that level of thought.
C I think our district really emphasizes kindness, and that’s something that I know
isn’t universal in other districts, but it is a skill. You know, it’s a skill to be
kind. It’s a skill to be understanding. It’s a skill to really see the needs of the
community that you serve.
D When you hear concerns, right? We hear it. Concerns may come up or someone
can say complaints but how do you get that individual or those people to be on
board with you and moving forward, hear them out, problem-solve but now
can you turn that around, okay now what can we do moving forward to address
whatever the concerns are.
E So, my two big drivers are: Number one the positive relationships with your staff
and number two the positive relationships with students, right? Because if
those two things are in place, a school is going to run, it’s going to move
mountains.
Note. Responses from all five participants related to the importance of culture and climate
competencies in principals.
Instructional Leadership
Instructional Leadership in General
Instructional leadership was the second most valued skill overall (20%, n = 5) but was the
skill valued most by Superintendent A. During their interview, Superintendent A emphasized the
need for regularly occurring, specific, and timely feedback. Superintendent B did not list any
skills in their survey categorized under instructional leadership. During their interview they
spoke of taking a less direct approach and providing a framework for leaders as individuals to
apply as they see fit according to their style and personality. Superintendents C, D, and E each

51
mentioned exactly one skill in their survey classified under instructional leadership. In regard to
the development of a principal learning to be a skilled instructional leader, these three
superintendents all saw their role as a support person providing professional development,
funding, or lived experience. Table 5 presents relevant quotes from the participants.
Table 5
Superintendent Interview Responses on Instructional Leadership (Small Districts)
Superintendent Quote
A As I grow leaders, I think a key point in that is to provide what you’re doing
right, successes, praise, and commendations. But it’s also giving constructive
feedback. I feel like if you don’t get something to grow on, you’re never going
to, like, really become that full potential.
B I like to give them a framework around leadership. Now go lead. That autonomy
piece, to me, is a differentiator. When you empower people to go and you
support them and when they fail that you’re there to work with them, that is so
different than. Go lead. Oh, you messed up. … You actually get to do it
multiple times with me and I get to give you feedback around it.
C I saw tremendous growth in leading instructional transformation at schools. I
think my job is to support, to make sure that professional development is in
place, to be available, to answer questions. But at the same time, to give people
an understanding that you can make a mistake but if you are going to err on the
side of our students, err on the side of doing the right thing.
D We are going to support [principals] as much as we can, but [their request]
should come with a plan. … What’s it going to do for student achievement or
social emotional learning? What’s the impact that’s going to have on that?
E It was really about supporting principals effectively so they can effectively
support teachers who are ultimately the most powerful driver in student
achievement.
Note. Responses from all five participants related to the importance of instructional leadership
competencies in principals.

52
Developing Instructional Leadership
Throughout the qualitative interview process, a clear and common theme was that
principals needed to possess strong instructional leadership skills, and this was also a prerequisite
of many of the participants’ districts’ principal pipelines. For example, Superintendent D said,
“We have a lot of great TOSAs [teachers on special assignment], a lot of times they would go
into administration and we’ve hired a lot that way … they get exposed to a lot of training … they
become really focused on the curricular side of it.” Superintendent A said:
We’ve tapped into a couple of the teacher leaders … we took a teacher leader, made
[them] an interim assistant principal … got selected as an assistant principal … now a
principal. We had another teacher leader who just became an assistant principal this year.
We had another teacher leader who’s serving as an interim.
Superintendent E said, “It starts early. You’ve got to even start to spot your superstar teachers
early in their career … you can spot talent when it’s there … starting to cultivate that early, so
you can build that in systematically.”
Communication
After instructional leadership, communication (16%, n = 4) and strategic management
(16%, n = 4) skills were valued equally by the superintendents surveyed. According to the survey
data, communication was the skill category most valued by Superintendent C. Superintendent C
was also the only superintendent to discuss communication with a school’s community and other
stakeholders outside the school campus in their interview. Superintendents A and D each
mentioned exactly one skill in their survey classified under communication. When interviewed,
they both expressed a desire to share clear expectations and be approachable so that
administrators would feel comfortable coming to them with questions. Neither Superintendent B

53
nor Superintendent E listed skills classified under communication in their surveys, but in their
interviews they both addressed communication as an exercise in listening as much as speaking. It
was clear that they perceived an effective principal to be capable of being a source of
information and themselves as facilitators helping principals reach productive and effective
conclusions. Table 6 presents relevant quotes from the participants.
Table 6
Superintendent Interview Responses on Communication (Small Districts)
Superintendent Quote
A We’re small enough that you can have meaningful conversations too and then
say, like, ‘Well have you thought about?’ or, you know, ‘I can support you
with that,’ or ‘Follow up with this person,’ or you know, ‘Have you done this?’
You know, so it’s actually actively, you know, doing that.
B I work a lot around communication tools with our ed services division especially
and talking through, well, why didn’t that work and reflect with them a lot and
say, okay, that’s fine. Here’s some recommendations. They go out and do it
and it gets better and it gets better. So those are the ones that I know are going
to grow at an exponential level.
C We talk about expectations. And I would say shared expectations because it’s
important. It’s not just my expectations, it’s the expectations of the community,
it’s the expectations of the stakeholders after school, and it’s your personal
expectations as the leader of the school.
D I think that’s important. Effective communication. What are the expectations?
What are the goals? But you need to be approachable. Your staff needs to
know that they can come to you and be able to ask you questions and what
have you.
E You provide ongoing supports and effective two-way communication … making
sure you’re going and visiting their school sites, making sure that you’re being
present and walking classrooms with them and being a thought partner with
them. It means being on the other end of the phone when there is a crisis, that
they know that they can reach out and they’re not alone.
Note. Responses from all five participants related to the importance of communication
competencies in principals.

54
Strategic Management
Strategic management (16%, n = 4), though valued overall by the superintendents as
equal in importance to communication (16%, n = 4), was the skill category most valued by
Superintendent E. Superintendents A and D each mentioned exactly one skill in their survey
classified under strategic management. Neither Superintendent B nor Superintendent C listed
skills classified under strategic management. Table 7 presents relevant quotes from the
participants.

55
Table 7
Superintendent Interview Responses on Strategic Management (Small Districts)
Superintendent Quote
A I don’t mince words and it’s like this is what the expectation is. And you either
need to rise to it or you know, take advantage. We’re all here to help you. And
sometimes people just aren’t the right fit. And yet they can go somewhere else
and be highly successful and stay and retain and all of those things.
B I do have very high standards and expectations, but a lot of grace to get there.
And so as long as people are emerging or working towards or a lot of it is
understanding that they are reflective and then that reflection turns into some
nuance change of improvement. That’s, I think, a really important piece of this
system is that it’s not punitive. … I [also] get to insulate [principals] from the
[barbs and attacks]. And I do that until I realize, no, that’s just them. And then
I stop that, and then that’s when it’s time for them to go.
C We all make mistakes, but are you learning from your mistakes? And are you
growing? Those people that continue to have the same issues, whether it’s
communication or I get a lot of calls from parents, but there is not growth, they
are doing the same exact things, then that’s someone that isn’t the best fit.
D You start knowing if it’s not a good fit because, A, there’s a lot of complaints
that come out of there, B, you have data that shows that it’s not moving
forward in that direction, C, when your redirecting or giving advice, on how to
improve on and he or she isn’t taking that and following that because we are all
going to make mistakes, but what do you learn from them?
E If we’ve created the pipeline, if we’ve picked the right person for the position, if
we’ve supported them effectively, I don’t need to have a punitive system
because I’ve already picked the right people for the position who are quite
frankly going to be harder on themselves than I could ever be on them. And
they’re going to drive themselves.
Note. Responses from all five participants related to the importance of strategic management
competencies in principals.
PLCs
Skills related to creating a good PLC (4%, n = 1) were the least valued overall and only
mentioned directly by Superintendent C. Table 8 presents relevant quotes from the participants.

56
Table 8
Superintendent Interview Responses on PLCs (Small Districts)
Superintendent Quotes
A The administrator is right there too, as a lead learner. So they’re benefiting not
only from their leadership training and the work that we’re doing, but they’re
also benefiting as a co-learner with the teachers at their school.
B I don’t subscribe to getting consultants a lot. I think that a lot of times the
answers are in the room. If we develop an effective system to, I guess, cultivate
the right questions, the right answers. Part of it is understanding what our
needs are…we need to train people on how to generate and mine the data that
we need.
We’ve also developed a comprehensive professional learning plan that’s in three
phases that brings probably 90 percent of our teachers, all of them through
three phases of professional learning.
D We started mirroring and doing PLCs with our principals so we could monitor
that so they can take it as their school leaders and they could do it at their
school site. Data driven decisions and dialogue like going deeper into how to
read all the data, how to access all the data.
E So we work really hard to make all of our principal meetings meaningful and
engaging, meaning that there’s an instructional piece, there’s a leadership piece
and there’s lots of collaboration opportunities built in to sit down and talk with
their colleagues.
Note. Responses from all five participants related to the importance of professional learning
community competencies in principals. PLC = professional learning community.
Evaluation and Capacity Building
The survey asked superintendents how they viewed the effectiveness of the evaluation
and support processes of their districts with respect to building the capacity of their principals—
presumably by building the five skills mentioned by the superintendents as valuable. Table 9
summarizes the participants’ responses.

57
Table 9
Responses to Questions 5–6 From the Small District Superintendent Survey
Question Strongly
disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neither
agree nor
disagree (3)
Agree (4) Strongly
agree (5)
f % f % f % f % f %
5. The principal evaluation
process identifies the skills a
principal needs to improve.
1 20 1 20 0 0 0 0 3 60
6. If a principal has a skill they
need to improve, the district has
a plan to support that principal.
0 0 1 20 1 20 1 20 2 40
Note. For both questions, n = 5.
The data collected with the survey influenced the questioning during the subsequent
interviews, and the interviews provided context for the responses given to the survey.
Research Question 2 Findings
With the aim of better understanding the capacity building opportunities principals
receive from their districts, Research Question 2 asked what programs, practices, and
professional development opportunities district leaders provide to principals. In the survey,
superintendents were asked, “What types of programs, practices and/or professional development
opportunities have you provided your principals in the last year?” Options were listed below the
question, and the superintendents were asked to check all that applied. This list included an
“other” option with which a superintendent could add an additional item if they felt the list was
not comprehensive. Figure 4 summarizes the responses to that survey question.

58
Figure 4
Types of Programs, Practices, and Professional Development Opportunities Provided to
Principals in the Last Year (Small Districts)
All of the superintendents surveyed (100%, n = 5) used coaching, principal networking
within their districts, group professional development, and collaboration with other sites. Four of
the five (80%) superintendents used mentoring and site visits to build capacity within their
principals. Three of the five superintendents (60%) implemented instructional rounds, individual
professional development, conferences, workshops, book clubs, and job-embedded training.
Only one of the five superintendents (20%) incorporated peer observations. The other least used
development aid was external training, also used by only one superintendent (20%).
The quantitative data from the survey (see Appendix A) and qualitative data from the inperson interviews (see Appendix B) were used to gain a better understanding of what

59
superintendents perceived as being the most effective practices for developing the leadership
skills needed by school administrators. The above data highlight the use of coaching, principal
networking, professional development, and collaboration with other sites as common practices
for building the capacity of administrators. The superintendents echoed and expanded on these
data during the interviews. The survey lists principal networking and collaboration with other
sites as two separate practices, but analysis of the transcripts made it clear that the
superintendents considered these practices to be the same. Other practices listed individually in
the survey but often used interchangeably by the participating superintendents were coaching and
mentoring. Table 10 includes some of the insights provided by the superintendents regarding
programs, practices, and professional development.

60
Table 10
Superintendent Interview Responses on Programs, Practices, and Professional Development
(Small Districts)
Superintendent Quotes
Coaching/mentoring
A I am very hands-on in giving people feedback and trying to grow my team.
B And we have principals struggling right now, and I know that, but I’m coaching
them now, mentoring, but I’m also mentoring all the people around them.
C I think it’s just finding the time to interact with them as much as possible. And
again, I would go back to establishing a trust where they can call.
E If we have someone that we feel or somebody comes and asks us, ‘Hey, can I get
a little extra support this year or a little extra coaching,’ or whatever, then we’ll
do that.
Professional development
A We actually have our own leadership training. So, we’ve done leadership training
after school gets out where it’s like a retreat and it’s fun and we go away and,
you know, really have time together. … And then when we come back to
school, we have a second administrative training where it’s kind of more nuts
and bolts.… Then each principal works with their staff.
B So now we’ve stretched this evaluation over 10 months of formalized
conversations where they’re getting constructive feedback formally five
different times in five different settings and five different ways. So it’s a true
authentic evaluation process. I think the evaluation process is one of the best
professional developments you can get, if done well.
I don’t subscribe to getting consultants a lot. I think that a lot of times the
answers are in the room. … We will meet with [the consultant] to see what
their presentation is. ‘OK, we don’t like that. We want you to do it this way.’ If
they say no, they’re out, if they will evolve and be a partner with us and we’ll
bring them in as a supportive voice.
C I think my job is to support, to make sure professional development is in place, to
be available, to answer questions.
D I think appropriate professional development is critical and so I do work with our
ed. services and planning a lot of our PD [professional development] for
principals on what they need. We’ll do surveys and work with things they
need, our ideas, our goals.
Networking/collaboration
A So principal meetings are new this year. We’re doing that monthly.
B We protected two and a half hours once a month to talk about leadership and
learning.
E We worked really hard to make all of our principals meetings meaningful and
engaging, meaning that there is an instructional piece, there is a leadership
piece and there’s lots of collaboration opportunities built in to sit down and
talk with their colleagues.

61
Coaching/Mentoring
All participating superintendents saw themselves as potential coaches and mentors for the
principals in their districts. The larger the district, the more difficulty the superintendent had
fulfilling this role. The superintendents in the smaller of the five small districts made a point of
being regularly involved in the capacity building of their principals. This proactive approach is
evident in Superintendent A’s “very hands-on” approach and Superintendent B’s efforts to not
only mentor principals but also the “people around them” (see Table 10). The superintendents in
the larger of the five small districts found themselves fulfilling this role by reminding their
principals they were available, if needed, for coaching or mentoring. This approach is evident in
Superintendent C’s need to “find the time” and Superintendent E’s willingness to be helpful
when a principal took the initiative to “come and ask” (see Table 10). In addition, the
superintendents of the larger of the five small districts shared that their assistant superintendents
took on a more active role when it came to mentoring principals.
Although every superintendent implemented some form of coaching or mentoring,
Table 11 indicates that one of the five superintendents felt it was not essential to building a
principal’s capacity.

62
Table 11
Responses to Question 7 From the Small District Superintendent Survey
Question Strongly
disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neither
agree nor
disagree (3)
Agree (4) Strongly
agree (5)
f % f % f % f % f %
7. Coaching/Mentoring is essential
to building one’s capacity. (N =
5)
1 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 80
Note. Responses from all five participants utilizing a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) to measure all five participants (N = 5) opinion of the
importance of coaching/mentoring on building leadership capacity.
Principal Networking/Collaboration
Every participating small district had a principals meeting at least once a month; some
had such meetings up to three times a month. It is important to note that this was a “new”
practice in Superintendent A’s district (see Table 10). Every superintendent alluded to the
loneliness of being a principal. They all felt that consistently setting aside time for the principals
in their districts to share struggles and achievements helped to build the principals’ capacity and
confidence.
Professional Development
All of the superintendents found professional development to be a necessary part of
building capacity in their principals, but they differed in their expectations of how to implement
good professional development. Every superintendent spoke of the value of taking their time and
finding a professional development that addressed an existing need in their district. They also all

63
mentioned the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in the process. The three largest of
the five small districts stopped there. The superintendents of the two smallest districts also
expressed the need for any outside professional developer to be flexible and consider the existing
culture of the district. The lack of flexibility of consultants had encouraged the superintendents
of these smaller districts to look inward. Superintendent A shared, “We actually have our own
leadership training,” and Superintendent B expressed the need for a consultant to be “a
supportive voice” (see Table 10).
Effective Capacity Building
Every superintendent spoke of their district as doing everything it was presently capable
of to build the capacity of its administrators. Table 12 indicates that at least two of the five
superintendents felt they had room for growth.

64
Table 12
Responses to Question 8 From the Small District Superintendent Survey
Question Strongly
disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neither
agree nor
disagree (3)
Agree (4) Strongly
agree (5)
f % f % f % f % f %
8. The opportunities provided for
principals in my district
effectively build their capacity
to lead schools. (N = 5)
0 0 0 0 1 20 1 20 3 60
Note. 60% (n = 3) of the participants “strongly agree” that the opportunities that their district
provides effectively supports capacity building in their administrators while 20% (n = 1) only
“agree,” indicating that one of the participants feel that more opportunities can be provided to
build the capacity of their district leaders and 20% (n = 1) “neither agree nor disagree,”
indicating that one of the participants “don’t know” their opinion or they don’t have an opinion
of agree or disagree.
Research Question 3 Findings
With the aim of better understanding superintendents’ perspectives of what are the
critical components of attracting, developing, and retaining administrators in their districts,
Research Question 3 asked what superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage
and develop future administrators. In the interviews, superintendents were asked, “What specific
actions do you take to develop assistant principals, coaches, and teacher leaders to become future
principals?” The quotes from the superintendents listed in Table 13 address critical components
of a successful principal pipeline and came from various parts of the interviews—not solely
responses to the question above. Analysis of the transcripts of the interviews revealed four

65
themes: leadership academies, stretch opportunities, tapping, and becoming a teacher on special
assignment.
Table 13
Superintendent Interview Responses on Critical Components of a Successful Principal Pipeline
(Small Districts)
Superintendent Quote
Tapping
A People … I’m looking, now that we’ve tapped these people, I’m like, Who’s
next?
B People tapping on the shoulder, and they said, ‘Go get your administrative
credential.’
C I was encouraged by my principal and others to try to seek an administrative
position … and I try to do the same.
Leadership academies
A I think we are going to have to almost maybe have HR have some exploratory
like, ‘Have you thought of administration workshop’ … because right now our
teachers are amazing, we have outstanding teachers here, but I just don’t know
that administration is something people are interested in.
B For emerging leaders, we are starting up a leadership academy. I asked HR to do
that, so we have a non-administrator leadership academy that we are going to
start here in January.
C So, we have persons who want to be administrators. They come to classes on
Saturday … to learn about administration, and they’re working towards earning
their credential. So, it’s sort of our own homegrown administrative program.
D I’ll share with them, you know we have these trainings.
E It starts from the beginning with things like having a leadership academy to begin
with, which places value on people aspiring to be leaders within the
organization.
Stretch opportunities
A Give them an opportunity to grow a little bit more. Give them a committee to run,
give them something that, you know, shows, gives them an opportunity to
stretch, right? You want to give them just that plus one.
B Let’s get out there and they don’t do that. So, they become stagnant because
they’re not willing to evolve.

66
Superintendent Quote
C Give the opportunity to present at conferences or they want to represent the
district where they want to have a meeting with stakeholders to build their skill
set. So, I think it’s just making sure that people have those growth
opportunities.
E We start there and then we move them into the pipeline in different out of the
classroom type positions where they get out of the classroom perspectives on,
you know, how a school operates and those kinds of things.
Teacher on special assignment (TOSA)
D So, I think that you start looking at building that capacity in teachers for some of
them, and not all teachers want to go into administration, but that’s one way of
looking at it. And then when they become APs or deans or TOSAs also given
the opportunity to have those experiences that can lead them to become a
principal because being a principal is one of the toughest jobs out there right
now.
E But in order to continue to, you know, move up in the system, you have to be
able to see a bigger picture than where you currently are, right? And so
whatever that is, we’ve got to build people outside of [a teacher’s four walls] to
see a bigger part of the picture and then the next level is still seeing a bigger
piece of the picture. So that’s really kind of it is putting people in different
places and giving them different experiences where they get exposed to the
larger operations of a school district.
Note. All small sized district participants interviewed shared their opinion on critical components
of a successful principal pipeline. HR = human resources; AP = assistant principal.
Table 13 lists all of the participants’ interview responses pertaining to what they
perceived as being critical components needed to encourage and develop future administrators.
The first of the four themes discovered involved creating a leadership academy for aspiring
administrators to participate in. All participants (100%, n = 5) mentioned leadership academies
as a strategy for building the capacity of those interested in administrative leadership roles. They
referred to this strategy with the terms “administrative workshop,” “leadership academy,”
“classes,” “administrative program,” and “trainings.” Four of the five superintendents (80%)

67
recognized stretch opportunities as contributing to a person’s administrative skill development. A
majority of participants (60%, n = 3) spoke of the power of tapping and how it can build the
confidence and capacity of a school staff member. Two of the five participants (40%,) mentioned
people who take initiative as a critical component of a successful principal pipeline.
Leadership Academies
Although every superintendent interviewed (100%, n = 5) mentioned leadership
academies as a strategy for building the capacity of those interested in administrative leadership
roles, only three (60%) had existing leadership academies in their districts. Superintendent B said
their leadership academy would be starting in the new year. Superintendent A had no plan in
place for a leadership academy because a need for one had only recently surfaced.
Stretch Opportunities
Examples of stretch opportunities varied among the four (80%) superintendents who
mentioned them. Superintendent A suggested additional unique duties, such as running a
“committee.” Superintendent B suggested individuals step outside their expected duties by
finding needs and filling them. Superintendent C suggested sharing knowledge and strengths
with a larger audience outside the district, such as at a “conference.” Superintendent E suggested
a transitional position, such as a teacher on special assignment, in which a person could gain a
new perspective by having more access to day-to-day school operations.
Tapping
All three superintendents who suggested tapping as a method of building the confidence
and capacity of a staff member had a personal experience to share at the start of their interview,
when asked about their path to becoming a superintendent. They also said that tapping more
often than not involved highlighting potential in a person that the person may not see yet in

68
themself. The superintendents also found that a tapped individual often improved in their current
position regardless of whether they took advantage of an opportunity to become an administrator.
Teacher on Special Assignment
It is noteworthy that the two superintendents who suggested educators who become
teachers on special assignment form an important part of a principal pipeline were from the
largest two of the five small districts. Perhaps a district’s size influences how challenging it is to
find staff members with administrative potential through informal methods such as tapping, and
larger districts may rely more heavily on self-selection.
Growth and Need
Table 14 indicates that two of the five participants (40%) strongly agreed that data were
used on an annual basis to measure the areas of growth for each principal, one participant (20%)
agreed with the statement, and two (40%) neither agreed nor disagreed. Only one of the five
participants (20%) strongly agreed that data were used on an annual basis to measure the areas of
need for each principal; the other four participants (80%) neither agreed nor disagreed.

69
Table 14
Responses to Questions 9–10 From the Small District Superintendent Survey
Question Strongly
disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neither
agree nor
disagree (3)
Agree (4) Strongly
agree (5)
f % f % f % f % f %
9. Data is utilized on an annual
basis to measure the areas of
growth for each principal. (N
= 5)
0 0 0 0 2 40 1 20 2 40
10. Data is utilized on an annual
basis to measure the areas of
need for each principal. (N =
5)
0 0 0 0 4 80 0 0 1 20
Note. Participants utilized a 5-point Likert type scale to determine if data was utilized to measure
a principal’s skill growth.
Comparative Data
This study was replicated in five medium-sized districts in Southern California. The size
labels were determined by the numbers of students in the districts. Districts classified as small
were those serving fewer than 22,500 students, and those classified as medium sized served at
least 22,500 and fewer than 66,000 students (see Table 2). The following subsections provide a
comparative analysis of the small and medium-sized districts.
Research Question 1 Findings
The study’s first research question was as follows: What specific skill sets do
superintendents intentionally foster to develop the leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise
of their principals? Question 5 of the survey asked each participant to list the five skills they
perceived principals needed. Table 15 illustrates which of the five skill categories the

70
superintendents of the small and medium-sized districts valued most based on the frequency with
which each occurred.
Table 15
Top Five Skills From the Superintendent Survey (Small and Medium-Sized Districts)
Superintendent n Communication Culture and
climate
Instructional
leadership
Strategic
management
PLC
f % f % f % f % f %
A 5 1 20 1 20 2 40 3 60 0 0
B 5 0 0 5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 5 2 40 1 20 1 20 0 0 1 20
D 5 1 20 2 40 1 20 1 20 0 0
E 5 0 0 2 40 1 20 2 40 0 0
F 5 1 20 2 40 0 0 2 40 0 0
G 5 0 0 3 60 1 20 1 20 0 0
H 5 0 0 1 20 2 40 2 40 0 0
J 5 0 0 1 20 2 40 2 40 0 0
K 5 1 20 3 60 1 20 0 0 0 0
Total 50 6 12 21 42 11 22 11 16 1 4
Note. PLC = professional learning community.
The data in Table 15 for the small and medium-sized districts combined are similar to
those in Table 3 for the small districts alone. Both data sets have culture and climate as the most
valued skill set and PLCs as the least valued. This is not to say that superintendents did not value
developing an effective PLC, it is just that they valued this category least relative to the other
categories. Superintendents valued instructional leadership skills about as much as strategic
management skills in the smaller districts—and exactly as much in the combined small and

71
medium-sized districts. Superintendents valued communication skills slightly less than
instructional leadership skills in both the smaller districts and combined small and medium-sized
districts. The similarities between the small district data and the combined data indicate that
district size does not affect the skills superintendents feel are needed by a principal to run their
school.
Research Question 2 Findings
The study’s second research question was as follows: What programs, practices, and
professional development opportunities do district leaders provide to principals? Question 5 of
the survey asked each participant to list the five skills they perceived principals needed. Table 15
indicates which of the five skill categories the superintendents of the small and medium-sized
districts valued most based on the frequency with which each occurred. The superintendent
survey asked, “What types of programs, practices and/or professional development opportunities
have you provided your principals in the last year?” The superintendents responded by checking
all practices that applied from a list provided. Figure 5 displays the responses of all 10
participating superintendents to that survey question.

72
Figure 5
Types of Programs, Practices, and Professional Development Opportunities Provided to
Principals in the Last Year (Small and Medium-Sized Districts)
The data in Figure 5 for the small and medium-sized districts combined are similar to
those in Figure 4 for the small districts alone. Both data sets indicate coaching, principal
networking, and professional development were the practices most used to build the capacity of
principals. A fourth practice equally valued by superintendents of small districts was
collaboration with other sites. The value of this practice was slightly less overall among the
combined superintendents of the small and medium-sized districts. The least used methods of
capacity building were also inconsistent between the supervisors of small districts alone and
those of small and medium-sized districts combined. This result may indicate that district size
affects the methods of building capacity in principals that superintendents find effective.

73
Research Question 3 Findings
The study’s third research question was as follows: What do superintendents feel are the
components needed to encourage and develop future administrators? Question 12 of the
interview asked, “What do you think are the critical components of a successful principal
pipeline?” Analysis of the transcripts for the superintendents of the five small districts yielded
four themes: leadership academies, stretch opportunities, tapping, and teachers on special
assignment. Three of these four themes also emerged from the data for the five medium-sized
districts: leadership academies, stretch opportunities, and tapping. The themes not shared
between the two data sets were teachers on special assignment and skill evaluation.
Table 16 indicates that 70% (n = 7) of the superintendents of small and medium-sized
districts agreed or strongly agreed that data were used on an annual basis to measure areas of
growth for each principal. This result was slightly higher than in the data for the same question
for the small districts alone (60%, n = 3). Table 16 also indicates that 50% (n = 5) of the
superintendents of the small and medium-sized district agreed or strongly agreed that data were
used on an annual basis to measure the areas of need for each principal. This result was
moderately higher than in the data for the same question for the small districts alone (20%,
n = 1). The data suggest that medium-sized districts were more likely than small districts to use
data on an annual basis to measure both growth and need.

74
Table 16
Responses to Questions 9–10 From the Superintendent Survey (Small and Medium-Sized
Districts)
Question Strongly
disagree (1)
Disagree (2) Neither
agree nor
disagree (3)
Agree (4) Strongly
agree (5)
f % f % f % f % f %
9. Data is utilized on an annual
basis to measure the areas of
growth for each principal. (N
= 10)
0 0 1 10 2 20 4 40 3 30
10. Data is utilized on an annual
basis to measure the areas of
need for each principal. (N =
10)
0 0 1 10 4 40 3 30 2 20
Note. Participants utilized a 5-point Likert type scale to determine if data was utilized to measure
a principal’s skill growth.
Summary
Through compilation of the quantitative and qualitative data in this study, four of the five
expected themes emerged for Research Question 1, three themes emerged for Research
Question 2, and four themes emerged for Research Question 3. Research Question 1 themes were
(a) culture and climate, (b) instructional leadership, (c) communication, and (d) strategic
management. The expected theme that did not emerge was PLCs. Research Question 2 themes
were (a) coaching/mentoring, (b) principal networking/collaboration, and (c) professional
development. Research Question 3 themes were (a) leadership academies, (b) stretch
opportunities, (c) tapping, and (d) teachers on special assignment.

75
Chapter 5 examines the themes identified in Chapter 4 more closely to determine their
prospective influence on leadership in theory and practice. The findings have implications for
existing superintendents who aspire to improve, incorporate, or implement systems within their
organizations that develop and refine the skill sets of existing school leaders and increase the
leadership capacity among aspiring administrators. Chapter 5 also explores opportunities and
recommendations for further research on the topic of how superintendents build the capacity of
principals.

76
Chapter Five: Summary
The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand how 10 superintendents made
sense of their social responsibilities to create instructional leaders—specifically, the skills they
deemed essential for effective principals and their methods for building the capacity for these
skills in their existing administrations. I and the other member of the research team compared
superintendents from five small and five medium-sized public school districts in search of
similarities or differences in processes based on size. By acknowledging the existing skill sets
understood to be essential and the district level supports perceived as effective for developing
principals’ leadership skills, this study had the potential to provide insight into how some
superintendents build effective programs for enhancing skills they find desirable in school
principals. Bolman and Deal’s (2017) human resources framework, coupled with Easton’s
(1953) political systems framework, was used as the lens through which to understand the data
gathered via surveys and interviews.
I and another researcher conducted the study. Quantitative data were collected with a
Google Form survey (see Appendix A). Qualitative data were collected through individual faceto-face interviews. The aim of using both sources of data was to answer the following research
questions:
1. What specific skill sets do superintendents intentionally foster to develop the
leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals?
2. What programs, practices, and professional development opportunities do district
leaders provide to principals?
3. What do superintendents feel are the components needed to encourage and develop
future administrators?

77
Chapter 5 encompasses a comprehensive analysis of application of the findings of this
study to theory and practice. The chapter discusses in detail the impact on leadership,
implications for policy and practice, and limitations of the study. The chapter concludes with
recommendations for further research, which could provide additional guidance to aspiring and
existing superintendents and aspiring and existing administrators.
Findings
A preinterview survey was sent to 12 superintendents in Southern California. At the
conclusion of the response period, 10 participants were contacted to schedule semistructured
interviews. After completion of the interviews, transcription of the interviews occurred, and
coding of the data began. Tables in the sections that follow present the themes that emerged in
response to the research questions.
The conceptual framework (see Figure 6) helped me to construct an approach to
understanding the data gathered. I modified Easton’s political systems model by combining
stresses, demands, and supports and categorizing them collectively as inputs. I found the inputs
to be the various stakeholders’ expectations for each district and school site (students, families,
teachers, support staff, community, etc.). Stakeholders’ expressed and perceived hopes, needs,
wants, and demands are the stresses that influence the type of leader each school requires to run
effectively.

78
Figure 6
Final Conceptual Framework
Research Question 1
Table 17 lists the top skill categories superintendents of small and medium-sized districts
perceived as vital to the principalship. The most vital skill category was building a positive
culture and climate by possessing the soft skills necessary to manage effective professional
relationships. Given that these relationships are with various stakeholders, this skill category is
understandably the most important because it is likely how principals can influence stresses,
demands, and supports. In the conceptual framework, these inputs affect both superintendents
and principals, but an administrator who can create a positive culture and climate can influence
those inputs. This would in turn filter out potential negative inputs felt by a superintendent.

79
These observations receive support from the existing finding that relationship skills are vital to
creating and maintaining a positive climate (Jacobson et al., 2007).
Table 17
Research Question 1 Themes
Research question Themes
Small districts Medium districts
1. What specific skill sets do
superintendents intentionally
foster to develop the leadership
capacity, confidence, and
expertise of their principals?
1. Culture and climate
2. Instructional leadership
3. Communication
4. Strategic management
1. Culture and climate
2. Strategic management
3. Instructional leadership
4. Communication
5. Professional learning
communities
Note. Adapted from “A Systems Analysis of Political Life” (p. 32) by David Easton, 1965,
University of Chicago Press.

80
The data for small and medium-sized districts, when combined, indicated both
instructional leadership and strategic management were equally important to the participants in
the study. According to existing research, instructional leadership is the most essential skill for
school leaders (City et al., 2009; Johnson et al., 2011). Hattie (2008) found instructional leaders
made learning a priority and had high expectations for teachers and students. In addition, schools
need leaders who know how to create systems that protect collaboration time, promote strategic
thinking, support effective resource allocation, lead to hiring and retention of good teachers, and
are organized (Anderson et al., 2010; Bloom et al., 2015; Finnigan, 2012; Grissom, 2021;
Grissom & Loeb, 2017; Horng et al., 2010; Lorton et al., 2013; Sebastian et al., 2018).
Therefore, experts would agree that one is impossible without the other.
Principals must possess both of these skills to impact learning in the classroom.
Superintendents expect a principal to be the instructional leader at their school site (Zepeda &
Lanoue, 2017), and can determine whether this is the case during a site visit. Site visits were one
of the ways participating superintendents felt they could get accurate feedback from their
principals. According to the conceptual framework, this feedback brings to light both positive
outcomes and areas of need that then influence how a superintendent proceeds with coaching or
professional development.
Participants ranked communication third in the list of five categories of essential
leadership skills. Although this skill category ranked lower than the others, according to the
participants, it is an essential skill that use to support the work leaders do. Communication skills
are critical for leadership because leaders use them to inform, motivate, and lead people on a
daily basis (Friedman, 2011). Leaders spend 70%–90% of their time communicating with their
teams. Possessing good communication skills enables leaders to effectively communicate their

81
expectations, develop improved understanding, and inspire others to follow (Barrett, 2006; Frese
et al., 2003). Barrett (2006) said:
Through effective communication, leaders lead. Good communication skills enable,
foster, and create the understanding and trust necessary to encourage others to follow a
leader. Without effective communication, a manager accomplishes little. Without
effective communication, a manager is not an effective leader. (p. 2)
None of the participants listed the skill involved in fostering and establishing strong,
data-driven PLCs. According to Leithwood and Jantzi (2008), PLCs are closely connected to
other leadership qualities, such as strong school culture and instructional leadership. Lyman
(2008) also associated strong PLCs with strategic management skills because PLCs require
scheduling and budget expertise to thrive. This is one possible explanation for why the study’s
participants did not list this skill category in their top five lists.
Research Question 2
Table 18 presents the themes that emerged for Research Question 2.
Table 18
Research Question 2 Themes
Research question Themes
Small districts Medium districts
2. What programs, practices, and
professional development
opportunities are provided by
district leaders to principals?
1. Coaching/mentoring
2. Principal
networking/collaboration
3. Professional development
1. Coaching/mentoring
2. Principal networking
3. Group professional
development

82
Analysis of the quantitative data from the survey responses of the 10 participating
superintendents yielded three common themes regarding the programs, practices, and
professional development opportunities provided by district leaders to principals: coaching,
principal networking, and group professional development. The themes corresponded to
opportunities provided by all of the participants (n = 10, 100%). Qualitative data from the inperson interviews supported the quantitative data. For example, Superintendent E said:
And the thought behind that was that, you know, if Tiger Woods can have a golf coach, if
Pete Sampras can have a tennis coach, then why shouldn’t the principal be able to have a
thought partner and an independent coach as well?
Coaching/mentoring was one means of professional development provided by all district
participants (n = 10, 100%). The validity of this theme receives support from existing research
indicating coaching to be an effective method of fostering a strong growth mindset and building
the performance skills of administrators (Baker & Kelley, 2019; Levin et al., 2020). However,
Superville (2021) found coaching to be most effective when a principal’s coach’s role was
separate from that of evaluator of the principal. All the superintendents of medium-sized districts
made a distinction between evaluator and coach; in fact, none of the participants from the
medium-sized districts were evaluators of their principals. This was not the case for most of the
participants from the small districts (n = 3, 60%). In fact, the superintendents from the smallest
districts (with average daily attendance less than 16,000) had the following to say.
Superintendent A said, “So I do evaluations of the principal. I just don’t give feedback, I give
you a written evaluation.” Superintendent B said, “So the first thing I did was make sure that I’m
evaluating every one of our principals.” Superintendent C said:

83
Unfortunately, in a smaller district, you don’t often have a set coaching position. And for
me, a lot of times I have a dual role, you know, a coach evaluator. And that’s always
difficult because sometimes the two cannot intersect, right? If someone knows that you’re
evaluating them, then there are times when their comfort level and saying, I messed up, I
did this. It’s a difficult conversation, right? Because ultimately, that’s something that
could be used in every evaluation, whether it’s directly or indirectly.
Principal networking/collaboration was another means of professional development
provided by all participants (n = 10, 100%). The validity of this theme receives support from
existing research indicating the importance of networking as a vital system of support that
contributes to the success of a school leader. Principal networking and collaboration supports,
sustains, and provides ongoing support and continual professional development to everyone
involved (Intrator & Scribner, 2008). Some participants shared their thoughts on the value they
placed on supportive peer-to-peer principal networking/collaboration opportunities.
Superintendent E said:
We worked really hard to make all of our principals meetings meaningful and engaging,
meaning that there is an instructional piece, there is a leadership piece and there’s lots of
collaboration opportunities built in to sit down and talk with their colleagues.
Superintendent F said, “There’s opportunities for them to also just have practical conversations
about the work that they’re facing each and every day. So that’s problem solving the things that
you’re bothered about.”
All participants provided group professional development opportunities (n = 10, 100%).
Learning opportunities for which colleagues meet during the day to share best practices and
provide feedback are essential for building capacity (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). All

84
participants acknowledged the importance of building capacity internally, so many used their
own district employees to provide group professional development.
Research Question 3
Table 19 presents the themes that emerged for Research Question 3. The data analysis
yielded three themes common to participants from both medium-sized and small districts:
tapping, stretch opportunities, and leadership academies. First, tapping was one of the strategies
participants used to build capacity and confidence among aspiring administrators. This theme
receives confirmation from existing research-based recommendations that organizations
carefully choose potential leaders at the right stage of their professional development and then
create plans to cultivate and strengthen their skills (Tichy, 2014). A common subtheme among
the participants from medium-sized districts was that 100% (n = 5) of them mentioned being
tapped during their careers, but only three (60%) of the participants from small districts shared
their personal experiences of being tapped during their interviews.
Table 19
Research Question 3 Themes
Research question Themes
Small districts Medium districts
3. What do superintendents feel
are components needed to
encourage and develop future
administrators?
1. Leadership academies
2. Stretch opportunities
3. Tapping
4. Teachers on special
assignment
1. Tapping
2. Instructional coach
3. Stretch opportunities
4. Leadership academies
5. Skill evaluation

85
Second, stretch opportunities that provide experiences outside of a potential candidate’s
typical job duties form a critical capacity building component for future administrators,
according to all participants (n = 10, 100%). This theme receives confirmation from the existing
finding that the best way to prepare an individual for a new role is through hands-on, on-the-job
training directly transferable to the new position. Hanover (2014) confirmed that people feel
more confident in a new role when they have had prior experiences engaging in activities that
stretch their capabilities.
Third, leadership academies provide professional development opportunities to support
existing, potential, and future principals, according to all 10 participants (100%). This theme
receives confirmation from existing findings recognizing the purpose of leadership academies in
the induction of new principals, identification of future leaders, and creation of networks (State
Support Network, 2020). Leadership academies provide formal professional development
focused on building knowledge, skills, and specialized practices and increasing the leadership
capacity of administrators to lead schools.
Limitations
Generalizability could be considered a limitation of the study given the contextual
specificity of the sample and the use of a small sample. As a qualitative study, however, the
study never had generalizability as part of its purpose. The goal of the study was instead to
understand how 10 superintendents made sense of their social responsibilities to create
instructional leaders—specifically, the skills they deemed essential for effective principals and
their methods for building the capacity for these skills in their existing administrations. The indepth interviews conducted provided the qualitative data needed to understand the perspectives
of the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The data collected resulted in a rich description of

86
the superintendents’ perspectives of effective capacity building, and, although not generalizable
across all educational contexts, the findings do allow for contextual inference and assessment of
applicability through the depth of their description.
The internal validity of the study is a limitation given the reliance on self-reported data in
the presurvey (see Appendix A) and interviews (see Appendix B). To increase validity, the
themes found in the survey data were reviewed within the context of the interviews. The
transcripts were read and marked many times while multiple themes were monitored and the
overall intent of the data was preserved. In addition, there was potential for researcher bias in the
conduct of the interviews and analysis of the data. Although an interview guide was used to
increase the likelihood of regularity in organization and structure, Randall et al. (2013) cautioned
that “there are a number of data collection situations in which the interviewer has considerable
personal control over the data collected” (p. 764). Follow-up questions during the semistructured
interviews could have been phrased in such a way as to encourage responses that confirmed or
disconfirmed researcher assumptions.
Implications for Practice
This study involved examination of superintendents’ perceptions of the skills needed for
effective administrative leadership. It also involved investigation of the superintendents’
approaches to building capacity for these skills in existing principals and aspiring administrators.
The study findings include themes that cab inform educational practitioners at the site and
district level. This study adds to the existing literature on the impact of superintendents on
development of administrators and the building of effective school principal pipelines.
Universities can benefit from an awareness of the administrative skills superintendents prefer in
their principals and the influence of this awareness on how and what coursework is offered in

87
traditional administrative credentialing programs. Aspiring administrators can use the identified
themes as a menu of skills to develop as they progress in their individual professional
development. Existing principals and district leaders can use the identified themes as a
framework for identification of potential leaders.
Future Research
Chapter 2 noted a need for further research regarding the problem of novice principals’
inability to positively affect teaching pedagogy in schools, which has a detrimental impact on the
development of teachers and students (Béteille et al., 2012; Grissom et al., 2021). It is important
to study this issue because a school’s leadership has a substantial influence on student learning,
second only to that of classroom teachers (Day et al., 2009; Harris et al., 2007; Leithwood et al.,
2004). In addition, high administrative turnover (Béteille et al., 2012) necessitates new principal
training, and empirical literature regarding how to build leadership capacity at the administrative
level of education is limited. Although this study contributes to understanding of how
superintendents build the leadership capacity of their principals, further research is needed. I
recommend additional research to address four areas related to this study:
1. Replicate the study with a larger number of superintendents from different U.S. states
over a longer period of time.
2. Explore how to change the participant selection process to include district leaders
who oversee the evaluation of principals.
3. Include data from districts’ principals’ evaluations over a period of time, assessing
significant growth and the programs, practices, and professional development
opportunities provided to these individuals.

88
4. Include principals’ perspectives on the programs, practices, and professional
development opportunities they found most effective.
Conclusions
As the demands of stakeholders increase stakeholders’ expectations of school leaders,
districts are having to hire teachers who may potentially become future school administrators.
This approach requires district leaders to be strategic in the way they hire, train, retain, and build
the capacity of each individual in their organizations to best serve the needs of their diverse
student populations. In addition, it requires district leaders to examine their hiring practices and
identify strategies with which to advance equitable policies and practices to better reflect the
diversity of the students served. School leadership matters, but the selection and cultivation of
leaders begins early in potential candidates’ careers. This study adds to the existing body of
research focused on the building of leadership capacity and principal pipelines. The findings of
this study of 10 superintendents from small and medium-sized districts provide superintendents
with insight into essential leadership skills and the opportunities that districts provide for
building principals’ skill sets. This study provides a framework to guide superintendents in the
selection of principals, effectively matching principals’ skill sets with the expectations of
stakeholders and the needs of students, teachers, and communities served. This study and its
findings can inform multiple stakeholders: existing and aspiring superintendents and
administrators responsible for the cultivation and development of leadership skills in existing and
future administrators; aspiring administrators who seek to fill principal positions and desire the
skills necessary to lead a school; and universities responsible for the training and development of
existing and aspiring administrative candidates enrolled in their administrative services
credential programs and administrative masters and doctoral programs.

89
References
Adams, C. M. (2013). Collective trust: A social indicator of instructional capacity. Journal of
Educational Administration, 51(3), 363–382.
AdLit (2023). Using the classroom walk-through as an instructional leadership strategy.
Adlit.org. https://www.adlit.org/topics/curriculum-instruction/using-classroom-walkthrough-instructional-leadership-strategy
American Association of School Administrators. (2021). The superintendent’s role.
https://www.aasa.org/School-Superintendents/Role-of-the-Superintendent.aspx
Anderson, S., Leithwood, K., & Strauss, T. (2010). Leading data use in schools: Organizational
conditions and practices at the school and district levels. Leadership and Policy in
Schools, 9(3), 292–327.
Ash, R., & Hodge, P. (2016). Five critical leadership practices: The secret to high performing
schools. Routledge.
Baker, J., & An, K. D. (2019, September). Coaching as a way of being. School Administrator,
AASA. https://my.aasa.org/AASA/Resources/SAMag/2019/Sep19/Baker-An.aspx
Baltzell, D., & Dentler, R. (1983). Selecting American school principals. Abt Associates.
Barret, D. (2006). Leadership communication: A communication approach for senior-level
managers. In Handbook of business strategy (pp. 385‒390). Emerald Group Publishing.
Bartanen, B. (2020). Principal quality and student attendance. Educational Researcher, 49(2),
101–113.
Bartanen, B., & Grissom, J. (2019). School principal race and the hiring and retention of
racially diverse teachers (EdWorkingPaper No. 19-59). Annenberg Institute.
http://edworkingpapers.com/ai19-59

90
Bartanen, B., Grissom, J. A., & Rogers, L. K. (2019). The impacts of principal turnover.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(3), 350–374.
Battle, D., & Gruber, K. (2010). Principal attrition and mobility: Results from the 2008–2009
Principal Follow-Up Survey: First look (Report No. NCES 2010-337). National Center
for Education Statistics.
Beckett, L. O. (2021). Predictors of Urban Principal Turnover. Urban Education (Beverly Hills,
Calif.), 56(10), 1695–1718.
Bennis, W., & Thomas, R. (2002). Crucibles of leadership. leadership qualities. Harvard
Business Review.
Béteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2012). Stepping stones: Principal career paths and
school outcomes. Social Science Research, 41(4), 904–919.
Bloom, G., Castagna, C., Moir, E., & Warren, B. (2005). Blended coaching: Skills and strategies
to support principal development. Corwin Press.
Bloom, N., Lemos, R., Sadun, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2015). Does management matter in
schools? The Economic Journal (London), 125(584), 647–674.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, L. G. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership
(6th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The Influence of
School Administrators on Teacher Retention Decisions. American Educational Research
Journal, 48(2), 303–333.
Branch, G., Hanushek, E., & Rivkin, S. (2013). School leaders matter. Education Next, 13(1),
62–69. https://www.educationnext.org/school-leaders-matter/

91
Brauckmann, S., & Pashiardis, P. (2012). Contextual framing for school leadership training:
Empirical findings from the Commonwealth project on leadership assessment and
development (Co-LEAD). The Journal of Management Development, 31(1), 18–33.
Brion, C. (2022). Culturally Proficient Professional Learning to Enhance Learning Transfer:
Guidance for Superintendents. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 19(1), 14–.
Brolund, L. (2016). Student success through instructional leadership. BU Journal of Graduate
Studies in Education, 8(2).
Brown, K. M., & Wynn, S. R. (2009). Finding, supporting, and keeping: The role of the
principal in teacher retention issues. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 37–63.
Center for Community Health and Development (2023). Conducting a workshop: Community
tool box. University of Kansas.
Cialdini, R. B. (2007). Influence: The psychology of persuasion (Rev. ed.). Collins.
City, E. A., Elmore, R., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A
network approach to improving teaching and learning. Harvard Education Press.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2014, February). California professional standards for
education leaders (CPSEL). https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/educatorprep/standards/cpsel-booklet-2014.pdf
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2015). Model principal supervisor professional
standards 2015. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/Documents/Model-Principal-Supervisor-Professional-Standards-2015.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE Publications.

92
Croft, A., Coggshall, J., Dolan, M., Powers, E., & Killion, J. (2010). Job-embedded professional
development: What it is, who is responsible, and how to get it done well. National
Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Cunha, R. S., Tintoré, M., Cabral, I., & Alves, J. M. (2020). Portuguese principals’ professional
development needs and preferred learning methods. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–16.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development. Learning Policy Institute.
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., & Orr, M. T. (2007). Preparing school
leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development
programs. Wallace Foundation. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/Documents/Preparing-School-Leaders.pdf
Darling-Hammond, L., & Plank, D. N. (2015). Supporting Continuous Improvement in
California's Education System. Policy Analysis for California Education, PACE.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wechsler, M., Levin, S., Leung-Gagné, M., & Tozer, S. (2022).
Developing effective principals: What kind of learning matters? Learning Policy
Institute. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/developingeffective-principals.pdf
Davis, S. H., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Innovative principal preparation programs: What
works and how we know. Planning and Changing, 43(1–2), 25–45.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ977545.pdf
Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). Review of research.
School leadership study. Developing successful principals. Stanford Educational
Leadership Institute.

93
Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2018). How successful secondary school principals in England respond to
policy reforms: The influence of biography. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(3),
332-344.
Day, C., Sammons, P., Hopkins, D., Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Gu, Q., & Kington, A. (2009).
The impact of school leadership on pupil outcomes. Final report (Research Report No.
DCSF-RR018). Nottingham University.
Delpit, L. (2006). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. The New Press.
DeMatthews, D. E., Knight, D. S., & Shin, J. (2022). The principal–teacher churn:
Understanding the relationship between leadership turnover and teacher attrition.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(1), 76–109.
DeMatthews, D. E., Scheffer, M., & Kotok, S. (2021). Useful or useless? Principal perceptions
of the Texas principal evaluation and support system. Journal of Research on Leadership
Education, 16(4), 279-304.
Dempster, N., Lovett, S., & Flückiger, B. (2011). Strategies to develop school leadership: A
select literature review. Research review). http://www. aitsl. edu.
au/docs/defaultsource/clearinghouse/strategies-to-developschool-leadership. pdf.
Donohoo, J., Hattie, J., & Eells, R. (2018). The power of collective efficacy. Educational
Leadership, 75(6), 40-44.
Downey, C. J., Steffy, B. E., English, F. W. Frase, L. E., & Poston, W. K. (2004). The threeminute classroom walk-through: Changing school supervisory practice one teacher at a
time. Corwin Press.
Dugan, J. P. (2011). Students’ involvement in group experiences and connections to leadership
development. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(S1), 17–32.

94
Dugan, J. P., Kodama, C., Correia, B. (2013). Multi-institutional study of leadership insight
report: Leadership program delivery. National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.
Easton, D. (1953). Political system: An inquiry into the state of political science. Alfred A.
Knopf.
Easton, D. (1965). A framework for political analysis. Prentice-Hall.
Edwards, W., Quinn, D., Fuller, E., & Pendola, A. (2018). Impact of principal turnover (Policy
Brief No. 2018-4). University Council for Educational Administration.
http://3fl71l2qoj4l3y6ep2tqpwra.wpengine.netdnacdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/06/Policy-Brief-2018-%E2%80%93-4-Impact-ofPrincipalTurnover.pdf
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for
professional development in education. The Albert Shanker Institute.
Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and
instructional improvement. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes (Eds.) Teaching as the
learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. Jossey Bass.
Ezenwafor, J. I. (2013). Enhancing the relevance of secretarial staff in the university system,
Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 4(3), 424‒432.
Finnigan, K. S. (2012). Principal Leadership in Low-Performing Schools: A Closer Look
Through the Eyes of Teachers. Education and Urban Society, 44(2), 183–202.
Flanary, D. (2011). Building leadership capacity. University of Washington, College of
Education, Center for Educational Leadership. https://k-12leadership.org/buildingleadership-capacity/
Frese, M., Beimel, S., & Schoenborn, S. (2003). Action training for charismatic leadership: Two

95
evaluations of studies of a commercial training module on inspirational communication
of a vision. Personnel Psychology, 56, 671‒698.
Friedman, K. (2011). You’re on! How strong communication skills help leaders succeed.
Business Strategy Series, 12(6), 308‒314.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2010). All systems go. Corwin Press.
Fuller, E., Hollingworth, L., & An, B. P. (2019). Exploring intersectionality and the employment
of school leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(2), 134–151.
Fuller, E. J., & Young, M. D. (2022). Challenges and opportunities in diversifying the leadership
pipeline: Flow, leaks and interventions. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21(1), 19–34.
Gao, W., & Mager, G. (2011). Enhancing pre service teachers’ sense of efficacy and attitudes
toward school diversity through preparation: A case of one US inclusive teacher
education program. International Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 92–107.
Gates, S., Kaufman, J., Doan, S., Prado Tuma, A. & Kim, D. (2020). Taking stock of principal
pipelines: What public-school principals report doing and what they want to do to
improve school leadership. Rand Corporation & Policy Studies Associates.
Gates, S. M., Baird, M. D., Master, B. K., & Chavez-Herrerias, E. R. (2019). Principal pipelines:
A feasible, affordable, and effective way for districts to improve schools. RAND.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2666.html
Gates, S., Hamilton, L., Martorell, P., Burkhauser, S., Heaton, P., Pierson, A., Baird, M., Vuollo,
M., Li, J., Lavery, D., Harvey, M., & Gu, K. (2014). Principal preparation matters: How
leadership affects student achievement. RAND.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9786.html

96
George, M. (2002). Professional development for a literature-based middle school curriculum.
The Clearing House, 75(6), 327–331.
Glass T., Björk L., & Brunner C. (2000). The study of the American school superintendency
2000: A look at the superintendent in the new millennium. American Association of
School Administrators.
Goff, P., Edward Guthrie, J., Goldring, E., & Bickman, L. (2014). Changing principals’
leadership through feedback and coaching. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5),
682–704.
Goldring, E. B., Neumerski, C. M., Cannata, M., Drake, T. A., Grissom, J. A., Rubin, M., &
Schuermann, P. (2014). Principals’ use of teacher effectiveness data for talent
management decisions.
González-Falcón, García-Rodríguez, M. P., Gómez-Hurtado, I., & Carrasco-Macías, M. J.
(2020). The importance of principal leadership and context for school success: Insights
from “(in)visible school.” School Leadership & Management, 40(4), 248–265.
Gordon, M. F., & Louis, K. S. (2009). Linking Parent and Community Involvement with Student
Achievement: Comparing Principal and Teacher Perceptions of Stakeholder Influence.
American Journal of Education, 116(1), 1–31.
Gordon, S. P., Oliver, J., & Solis, R. (2016). Successful innovations in educational leadership
preparation. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(2), 51–70.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1123995.pdf
Gordon, S. P., Taylor-Backor, K., & Croteau, S. (2017). Recommended Capacities for
Educational Leadership: Pre-Reform Era Scholars Versus Reform-Era Scholars Versus
National Standards. NASSP Bulletin, 101(3), 188–214.

97
Grissom, J. A., Bartanen, B., & Mitani, H. (2019). Principal sorting and the distribution of
principal quality. AERA Open, 5(2), Article 94.
Grissom, J. A., Egalite, A. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (2021). How principals affect students and
schools: A systematic synthesis of two decades of research. Wallace Foundation.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/pages/how-principals-affectstudents-andschools-a-systematic-synthesis-of-two-decades-of-research.aspx
Grissom, J. A., & Harrington, J. R. (2010). Investing in Administrator Efficacy: An Examination
of Professional Development as a Tool for Enhancing Principal Effectiveness. American
Journal of Education, 116(4), 583–612.
Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2017). Assessing principals’ assessments: Subjective evaluations of
teacher effectiveness in low-and high-stakes environments. Education Finance and
Policy, 12(3), 369–395.
Grissom, J., Mitani, H., & Woo, D. (2019). Principal preparation programs and principal
outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(1), 73–115.
Grunow, A., Horng, E. H., & Loeb, S. (2010). Succession management in schools [Working
paper]. Stanford University, Center for Education Policy Analysis.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A
review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1),
544.
Handford, V., & Leithwood, K. (2013). Why teachers trust school leaders. Journal of
Educational Administration, 51(2), 194–212.
Hanover Research (2014, October). Best practices in succession planning.
https://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Best-Practices-in-Succession-Planning.pdf

98
Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership
and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Educational Change, 8(4), 337–347.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning. Routledge.
Heffernan, A. (2021). Retaining Australia’s school leaders in “challenging” contexts: The
importance of personal relationships in principal turnover decisions. International
Journal of Educational Research, 105(2021), 101716.
Herman, R., Gates, S. M., Arifkhanova, A., Barrett, M. K., Bega, A., Chavez-Herrerias, E. R.,
Han, E., Harris, M., Migacheva, K., Ross, R., Leschitz, J. T., & Wrabel, S. L. (2017).
School leadership interventions under the Every Student Succeeds Act: Evidence review:
Updated and expanded. RAND.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1500/RR1550-
3/RAND_RR15503.pdf
Herold, D. M., & Fedor, D. B. (2008). Change the way you lead change: Leadership strategies
that really work. Stanford University Press.
Hollingworth, L., Olsen, D., Asikin-Garmager, A., & Winn, K. M. (2018). Initiating
conversations and opening doors: How principals establish a positive building culture to
sustain school improvement efforts. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership, 46(6), 1014–1034.
Honig, M. I., & Rainey, L. R. (2020). Supervising principals for instructional leadership.
Harvard Education Press.
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal’s time use and school effectiveness.
American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491–523.
Huse, R. R. (2010). Entrepreneurship theory and practice. Oxford University Press.

99
Institute for Educational Leadership (2000, October). Leadership for student learning:
Reinventing the principalship. Achievehartford.org.
https://www.achievehartford.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/IEL-Leadership-forStudent-Learning.pdf
International Coaching Federation (2023). Empowering the world through coaching.
Coachingfederation.org. https://coachingfederation.org/
Intrator, S., & Scribner, M. (2008). NSLN network evaluation report: Executive summary.
[Unpublished executive summary]. Smith College.
Jacobson, S. L. (2005). The recruitment and retention of school leaders: Understanding
administrator supply and demand. In International handbook of educational policy (pp.
457-470). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Jacobson, S. L., Brooks, S., Giles, C., Johnson, L., & Ylimaki, R. (2007). Successful leadership
in three high-poverty urban elementary schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(4),
291–317.
Jacobson, S. L., Johnson, L., Ylimaki, R., & Giles, C. (2005). Successful leadership in
challenging US schools: Enabling principles, enabling schools. Journal of Educational
Administration, 43(6), 607–618.
Jiang, N., Sumintono, B., Perera, C. J., Harris, A., & Jones, M. S. (2017). Training preparation
and the professional development of principals in Henan Province, China: Formal and
informal learning. Asia Pacific Education Review, 19(1), 41–51.
Johnson, J. F., Uline, C. L., & Perez, L. G. (2011). Expert noticing and principals of highperforming urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 16(2), 122–
136.

100
Kafka, J. (2009). The principalship in historical perspective. Peabody Journal of Education,
84(3), 318–330.
Khalifa, M. (2012). A re-new-ed paradigm in successful urban school leadership: Principal as
community leader. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(3), 424–467.
Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally responsive school leadership: A
synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272–1311.
Kolbe, T., & Strunk, K. O. (2012). Economic incentives as a strategy for responding to teacher
staffing problems: A typology of policies and practices. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 48(5), 779‒813.
Kowalski, T. J., & Bjork, L. G. (2014). The contemporary superintendent: preparation, practice,
and development. Corwin.
Krasnoff, B. (2015). Leadership qualities of effective principals. Northwest Comprehensive
Center.
Lankford, R. H., O’Connell, R. W., Wyckoff, J. H. (2003). Our next generation: School
leadership in New York State. New York State Education Department.
Lavigne, H. J., Shakman, K., Zweig, J., & Greller, S. L. (2016). Principals’ time, tasks, and
professional development: An analysis of schools and staffing survey data. Education
Development Center.
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2017201.pdf
Leibman, M., Bruer, R. A., & Maki, B. R. (1996). Succession management: The next generation
of succession planning. Human Resource Planning, 19(3), 16–29.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of
leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 496–528.

101
Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. (2012). Linking leadership to student learning. Jossey-Bass.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences
student learning. Wallace Foundation. http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/school-leadership/key-research/Pages/How-Leadership-Influences-StudentLearning.aspx
Levin, S., Bradley, K. & Scott, C. (2019, July 18). Principal turnover: Insights from current
principals. Learningpolicyinstitute.org. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/nasspprincipal-turnover-insightsbrief#:~:text=Past%20research%20has%20identified%20five,authority%2C%20and%2
0ineffective%20accountability%20policies
Levin, S., Leung, M., Edgerton, A. K., & Scott, C. (2020). Elementary school principals’
professional learning: Current status and future needs. Learning Policy Institute.
Liljenberg. (2021). A professional development practice to enhance principals’ instructional
leadership – enabling and constraining arrangements. Journal of Professional Capital
and Community, 6(4), 354–366.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic observation. SAGE.
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lortie, D. (2009). School principal—Managing in public. University of Chicago Press.
Lorton, J. A., Bellamy, G. T., Reece, A., & Carlson, J. (2013). Understanding schools as highreliability organizations: An exploratory examination of teachers’ and school leaders’
perceptions of success. Journal of School Leadership, 23(6), 1047–1082.

102
Louis, K., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K., & Anderson, S. (2010). Learning from leadership:
Investigating the links to improved student learning. University of Minnesota; University
of Toronto.
Louis, K. S., Murphy, J., & Smylie, M. (2016). Caring leadership in schools: Findings from
exploratory analyses. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 310–348.
Lyman, L. L. (2008). Women principals leading learning at “poverty’s edge.” Journal of Women
in Educational Leadership, 6(3), 187–200.
Macpherson, R. (2009). How secondary principals view New Zealand’s leadership preparation
and succession strategies: Systematic professionalization or amateurism through serial
incompetence? Leading & Managing, 15(2), 44–58.
Marzano, R. J., & Waters, T. (2009). District leadership that works: Striking the right balance.
Solution Tree.
Maulidin, M., Usman, N., & Bahrun, B. (2022). Principal communication management in
improving teacher performance in senior high school. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan,
14(4), 7353–7360.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013) Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.
May, H., & Supovitz, J. A. (2011). The scope of principal efforts to improve instruction.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 332–352.
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation
(4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
MetLife. (2012). The MetLife survey of the American teacher: Challenges for school leadership.
Harris Interactive.
Metros, S. & Yang, C. (2006). The importance of mentors. The Ohio State University.

103
Mininger, V. R. (2022). One and Done: An Instrumental Case Study of Administrative Turnover
in a Private Christian School (Doctoral dissertation, Baylor University).
Mohamed. S. (2021, October 1). Theoretical contribution to Easton’s system theory. Algerian
Encyclopedia of Political and Strategic Studies.
Moye, M. J., Henkin, A. B., & Egley, R. J. (2005). Teacher–principal relationships: Exploring
linkages between empowerment and interpersonal trust. Journal of Educational
Administration, 43(2/3), 260–277.
Murniati, A. R., Usman, N., & dan Ulfa, I. Z. (2021). Manajemen mutu terpadu pendidikan
kejuruan pengembangan sekolah menengah kejuruan sebagai sekolah berbasis sistem
ganda (dual-based system) dan kewirausahaan (school-based entrepreneurship)
[Translation of the title]. Deepublish; Yogyakarta.
Murphy, G. (2020). Leadership preparation, career pathways and the policy context: Irish novice
principals’ perceptions of their experiences. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership. Advance online publication.
Myung, J., Loeb, S., & Horng, E. (2011). Tapping the principal pipeline: Identifying talent for
future school leadership in the absence of formal succession management
programs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 695-727.
National Association of Elementary School Principals, The (2008, March). School culture,
school climate: are not the same thing. NAESP.org.
https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/resources/2/Principal/2008/M-Ap56.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). Public elementary and secondary school
enrollment, number of schools, and other selected characteristics, by locale: Fall 2014
through fall 2017. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_214.40.asp

104
National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for
educational leaders 2015. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/Documents/Professional-Standards-for-Educational-Leaders-2015.pdf
Ng, S-W., & Szeto, S. E. (2016). Preparing school leaders: The professional development needs
of newly appointed principals. Educational Management, Administration & Leadership,
44(4), 540–557.
Niesz, T. (2007). Why teacher networks (can) work. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(8), 605‒610.
Orr, M, & Barber, M. (2006). Collaborative leadership preparation: A comparative study of
partnership and conventional programs and practices. Journal of School Leadership,
16(6), 709–739.
Orr, M. T., & Orphanos, S. (2011). How graduate-level preparation influences the effectiveness
of school leaders: A comparison of the outcomes of exemplary and conventional
leadership preparation programs for principals. Educational Administration Quarterly,
47(1), 18–70.
Owen, J. E. (2012). Using student development theories as conceptual frameworks in leadership
education. New Directions for Student Leadership, VV(140), 17–35.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Perez, L. G., Uline, C. L., Johnson, J. F., James-Ward, C., & Basom, M. R. (2011).
Foregrounding fieldwork in leadership preparation: The transformative capacity of
authentic inquiry. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 217–257.
Perrone, F., Young, M. D., & Fuller, E. J. (2022). A call for data on the principal pipeline.
Educational Researcher, 51(6), 423–430.

105
Pounder, D., & Crow, G. (2005). Sustaining the pipeline of school administrators. Educational
Leadership, 62(8), 5.
Pounder, D. G., Galvin, P., & Shepherd, P. (2003). An analysis of the United States educational
administrator shortage. Australian Journal of Education, 47(2), 133–146.
Powers, J. & Constance, E. (2019). Evaluating the superintendent: The process of collaborative
compromises and critical considerations. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Price, H. E. (2012). Principal–teacher interactions: How affective relationships shape principal
and teacher attitudes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(1), 39–85.
Price, H. E. (2015). Principals’ social interactions with teachers: How principal–teacher social
relations correlate with teachers’ perceptions of student engagement. Journal of
Educational Administration, 53(1), 116–139.
Printy, S. M., & Williams, S. M. (2015). Principals’ Decisions: Implementing Response to
Intervention. Educational Policy (Los Altos, Calif.), 29(1), 179–205.
Pujianto, P., Arafat, Y., & Setiawan, A. A. (2020). Pengaruh aupervisi akademik kepala sekolah
dan lingkungan kerja terhadap kinerja guru sekolah dasar negeri air salek [Translation of
title]. Journal of Education Research, 1(2), 106–113.
Randall, S., Coast, E., Compaore, N., & Antoine, P. (2013). The power of the interviewer.
Demographic Research, 28(N), 763–792.
Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Robinson, V. M. J., Hohepa, M., & Lloyd, C. A. (2009). School leadership and student
outcomes: Identifying what works and why, best evidence synthesis. New Zealand
Ministry of Education.

106
Rousmaniere, K. (2013). The principal’s office: A social history of the American school
principal. State University of New York Press.
Roza, M. (2003). A matter of definition: Is there truly a shortage of school principals?
University of Washington, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
Ruliana, P. (2016). Komunikasi organisasi (Teori dan studi kasus) [Translation of the title]. Raja
Wali Pers.
Ryder, A. J., Reason, R. D., Mitchell, J. J., Gillon, K., & Hemer, K. M. (2016). Climate for
learning and students’ openness to diversity and challenge: A critical role for faculty.
Journal of Diversity Higher Education, 9(4), 339–352.
Schlechty, P. C. (2005). Shaking up the School House. (Translation: Yüksel Özden). Ankara:
Nobel Publications.
School Leaders Network. (2014). Churn: The high cost of principal turnover.
https://www.issuelab.org/resources/20544/20544.pdf
Sebastian, J., Allensworth, E., Wiedermann, W., Hochbein, C., & Cunningham, M. (2018).
Principal leadership and school performance: An examination of instructional leadership
and organizational management. Leadership and Policy in Schools, VV(N), 1–23.
Seemiller, C., & Murray, T. (2013). The student leadership competencies guidebook: Designing
intentional leadership learning and development. Jossey-Bass.
Sheridan, C. & Johnson, E. (2021, March). Mentoring vs. coaching: The key differences and
benefits. PushFar.com. https://www.pushfar.com/article/mentoring-vs-coaching-the-keydifferences-and-benefits/
Shortland, S. (2004). Peer observation: A tool for staff development or compliance? Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 28(2), 219‒228.

107
Snyder, J. (2015). Teacher leadership and teacher preparation: A personal narrative. The
Educational Forum, 79(1), 5–11.
Sorensen, L. C., Bushway, S. D., & Gifford, E. J. (2022). Getting tough? The effects of
discretionary principal discipline on student outcomes. Education Finance and
Policy, 17(2), 255-284.
State Support Network (2020, April). Designing leadership academies for principal professional
learning. OESE.ed. https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/10/leadershipacademies-508.pdf
Superville, D. (2021). Coaching for new principals can provide a critical pillar of support.
Education Week.
Syed, S. (2015). Building principal pipelines: A strategy to strengthen educational leadership.
Wallace Foundation. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledgecenter/Documents/Building-Principal-Pipelines-A-Strategy-to-Strengthen-EducationLeadership.pdf
Taie, S., & Goldring, R. (2019). Characteristics of public and private elementary and secondary
school principals in the United States: Results from the 2017–18 National Teacher and
Principal Survey first look (NCES 2019141). U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2019141
Tichy, N. (2014). Succession: Mastering the make-or-break process of leadership transition.
Penguin.
Tingly, S. (2023). Education conferences are a great place for teachers to grow. Hey Teach.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of Educational
Administration, 39(4), 308–331.

108
Turnbull, B., Worley, S., & Palmer, S. (2021). Strong pipelines, strong principals: A guide for
leveraging federal sources to fund principal pipelines. Wallace Foundation.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/pages/strong-pipelines-strongprincipals-a-guide-for-leveraging-federal-sources-to-fund-principal-pipelines.aspx
Turner, R. (1960). Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system. American Sociological
Review, 25(1960), 855–867.
Ujifusa, A. (2022, February 10). How politics are straining parent-school relationships.
Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-politics-are-straining-parentschool-relationships/2022/02
U.S. News and World Report. (2023). Overview of school districts. US News.com.
Walker, A., and Kwan, P. (2012), Principal selection panels: Strategies, preferences and
perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(2), 188‒205.
Wallace Foundation, The. (2013, January). The school principal as leader: Guiding schools to
better teaching and learning. Wallacefoundation.org.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Principalas-Leader-Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning-2nd-Ed.pdf
Walsh, E., & Dotter, D. (2020). The impact on student achievement of replacing principals in
District of Columbia public schools. Education Finance and Policy, 15(3), 518–542.
Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development
in the United States and abroad (Technical Report). National Staff Development Council.
Westberry, L., & Horner, T. (2022). Best practices in principal professional development. AASA
Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 19(1), 29.

109
Workplace Testing (2018, July 28). Site visit. Surehire.inc.
https://www.workplacetesting.com/definition/375/site-visit-workplace-health-and-safety
Youngs, P., Kim, J., & Mavrogordato, M. E. C. (Eds.). (2021). Exploring principal development
and teacher outcomes: How principals can strengthen instruction, teacher retention, and
student achievement. Routledge.
Zepeda, S. J., & Lanoue, P. D. (2017). Conversation walks: improving instructional leadership
(Clarke County School District, Georgia). Educational Leadership (Vol. 74, Issue 8, p.
58–). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

110
Appendix A: Superintendent Presurvey
This is a confidential message, intended solely for the person to whom it is addressed. If
you receive this message in error, please forward it to the correct person, or email it back to me.
Thank you.
Dear (Superintendent's name),
Thank you for your commitment of participation. I am requesting that you please take a
few minutes and fill out this google form survey. As part of my doctoral dissertation process, I am
conducting a study on how a superintendent develops the leadership capacity, confidence, and
expertise of their principals. I am talking to multiple superintendents to learn more about this. All
information will be handled in a confidential marmer. No information will be reported using your
name or in connection with your specific school district.
Informed Consent Form
I give my consent for my participation in the research project: “Building Leadership
Capacity From The Top: How superintendents empower principals to lead schools.” I understand
that the person responsible for this research project is Veronica Perez, Doctoral Student, Rossier
School of Education, University of Southern California, available at (626) 939- 0600 ext. 6046.
1. Your participation will involve responding to a set of survey (10 minutes) and interview
(1 hour) questions.
2. There are no anticipated adverse risks from your participation.
3. There are no anticipated benefits from your participation.
4. Your participation is voluntary.
5. You may terminate your participation at any time.

111
The risks are explained to you as follows: there are no anticipated risks with participation in this
study. It is further explained to you that the total duration of your participation in this survey will
not exceed ten (10) minutes; and that all data associated with this study will remain in strictest
confidence. By completing this survey, you are consenting to participate in this study. Thank you
for your participation.
Survey Items
Please select your response by checking the appropriate box(s) or writing on the lines
provided.
1. Superintendent gender?
• Male
• Female
• Prefer to describe (please describe below).
• Prefer not to say.
2. Superintendent age?
• 30–39
• 40–49
• 50–59
• 60+
3. Superintendent ethnicity?
• Caucasian
• African American
• Latino or Hispanic
• Native American

112
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
• Prefer not to say.
4. Past experiences (check all that apply):
• School site positions:
● elementary school teacher
● middle school teacher
● high school teacher
● counselor (any level)
● college/university instructor
● community college instructor
● teacher on special assignment (TOSA)
● Other: _____________________
• School site administrator positions:
● elementary school assistant principal
● middle school assistant principal
● high school assistant principal
● elementary principal
● middle school principal
● high school principal
● dean of students
• District level positions:
● coordinator
● specialist

113
● director of curriculum and instruction
● director of research and planning
● director of human resources
● director of student support services
● Director: Other: _____________________
● assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction
● assistant superintendent of human resources
● assistant superintendent of business/chief business officer (CBO)
● deputy superintendent
● local district superintendent
● chief of staff
● assistant superintendent:
● Other: _____________________
● other than education
● Please specify: _____________________
5. What do you believe are the top 5 skills needed to be a principal?
6. What types of programs, practices, and/or professional development opportunities
have you provided to your principals in the last year? (Check all that apply):
● coaching
● mentoring
● peer observations
● instructional rounds
● site visits

114
● principal network (inside district)
● principal network (with other districts)
● group professional development
● individual professional development
● conferences
● workshops
● book clubs
● collaboration with other sites
● job embedded training
● external training
● Other: _____________________
To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please
select one answer per row by circling the appropriate number: 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree).
7. The principal evaluation process identifies the skills a principal needs to improve.
8. If a principal has a skill they need to improve, the district has a plan to support that
principal.
9. Coaching/mentoring is essential to building one's capacity.
10. The opportunities provided for principals in my district effectively build their
capacity to lead schools.
11. Data is utilized on an annual basis to measure the areas of growth for each principal.
12. Data is utilized on an annual basis to measure the areas of need for each principal.

115
Closing
If you have any questions or concerns regarding your participation in this study, you may
contact me at vmperez@usc.edu. Thank you for your time and contribution to this study.

116
Appendix B: Superintendent Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time you have set
aside to meet with me and answer my questions. As I mentioned in my email, the interview
should take about an hour, does that still work with you?
Before we begin, I would like to review with you this study, the overview, which I
provided in the Study Information Sheet, and answer any questions you might have about your
participation in this interview. I am a student at USC and conducting a study on how a
superintendent develops the leadership capacity, confidence, and expertise of their principals. I
am talking to multiple superintendents to learn more about this.
I want to assure you that I am here as a researcher. What this means is that my questions
are not evaluative. I will not be making judgements of your performance. My goal is to
understand your perspective.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet I provided you previously, this interview is
confidential. This means that your name will not be shared with anyone outside of the research
team. No information will be reported using your name or in connection with your specific
school district. The data for this study will be compiled into a report and while I do plan on using
some of what you say as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I will
use a pseudonym to protect your anonymity and will try my best to de-identify any of the data I
gather from you. I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final paper if you are interested.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet, I will keep the data in a password protected
computer and all data will be destroyed after 3 years.
Do you have any questions about anything I just said or about the study in general before
we get started? I will be recording our interview so that I can accurately capture what you share

117
with me. The recording is solely for my purposes to best capture your perspectives and will not
be shared with anyone outside the research team. May I have your permission to record this
interview?
Setting the Stage
1. Please tell me about your path to becoming a superintendent.
• How did you become interested in the field of education?
• What roles or positions have you held?
• How long have you held your different roles until this point?
Which role do you perceive as being the most demanding? What skills did you need to
refine or develop in order to be successful in this new position?
Heart of the Interview
Thank you. I’d like to ask you about your leadership philosophy.
1. Tell me about your personal philosophy/belief about leadership capacity building.
2. In your survey you listed ____________ skills. In the past year which skills did you
focus on?
3. How was this determined?
Thank you. I’d like to continue by asking about building strong leadership in your
district.
4. What steps do you take to communicate your expectations to principals?
5. After having hired a principal, what do you look for in evaluating where they are at in
terms of their leadership ability? And then potential?
6. How do you know the difference between a principal that “is not there yet” vs a
principal that is “not a good fit”?

118
7. Think about a time, if any, when you witnessed more than average growth in an
administrator. What actions did you take to contribute to that growth?
8. What specific actions do you take to develop the capacity of principals to become the
leaders that you want for your schools?
9. What specific actions do you take to develop assistant principals, coaches, and
teacher leaders to become future principals?
Thank you. I’d like to continue by asking about professional learning
opportunities.
10. What do you look for when evaluating a “good” program or training for your district
administrators?
11. In your survey response you mentioned ________________ professional learning
opportunities related to leadership capacity building?
• When did this occur?
• How often?
• Who participated?
• How did you hear about this professional learning opportunity?
• What were some of the reasons you chose this professional development?
12. What do you think are the critical components of a successful principal pipeline?
13. What do you think are some of the challenges of providing capacity building
opportunities for school leaders in your organization?
14. What changes if any do you feel should be implemented in your organization in order
to focus more on leadership capacity building?

119
Thank you. I would like to conclude this interview with two scenarios. Please address the
following utilizing your leadership capacity building philosophy.
15. Scenario One: Principal A of X High School, consistently demonstrates his
commitment to continuous improvement, takes initiative, and is an indispensable
member of his school team. What actions would you take to continue to develop his
leadership skills to lead his school effectively? What impact do you believe these
actions will have?
16. Scenario Two: Principal B of Y High School is disorganized, highly impulsive, and
never on time. He is disorganized because he will never say no to doing good, and
there is too much good to be done. He is impulsive because he needs to act swiftly
and seize opportunities that might otherwise pass him by. When he's not on time, it's
probably because he is doing a home visit for a student who has missed too many
days of school. As much as he cares about education, he cares about lives more. What
actions would you take to continue to develop his leadership skills to lead his school
effectively? What impact do you believe these actions will have?
Closing Question
I want to ensure that I understand your experiences and expertise on the development of
current and future leaders and their capacity to lead successfully at their school sites. I would like
to provide you an opportunity to share anything you feel is important about building leadership
capacity internally that I have not asked.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This dissertation explores the ways superintendents build leadership capacity among principals to improve student performance. Drawing on existing literature regarding educational leadership development, this study involved employing a qualitative research design and data gathered through surveys and interviews of 10 superintendents of public school districts in Southern California. The study yielded (a) an in-depth understanding of the leadership skills desired by these superintendents in principals in their district, (b) the reported actions taken by superintendents to build leadership capacity among those principals, and (c) the superintendents’ understanding of the critical components of attracting, developing, and retaining administrators in their districts. The skills most desired by the superintendents in their school leaders were ability to foster a positive culture and climate, instructional leadership skills, effective communication, strategic management, and ability to organize forward-moving professional learning communities. The various strategies employed included coaching/mentoring, fostering a culture of collaboration, and providing opportunities for professional development. The critical components mentioned by the participating superintendents were leadership academies, stretch opportunities, tapping, and teachers on special assignment. These findings have significant implications for educational policy and practice because they suggest ways to build leadership capacity from the top, potentially improving school performance and ensuring student success. By providing practical recommendations for superintendents and other educational leaders, this study contributes to the ongoing conversation about how to build effective and sustainable leadership practices in schools.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Building leadership capacity to support principal succession

PDF

Leadership capacity building: promising practices in principal preparation

PDF

Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions

PDF

How principals lead Title I schools to high academic achievements: a case study of transformative leadership

PDF

Latinx principal belonging and mattering

PDF

Building leadership capacity: Practices for preparing the next generation of Catholic school principals

PDF

Building the leadership capacity of women in K-12 education: successful strategies that create the next generation of women school and district leaders

PDF

Principal leadership succession: developing the next generation of leaders

PDF

Female elementary school principals and building capacity for teacher leaders

PDF

Promising practices for developing leadership capacity in future school administrators

PDF

Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

How principals lead Title I schools to high academic achievement: a case study of transformative leadership

PDF

Leadership pipeline and succession: promising practices for building leadership capacity in a K-12 school district

PDF

Leading the new generation: principal leadership practices that promote retention of millennial teachers

PDF

Leading conditions to support reclassification of long-term multilingual learners

PDF

Leadership succession: promising practices to develop a sustainable leadership pipeline at a secondary school

PDF

How they got there: examining the advancement of women of color in K–12 leadership roles

PDF

Principal leadership practice: the achieving principal coaching initiative

Asset Metadata

Creator Perez, Veronica Maria (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 01/08/2024

Defense Date 12/31/2023

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

Tag leadership capacity,OAI-PMH Harvest,principal pipeline,professional development

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Franklin, Gregory (committee chair), Hinman, Charles (committee member), Kishimoto, Christina (committee member)

Creator Email vmperez@usc.edu,vperez@wcusd.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113803925

Unique identifier UC113803925

Identifier etd-PerezVeron-12596.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-PerezVeron-12596

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Perez, Veronica Maria

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240116-usctheses-batch-1119 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu