University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content How Principals Lead Title I Schools to High Academic Achievements: A Case Study of
Transformative Leadership
Cristina Prado
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
August 2024

© Copyright by Cristina Prado 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Cristina Prado certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Gregory Franklin
Rudolph Crew
David Cash, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
This qualitative case study explored the application of transformative leadership practices by
principals in high-achieving Title I high schools across Los Angeles County. The focus was on
understanding how these practices create an equitable and inclusive learning environment for
socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) students. By examining the relationship between
effective leadership practices and the eight principles of transformative leadership theory, the
study sought to uncover how school leaders implement such practices and how teachers perceive
these implementation practices. Two research questions guided this study: To what extent do
principals in Title I high schools employ transformative leadership practices to increase student
achievement? What transformative leadership practices do teachers in Title I schools identify in
their principals’ efforts to improve student achievement? Data were collected through semistructured interviews with principals and teachers, allowing for a detailed comparison and
analysis of perspectives. The study’s findings reveal a significant link between the principals’
leadership practices and transformative leadership principles, highlighting the strengths and areas
for further development. This analysis reinforces the theoretical underpinnings of transformative
leadership. It offers insights into its practical application, suggesting a pathway toward more
aligned and effective educational leadership centered on equity, inclusion, and social justice.

v
Dedication
To Tatiana and Gabriel, I could not have achieved this without your love and support. You have
been my guiding stars, always giving me the strength and courage to succeed.
To my mom, dad and sisters. Gracias por su apoyo, oraciones y amor.
To Jorge. Thank you for your patience, understanding, and love. You are my rock.
To Merce, Loretta, and the rest of my village, your unconditional friendship, love, and support
are my pillars of strength. You are my steadfast companions through every journey in life.

vi
Acknowledgments
I extend my deepest gratitude to Dr. Cash, whose guidance was indispensable. Dr. Cash
often reminded us that “a good dissertation is a done dissertation.” Your regular meetings,
sample documents, and clear timelines kept me focused and boosted my confidence in pursuing
and completing this challenging task.
To Dr. Franklin, I am profoundly thankful for your role on my committee and the
mentorship you provided throughout my doctoral program. You have taught me how to be an
exceptional leader and continually reminded me of my strengths. You have encouraged me to
continue to learn and reflect, guided by my moral purpose.
I am also grateful to Dr. Crew for sharing your invaluable expertise and input. Your
insightful comments prompt deep reflection and encourage me to strive for excellence.
Lastly, Dr. Yi, thank you for taking me on this incredible journey. I could not have done
it without you. I will miss our Thursday drives, but I look forward to our conversations on our
Thursday calls. Fight On, Sam!
Thank you all for your dedication, support, and belief in my mission to challenge the
status quo by empowering and educating nuestra comunidad with knowledge and compassion.

vii
Preface
Some of this dissertation’s chapters were coauthored and identified as such. While jointly
authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a collaborative effort reflects
real-world practices. To meet their objective of developing highly skilled practitioners equipped
to take on real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of
Education have permitted our inquiry team to carry out this shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with another doctoral candidate,
Samuel Yi. We doctoral students met with three distinct high-performing Title I high schools in
Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside counties to determine if the school principals’
leadership practices correlated with transformative leadership practices. However, the process of
dissecting and resolving the problem was too large for a single dissertation. As a result, two
dissertations produced by our inquiry team collectively gathered leadership and transformative
practices data.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
Preface........................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study...............................................................................................1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................1
Transformative Leadership Theory......................................................................................4
Statement of the Problem.....................................................................................................4
Research Questions..............................................................................................................6
The Significance of the Study..............................................................................................7
Limitations...........................................................................................................................8
Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................8
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................................9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................11
Effect of Poverty on SED Students....................................................................................11
The History of Laws and Landmark Court Cases That Impacted Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged Students.....................................................................................................18
Principal’s Impact on Student Achievements....................................................................24
Transformative Leadership Theory....................................................................................30
Chapter Three: Methodology.........................................................................................................36
Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................................36
Research Questions............................................................................................................36

ix
Sample and Population ......................................................................................................37
Design Summary................................................................................................................37
Methodology......................................................................................................................38
Qualitative Instrument and Protocols.................................................................................39
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................39
Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................40
Credibility and Trustworthiness.........................................................................................40
Personal Positionality.........................................................................................................42
Summary............................................................................................................................43
Chapter Four: Results ....................................................................................................................44
Participants.........................................................................................................................45
Results Research Question 1..............................................................................................46
Results Research Question 2..............................................................................................60
Summary............................................................................................................................74
Chapter Five: Discussion ...............................................................................................................77
Findings..............................................................................................................................79
Limitations.........................................................................................................................87
Implications for Practice ....................................................................................................88
Future Research .................................................................................................................93
Conclusions........................................................................................................................95
References......................................................................................................................................97
Appendix A: Principal Interview Protocol ..................................................................................109
Introduction......................................................................................................................109
Principal Interview Questions (With Transitions)...........................................................110
Closing Question..............................................................................................................112

x
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Protocol ....................................................................................113
Introduction......................................................................................................................113
Introduction and Background ..........................................................................................114
Closing Question..............................................................................................................116
Appendix C: Revised California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders With DIE ....117

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Los Angeles County Academic Achievement for Grade 11 SED Students and Not-SED
2021–22 Academic Performance & Graduation Rate 2
Table 2: Title 1 High School 2023 Academic Achievement, California Dashboard Academic
Performance and Graduation Rate 45
Table 3: Interview Participants’ Background Information 46

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Principal Responses to Transformative Leadership Practices 47
Figure 2: Teacher Responses to Transformative Leadership Practices 61

1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Authors: Cristina Prado, Samuel Yi1
The concept of the American Dream embodies the ideas of opportunity and economic
prosperity. It requires school principals to challenge the status quo and focus on leading critically
about social justice to create equitable learning environments (Shields, 2010). However, for
marginalized groups, the reality of the American Dream has fallen short of its promise. Putnam
(2015) examined the widening gap between the American Dream and the realities that
socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) students experienced in the educational system. Putnam
asserted that these students frequently encounter significant obstacles to academic success
despite the American Dream’s notion that hard work and education lead to economic prosperity.
Education is one of the most powerful tools for promoting social mobility and reducing
inequality (Goldin & Katz, 2007; Heckman & LaFontaine, 2010). Individuals with higher levels
of education are more likely to secure better-paying jobs, accumulate wealth, and enjoy a higher
standard of living. Shafiq (2014) described the relationship between personal and social benefits
and asserted that people who are educated and productive earn higher wages, are healthier, and
are less likely to be incarcerated. Additionally, education can help to level the playing field for
SED students, providing them with the skills, knowledge, and opportunities to achieve social and
economic success (Payne, 2017)
Background of the Problem
Despite progress in recent years, SED students still face significant education disparities
and inequities that hinder their academic achievement (Reardon, 2013). The National Center for
Education Statistics reported that the high school graduation rate for SED students in the United
1 This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.

2
States in 2021 was 78.4%, compared to 89.6% for higher-income students. In California, the
graduation rate for all students is 87% and 84.5% for SED students (California Department of
Education, 2021). The inequitable trend between SED student groups and all students is also
visible when comparing Los Angeles County reading and math test scores. According to 2021–
2022 reading and math test data on DataQuest, the California Department of Education data
reporting system, 47.76% of Grade 11 SED students met or exceeded English language arts
standards, compared to 54.38% of not-SED students. The number of Grade 11 SED students
meeting or exceeding math standards was even smaller, 18.37%, compared to 25.62% of notSED students meeting or exceeding math standards (Table 1)
Table 1
Los Angeles County Academic Achievement for Grade 11 SED Students and Not-SED 2021–22
Academic Performance & Graduation Rate
Los Angeles County English language arts Math Graduation
rate
Not SED students, 33.8% 54.38% met or exceeded
standard
25.62 % met or
exceeded standard
87%
SED students, 66.2% 47.76% met or exceeded
standard
18.37% met or
exceeded standard
84.4%

3
The persistent inequities SED students experience in Title I high schools underscore the
need to examine school principals’ role in establishing equitable learning environments and
increasing students’ academic achievement. Recent research emphasizes school principals’
impact on addressing these challenges and promoting students’ academic success (Allensworth
et al., 2018; Rodriguez, 2019). Grissom et al. (2021) further supported this notion by confirming
that principals significantly influence student achievement. Their review of academic
achievement data from six studies involving over 22,000 principals across four states
demonstrates the principal’s role as a driver of student achievement. Additionally, the study
reveals that effective principals could lead to an increase of up to 20 percentage points in student
achievement, identifying the principal’s impact as second only to teachers’ instruction.
While effective principals are central to improving student achievement, they are
especially important for Title I high schools serving SED students (Dutta & Sahney, 2016;
Gümüş et al., 2022). The U.S. Department of Education identifies Title I schools as those where
at least 40% of students come from SED families and which require additional federal funding to
support students’ academic achievement. These schools grapple with high poverty rates and face
difficulties in attracting and retaining effective principals and teachers, as evidenced by higher
turnover rates in high-poverty, low-achieving schools than in wealthier, high-performing schools
(Brown, 2004; Grissom & Sutcher, 2018). According to a survey by the RAND Corporation,
53% of school principals are at the bottom 20% in student achievement in the first three years of
their principalship (Grissom & Sutcher, 2018). Furthermore, there is a tendency among educators
in Title I schools to hold lower expectations for students, attributing academic struggle to the
students or their families rather than recognizing the value of the cultural capital they bring to the
educational setting (Curto et al., 2011; Yosso, 2005). This deficit thinking, Shields (2018)

4
described, views differences as deficiencies, unfairly placing the blame and responsibility onto
the students, thus hindering academic achievement. Consequently, there is a pressing need for
leaders in Title I schools to disrupt the status quo and foster an inclusive, equitable learning
environment. Transformative leaders must mobilize educational partners to ensure every student
has access to quality education and academic resources, challenging and changing the narrative
for SED students (Quantz et al., 1991).
Transformative Leadership Theory
Title I high school principals have a moral duty to recognize and eliminate institutional
barriers that hinder SED students from reaching their full potential (Quantz et al., 1991). Shields
(2010) examined transformative principals’ beliefs and practices to understand how they produce
equitable outcomes and inclusive approaches in schools with high poverty levels. Transformative
leadership theory questions inequitable practices to ensure opportunity and economic prosperity
for individuals and the greater good of society. This theoretical approach addresses the mindsets
and knowledge frameworks of those contributing to inequity and transforms them into more
equitable perspectives. The theory consists of eight supporting tenets that guide the process of
promoting equity: moral courage; redistributing power; public and private good; democracy,
emancipation, and equity; critique and promise; new knowledge frameworks and mindsets;
interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness; and a mandate for change.
Statement of the Problem
In recent decades, the widening academic achievement gap between students from highincome and low-income families has spotlighted the persistent disparity in educational
opportunities (Jang & Reardon, 2019). This gap significantly increased, with test scores for
students from less affluent backgrounds born in the early 2000s lagging roughly 40% behind

5
their wealthy peers than those born in the 1970s (Chmielewski & Reardon, 2016). Such growing
disparities underscore the need to examine effective leadership practices at high-performing Title
I schools, which serve predominantly low-income students and have increased academic
achievement. The challenges of educational disparities and inequities require high school
administrators to adopt transformative leadership practices. Such practices foster equitable and
inclusive learning environments and positively influence student achievement, altering existing
knowledge frameworks that perpetuate deficit thinking (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol,
2020).
Further research indicates the link between transformative leadership and principal
practices prioritizing equity and inclusion, improving SED students’ academic outcomes
(Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol, 2020). These practices involve school principals
critically addressing social justice issues and challenging the status quo to create equitable and
inclusive educational settings (Grissom et al., 2021; Shields, 2018). Moreover, the emphasis on
leveraging students’ cultural wealth indicates a valuable approach to enriching the learning
environment and promoting intellectual achievement in an educational landscape where all
students can thrive.
Purpose of the Study
This study explored the leadership practices school principals implemented in three highperforming Title I high schools in Los Angeles County. It sought to understand the impact of
effective leadership practices on creating equitable and inclusive educational environments for
SED students. It also sought to investigate the correlation between principal leadership practices
and Shields’s (2018) eight core principles of transformative leadership theory. Through
interviews with principals, the research identified the potential correlations between effective

6
leadership practices and the eight key principles of transformative leadership theory that foster
equitable and inclusive learning environments and positively influence student achievement by
altering knowledge frameworks that perpetuate deficit thinking. Further research indicates a
strong link between transformative leadership and principal practices prioritizing equity and
inclusion (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol, 2020). Additionally, interviews with teachers
highlighted how closely their principals’ leadership approaches align with transformative
leadership principles. Teachers’ insights further showcase the effectiveness of principals in
fostering academic achievement among SED students, contributing to both individual success
and the greater good of society.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1. To what extent do school principals in Title I high schools employ transformative
leadership practices to increase student achievement?
2. What transformative leadership practices do teachers in Title I high schools identify in
their principals’ efforts to increase student achievement?
This study explored the relationship between principals’ practices at high-achieving Title
I high schools and transformative leadership tenets. It examined how transformative leadership
practices significantly impact the academic achievement of SED students. Transformative
leadership, grounded in eight essential practices, is identified as a crucial approach for fostering
an equitable and inclusive educational environment. Evidence suggests that principals who
embody transformative leadership cultivate a school centered on equity and inclusion (Caldwell
et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol, 2020). Moreover, transformative leadership ensures that teachers
provide equitable learning opportunities to all students (Walton-Fisette & Montgomery, 2018).

7
Researchers found that transformative leadership is associated with challenging and revising
entrenched beliefs and practices that contribute to deficit thinking, thereby enhancing student
academic outcomes (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol, 2020). A similar study by Shields
(2010) supports that school principals who adopt transformative leadership practices are more
effective in implementing changes in the educational environment (structures, culture,
pedagogical practices) to enhance equity, inclusion, and social justice.
The Significance of the Study
This study highlights the role of transformative leadership in increasing student
achievement in the context of Title I schools serving SED students. Bridging a gap in the
literature, it investigated the alignment between effective leadership practices and the principles
of transformative leadership theory, underscoring their collective impact on educational equity
and student success. Transformative leadership, characterized by its focus on equity, inclusion,
and social justice, empowers leaders to inspire change in knowledge frameworks that perpetuate
deficit thinking and pedagogical practices, fostering a learning environment that promotes
students’ intellectual achievement (Brown, 2004; Shields, 2018). Other studies indicate the
significant influence of principal leadership on student academic outcomes (Grissom et al., 2021;
Shields & Hesbol, 2020), highlighting the necessity for principals to critically evaluate
traditional leadership models and embrace approaches that address the multifaceted, culturally
distinct needs of students and their families.
This study’s findings can guide the development of policies and practices that enable
school principals to promote educational equity, inclusion, and social justice. Moreover, the
results can enrich school leaders’ training and professional development programs, emphasizing
the cultivation of equity-focused leaders-focused leadership skills that incorporate social justice.

8
Additionally, this research could benefit school administrator preparation programs by offering
strategies for embedding transformative leadership practices that support teachers in creating
equitable, inclusive, and social justice learning environments for all students.
Limitations
It is important to note that the correlation between effective principal practices and
transformative leadership practices may vary based on this study’s context. This research
occurred in three Title I high schools in Los Angeles County, where more than 60% of the
students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. Therefore, the sample of leaders, teachers, and
schools included in the study does not represent leaders, teachers, and schools across the country.
The result may not apply to other contexts. Furthermore, the measures used to assess
transformative leadership practices and student achievement also affected the study’s limitations.
The validity and reliability of these measures could have affected the results’ accuracy. Finally,
transformative leadership's impact on SED students' outcomes may not be immediate and may
take time to emerge fully. Furthermore, SED students often face significant barriers and
challenges in accessing high-quality education and achieving academic success. For instance,
they frequently lack access to resources and opportunities for academic achievement, including
high-quality schools, supportive educational programs, and extracurricular activities (National
Center for Education Statistics, 2020).
Definition of Terms
Equity: Justice according to natural law or right, specifically freedom from bias or
favoritism (Merriam-Webster Dictionary).

9
The free or reduced-price lunch program is frequently used to indicate poverty. K–12
students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches if their families earn an income level
below the federal poverty line (Rogers et al., 2014)
Inclusion: The practices and policies ensure that all individuals feel welcomed, respected,
and valued. It also emphasizes creating conditions where everyone can participate fully and
authentically.
Socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) is a term often defined by income that falls
below the poverty line, level of education, employment, health, and access to resources (Burney
& Beilke, 2008)
Social justice education “teaches students in a socially just institution, taught about social
(in) justice in the world,” and prepares students to take a stance against injustice (Shields, p. 97,
2018)
Social mobility refers to the ability of individuals to move up or down the socioeconomic
ladder (Putnam, 2015)
Title I is the primary source of federal aid for elementary and secondary education and is
intended to improve the educational opportunities for low-income students. Schoolwide Title I
programs must have 40% or higher low-income students.
Transformative leadership involves systematically analyzing schools and confronting
education inequities to enact social justice (Cooper, 2009).
Organization of the Study
This study sought to determine the extent to which school administrators at three highachieving Title I high schools in Los Angeles County use transformative leadership practices to
promote an inclusive educational environment for students of poverty. It is organized into five

10
chapters. Chapter One provides an overview of the study and introduces data to present the root
causes of inequities in the selection process of principals in the suburbs of Los Angeles,
California, and includes definitions of terms used in this study. Chapter Two presents a literature
review in the following three areas: the effect of poverty on SED students, landmark court cases
and the history of Title I in American public schools, principals’ impact on student achievement,
and transformative leadership theory. Chapter Three describes the methodology for this study
and includes sample and population selection, interview questions, observation, teacher survey,
and data analysis. Chapter Four is a report of the research findings. Chapter Five summarizes the
findings, implications for practice, recommendations, and conclusion. This study’s conclusion
includes references and appendices.

11
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Authors: Cristina Prado, Samuel Yi2
The academic outcomes of SED students in K–12 schools underscore the need to
investigate how transformative leaders increase student performance. Over the last century,
views on SED students have evolved from positive perceptions to negative connotations of
underperformance, with deficit perspectives (Massey et al., 2014). This chapter will first explore
how poverty impacts students’ educational outcomes. It will then analyze the landmark court
cases and educational policies aimed at improving these students’ academic achievement.
Additionally, the literature examines the role of school principals in students’ academic
performance. School principals, as leaders, have the power to shape the educational environment
and influence the outcomes of students (Grissom et al., 2021). Furthermore, this chapter will
review the theoretical framework that aligns with transformative leadership theory to promote
equity, inclusion, and social justice. Finally, the literature presents the degree to which school
principals in Title I schools utilize the eight key principles of Shields’ (2010) transformative
leadership theory. The chapter will conclude by summarizing the conceptual framework.
Effect of Poverty on SED Students
Over the past 15 years, there have been signs of improving socioeconomic conditions in
the United States. However, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly reversed many of
these gains (Brighouse et al., 2018). By 2022, the U.S. Census reported that nine million children
were living in poverty, according to supplemental poverty measures. The Official Poverty
Measure, which sets income thresholds adjusted for family size and inflation, remains the most
common method for assessing poverty in the United States. Additionally, the U.S. Census
2 This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.

12
Bureau and other federal agencies use various indicators such as education, occupation, and
housing to collect comprehensive poverty data. These data map the nation’s socioeconomic
landscape and inform public policy to target resources to those most in need and address
socioeconomic disparities.
Collecting and analyzing poverty data aids in understanding the socioeconomic landscape
of the United States. According to the National Poverty Center (n.d.), there are significant
variations in poverty rates among different racial and ethnic groups. Black and Latino families
face higher rates of poverty compared to their White counterparts, a disparity that exposes these
communities’ economic vulnerabilities (Duncan & Murnane, 2011). The primary cause of this
imbalance is the high representation of Black and Latino workers in low-wage industries, which
are susceptible to fluctuations in the broader economy. Consequently, when the economy is
strong, these industries may experience wage growth, benefiting these workers due to their
substantial presence in such sectors (Berends, 2014). This analysis provides an understanding of
poverty dynamics and the economic forces affecting diverse communities.
A study by Rodems and Pfeffer (2021) highlighted that Black and Latino households
more often experience material hardship compared to their White counterparts. The study
defined material hardship as difficulties in meeting basic needs, such as paying bills or affording
necessities. Specifically, about 40% of Black households and 36% of Latino households
encounter these challenges, in contrast to only 20% of White households. Furthermore, Black
and Latino households are disproportionately affected by hidden hardship and financial
difficulties that do not necessarily meet traditional income-based poverty criteria but cause
significant economic strain. This insight points to the need for a nuanced understanding of
poverty that considers visible and less apparent forms of economic hardship.

13
Income disparities significantly affect educational outcomes for students. A study by
Gottfried and Ream (2014) documented the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on education.
Additionally, economic resources, educational background, and occupational opportunities are
robust predictors of educational outcomes, such as test performance and overall educational
outcomes. Notably, family SES directly correlates with the level of investment in a child’s
education and development. This investment manifests in higher SES families providing
substantial educational resources and engaging in activities that foster learning (Duncan &
Murnane, 2011). Such families often have access to high-quality childcare, regularly read to their
children, and invest in educational materials, enhancing their children’s learning environment
(Kaushal et al., 2011). Moreover, these families benefit from well-informed social networks that
provide crucial information about school policies and educational strategies, further supporting
their children’s educational progress (Duncan & Murnane, 2011). This multifaceted view of
educational inequities provides a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and barriers
that must be addressed to close the achievement gap between high- and low-SES students.
Socioeconomic Context and Educational Outcomes
The correlation between SES and educational outcomes is well-documented and
highlights the significant influence of socioeconomic factors on academic success. Multiple
studies document this relationship, highlighting various influential factors, from the impact of
family income and neighborhood conditions to the effectiveness of school programs,
interventions, and broader societal benefits.
Socioeconomic Influences on Educational Outcomes
Research conducted by Reardon (2013) highlighted a significant increase in the income
achievement gap over recent decades, noting that economic disparities now exceed racial

14
disparities in influencing educational outcomes. This study revealed that the gap in standardized
test scores between SED and non-SED students had grown by 40% over 25 years. Despite efforts
to close these gaps, substantial disparities persist. For example, in California, SED students
consistently perform nearly a full grade level behind their peers nationally. Moreover, regarding
the challenges disadvantaged groups face in California, Brighouse et al. (2018) reported that the
outcomes on the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBAC) for English language arts and math,
which is administered to eleventh graders, were that SED students demonstrated lower college
readiness scores. Specifically, only 15% of Black students and 20% of Latino students met both
English language arts and math standards compared to 40% of White students. These figures
underscore the persistent educational challenges and disparities encountered by SED students.
The increasing disparity in educational outcomes between SED and non-SED students is
attributed to the differing resources that high-income families can invest in their children’s
development. According to Duncan and Murnane (2011), the rise in inequality affects families,
neighborhoods, and schools. Families with higher incomes can provide their children with highquality childcare, summer camps, books, and advanced technological tools, all contributing to
educational success. Furthermore, higher-income families’ ability to afford homes in more
affluent neighborhoods perpetuates residential segregation, which leads to disparities in the
quality of schools and childcare facilities available to children from different income brackets.
Duncan et al. (2017) noted that this segregation also limits interactions between families from
diverse economic backgrounds, which can further entrench socioeconomic divides. Research
also indicates that schools in poorer neighborhoods often lack the resources and educational rigor
found in wealthier areas, leading to a clustering of students from similar socioeconomic
backgrounds (Duncan et al., 2017; Reardon, 2013). Such schools typically offer fewer

15
challenging courses, lower overall academic achievement, and less student and teacher
engagement. These factors combine to create substantial differences in educational outcomes,
highlighting the complex interplay of income, community resources, and educational
opportunities (Altonji & Mansfield, 2013)
Neighborhood and community settings also influence educational outcomes. According
to Harding et al. (2011), the neighborhood environment, including factors like local health
conditions, exposure to violence, available resources, and cultural elements, plays a critical role.
Socioeconomically disadvantaged students living in low-income neighborhoods are more likely
to be exposed to stressful environments resulting from higher crime rates and experiencing
instances of abuse and neglect (Nelson & Sheridan, 2011). Students exposed to traumatic stress
are more likely to have an increased risk for anxiety and depression, decreasing school
attendance, and increasing inattentiveness during learning. Hicks et al. (2018) explored the
“sequential neighborhood effects,” demonstrating how long-term exposure to concentrated
disadvantage adversely affects children’s academic performances, particularly in reading and
math (p. 4). These findings underscore the critical role of the environment in shaping educational
outcomes over time.
Differences in SES and the availability of resources contribute to the achievement gap of
SED students, underscoring the complexity of educational disparities. These disparities highlight
the interconnected nature of socioeconomic factors, from parental involvement to neighborhood
characteristics, exacerbating the achievement gap between high and low-income students.
Socioeconomic Influences on Educational Practices
Title I schools encounter several interconnected challenges that impact educational
quality. Curto et al. (2011) and Payne and Ortiz (2017) underscored the inadequacy of current

16
educational frameworks prioritizing academic achievement without fully addressing the
pervasive effects of poverty. These researchers advocate for a holistic educational approach,
emphasizing rigorous instruction, leadership accountability, and equitable resource allocation.
Notably, the concept of intentionality in school practices, from school principal and teacher
selection to curriculum implementation, emerges as a critical factor in enhancing academic
achievement among SED students.
An additional challenge to educational equity is the prevalent deficit thinking among
educators who attribute students’ academic struggles to their backgrounds rather than
recognizing them as stemming from cultural capital (Curto et al., 2011; Shields, 2018; Yosso,
2005). This viewpoint hinders students’ academic achievement by failing to acknowledge the
strengths they bring to school. Using students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences improves
their engagement by making learning relevant and meaningful. Geneva Gay (2001) advocated
for culturally responsive teaching, leveraging ethnically diverse students’ cultural characteristics
and experiences to enhance educational effectiveness. Culturally responsive teachers engage
with students’ backgrounds to enrich curriculum planning and implementation, fostering an
environment with high expectations and creative teaching strategies to ensure student success.
Both teacher and school principal preparation programs must develop knowledge and
skills in a culturally responsive teaching setting to support educators’ pedagogy development.
Perrone’s (2022) study indicates a mismatch between teachers and principals and students’ race.
This shift can transform the learning experience for students, promoting higher academic
achievement and personal growth. Research has confirmed that teachers are the most important
school-related factor impacting student achievement (Berends, 2014). However, a cultural gap
exists between SED students and teachers. Studies show that 79% of education teachers are

17
White (Douglas & Nganga, 2013). If teachers are to teach and lead students of color, they must
examine their values and assumptions about diverse students. Moreover, Ingersoll et al.’s (2019)
work examines the challenges of recruiting and retaining minority teachers. They identified the
minority teacher shortage as a critical issue impacting SED students. The presence of highquality teachers, combined with stimulating curricula and adequate resources, is highlighted as
essential for providing equitable educational opportunities.
Like teachers, school principals must also develop equity-focused skills and knowledge
to shift teacher beliefs and assumptions about SED student achievement. However, inadequate
diversity and representation in principalship are also evident, with 80% of principals being
White. Perone’s study found that principals of color impact student outcomes by directly
influencing teachers. Moreover, there is strong evidence that principals of color recruit and retain
teachers of color, leading them to higher levels of job satisfaction.
In addition to the lack of representation of diverse school principals who are culturally
responsive, there is a lack of experienced principals. According to a survey by the RAND
Corporation, 53% of principals in the bottom 20% of student achievement are in the first 3 years
of their principalship (Grissom & Sutcher, 2018). School leaders must learn about leadership and
social theory to support the development of the skills and knowledge frameworks of principals
who lead schools with diverse learners. Stina Jerdborg’s (2022) empirical study explored how
novice principals in Sweden engage in principal training and investigated their identity
development. While principals lead schools, they need to engage in critical and theoretical
thinking to challenge and shift the mindsets of their teachers. The study further confirms that
principals negotiate meaning through a clear sense of responsibility for student outcomes and
coordinating actions. The study found that principal training programs need to engage novice

18
principals in developing their identity through school leader education and professional practice
to negotiate meaning, shape communities of practice, changing school practice to increase
student outcomes.
The literature reviewed illustrates the impact of socioeconomic factors on SED students’
educational experiences and outcomes. While the challenges are significant, the research also
points to the potential of targeted educational policies and practices to extenuate these disparities.
Holistic approaches encompass rigorous instruction, equitable resource distribution,
comprehensive support systems, and an emphasis on high-quality teaching and intentional
leadership school practices, which are necessary to improve SED students' academic
achievement. Addressing the socioeconomic context, including efforts to enhance social
mobility, economic equality, and educational equity, remains a fundamental aspect of this
endeavor.
The History of Laws and Landmark Court Cases That Impacted Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged Students
Throughout history, laws and court cases at the federal and state levels have aimed to
provide greater educational access and equity for SED students. Key federal legislation and court
cases have established legal foundations for serving disadvantaged youth. California has been a
leader in enacting progressive policies to meet the needs of its substantial SED student
population.
Federal Laws and Court Cases
The Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision solidified legal obligations to serve
poor and minority youth. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public
schools was unconstitutional (Guinier, 2004). This decision rejected the separate-but-equal

19
doctrine established in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), declaring that segregated schooling was
inherently unequal. Although not explicitly focused on SED students, this landmark case sparked
several court cases focused on ensuring equal educational opportunities for all students. It
established that all students must receive equal access to facilities, resources, and opportunities
regardless of race, which was an essential foundation for later efforts to promote equity among
SED students.
Efforts to use federal law to promote educational equity began in the 1960s during the
Civil Rights Movement. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination based
on race, color, or national origin in federal assistance programs (Rosenbaum & Schmucker,
2017). This landmark legislation established legal accountability for providing equal access to
education for minority students, who were disproportionately from low-income backgrounds due
to historical racism and discrimination. The law empowered the federal government to withhold
funding from programs that continued discriminatory practices. As a result, Title VI compelled
many school districts to finally integrate and provide more equitable facilities, materials, and
opportunities for students of color.
Additional provisions of the Civil Rights Act also expanded educational access. For
instance, Title IV authorized the attorney general to file lawsuits for parents and students facing
discrimination in public schools (Frankenberg & Taylor, 2015). The legislation enabled legal
challenges to school segregation. Overall, the Civil Rights Act created important federal
enforcement mechanisms to ensure that states and districts upheld students’ constitutional rights.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 1965 represented a significant
federal effort to improve education for disadvantaged youth (U.S. Department of Education,
n.d.). ESEA provided federal grants to state educational agencies to allocate funding to schools

20
and districts with high percentages of SED students. Title I of ESEA specifically targeted
enhancing educational programs for SED students through funding additional teachers and
instructional materials, establishing remedial programs, and creating full-day kindergarten and
preschool services (Thomas & Brady, 2005). In later reauthorizations, Title I also expanded
requirements for parent involvement and targeted assistance for migrant students. Altogether, the
legislation channeled substantial resources toward addressing SED students’ educational
disadvantages.
The original ESEA legislation also funded initiatives like the National Assessment of
Educational Progress to create national metrics for evaluating educational outcomes. Doing so
enabled monitoring of achievement gaps by race and class. This data illuminated ongoing
disadvantages for SED students and students of color despite state efforts at reform (Thomas &
Brady, 2005). The national assessments provided ongoing evidence over subsequent decades that
inequitable disparities persisted, helping inform later policies to enhance equity.
In 1968, the landmark Bilingual Education Act (Title VII of the ESEA amendments)
provided federal funds to support bilingual instruction, recognizing native language maintenance
as an educational right (Stewner-Manzanares, 1988). This addressed barriers faced by immigrant
students with limited English proficiency, frequently from low-income Hispanic families. The
law helped catalyze the growth of bilingual programs to aid equal participation for these
disadvantaged students.
The Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 further reinforced the civil rights of
students of color and those from low-income families. This law prohibited states from denying
equal educational opportunity through intentional segregation or discrimination (H.R.40 - 93rd
Congress, 1973-1974). It also required states to overcome inequitable barriers students faced due

21
to characteristics such as race, color, sex, or national origin (H.R.40 - 93rd Congress, 1973-
1974). For instance, it obligated school districts to take action to address language barriers that
impede the equal participation of English learners in instructional programs. As such, the
legislation specifically aimed to enhance access and inclusion of disadvantaged minorities.
The reauthorization of ESEA as the Improving America’s Schools Act in 1994 increased
accountability for student outcomes and expanded qualifying schools for Title I funds beyond
just the poorest districts (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). This enabled more SED students
to receive supplemental services. The reauthorization also created the Comprehensive School
Reform Demonstration Program, which awarded grants for whole-school reform models with
evidence of raising achievement for disadvantaged students.
In 2001, the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) reshaped the federal role
in education (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). The law increased accountability through
annual testing, academic progress requirements, and consequences for schools failing to meet
growth targets. It also mandated closing achievement gaps between various subgroups. As a
result, NCLB brought forth a spotlight on persistent disparities among SED students, students
with disabilities, and students of color. However, critics argued that it overemphasized
standardized testing and punishments over capacity building (Nichols & Berliner, 2007).
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) replaced NCLB in 2015, scaling back the federal
prescription while focusing on equitable opportunities and outcomes (Skinner, 2020). The law
grants states more flexibility in accountability systems and school improvement strategies.
However, it preserves requirements to assess students annually, report disaggregated subgroup
data, and implement targeted interventions in the lowest-performing Title I schools. ESSA also
maintains dedicated funding for disadvantaged student groups.

22
California Laws and Court Cases
California has been a pioneer in crafting education finance policy and law specifically
aimed at promoting equity for SED students. A series of progressive court cases and legislation
have deliberately sought to counteract disparities between wealthy and low-income school
districts. The state’s population of diverse students from low-income, immigrant, and languageminority backgrounds has made these efforts particularly pressing and impactful.
The 1971 California Supreme Court case Serrano v. Priest was an early turning point.
This case was filed on behalf of students in Los Angeles County representing low-property
wealth districts with much lower per-pupil spending compared to affluent Beverly Hills.
Plaintiffs charged that wide discrepancies in school funding based on local property taxes
violated the Equal Protection Clause (Dayton & Dupre, 2006). In its initial ruling, the California
Supreme Court ruled that funding schemes resulting in substantial inter-district spending
disparities were unconstitutional. As a result, the state could no longer rely primarily on local
property tax revenues without accounting for differences in needs and resources across districts.
This landmark Serrano decision compelled California to undertake significant school
finance reforms. The state Legislature subsequently passed the California School Finance
Reform Act of 1972. This legislation established a state school fund to allocate resources to
counties and districts based on pupil population and needs (Dayton & Dupre, 2006). It created a
foundation program to provide a basic level of guaranteed funding per pupil while capping
revenue limits allowed from local property taxes (Dayton & Dupre, 2006). These provisions
significantly reduced spending variances between low-income and high-income districts (Kirst,
2007). While imperfect, the law initiated a more equitable approach to school funding.

23
A later wave of reform in California came through the Serrano v. Priest case in 1977 and
the implementation of Proposition 98 in 1988. In the second Serrano ruling, the Supreme Court
of California reinforced its prior decision, declaring that the California school funding system
continued to be unconstitutionally inequitable (Dayton & Dupre, 2006). In response, Proposition
98 increased the state’s overall education funding levels. It revised the state funding formula to
direct more resources to districts serving large shares of SED students who require extra support.
The law established a complex allocation scheme but channeled billions in new funds to highneeds schools (Timar, 2006)—resources targeted at class-size reduction, instructional materials,
school facilities upgrades, and program improvements in low-income communities.
The Williams v. California lawsuit filed in 2000 highlighted deficiencies in essential
instructional resources at many low-income schools. The suit charged that thousands of students,
the majority SED children of color, were deprived of qualified teachers, books, safe facilities,
and other essential tools for learning (California Department of Education, n.d.). This constituted
a violation of the constitutional right to educational equality. The evidence of stark inequities in
California’s public education system compelled the state to agree to a comprehensive settlement
in 2004. This included commitments for sufficient textbooks and instructional materials, facility
repairs, teacher quality improvements, and accountability tools for ensuring these changes. The
Williams case spotlighted and initiated reforms addressing chronic opportunity gaps
marginalized students experienced.
Most recently, the local control funding formula (LCFF) enacted in 2013 changed
California’s school finance and accountability approach. Championed by Governor Jerry Brown,
the LCFF instituted a weighted student funding formula, allocating a base grant per pupil with
additional funds for SED students, English language learners, foster youth, and other high-needs

24
populations (Johnson & Tanner, 2018). Districts with high concentrations of disadvantaged
students also receive extra “concentration” grants. The legislation moved beyond input to focus
on equity in outcomes. The LCFF grants districts flexibility in spending funds on locally
determined services tailored for crucial student groups. The law reflects a paradigm shift
acknowledging students' differing needs to reach common outcome goals. Early research
indicates that the LCFF has increased funding and narrowed disparities for high-poverty districts
(Johnson & Tanner, 2018).
Federal and California laws and court cases have established legal foundations for
promoting educational access, inclusion, and equity for marginalized students. While historical
disparities persist, legislative and judicial action has affirmed the right of SED students, students
of color, English learners, and other disadvantaged groups to fair school funding, high-quality
facilities, sufficient resources, and equal opportunities. Furthermore, California’s innovative
approaches have provided models that other states across the country can replicate and extend.
Principal’s Impact on Student Achievements
In recent decades, there has been an increased focus on school principals in improving
student academic achievements. Principals play a pivotal role in setting the direction for schools,
shaping the school’s culture, managing resources, and supporting teacher development and
effectiveness (Branch et al., 2013). In fact, a study concluded that the principals’ contributions to
student achievements were nearly as significant as the teachers’ contributions; however,
principals’ effects are more significant in scope, impacting more students than an average teacher
(Grissom et al., 2021). As school leaders, principals directly and indirectly affect various factors
related to teaching and learning that contribute to student achievement.
The Principal’s Role in Shaping School Culture

25
A significant body of research supports the positive impact of principals in establishing
and sustaining a school culture focused on academic success and continuous improvement
(Brach et al., 2013; MacNeil et al., 2009; Valentine & Prater, 2011). Principals shape school
culture by promoting shared values and norms, establishing high expectations for students and
staff, and fostering positive and collaborative working relationships among teachers and other
staff members. A school’s vision is a roadmap, guiding all stakeholders toward a common
purpose and direction. Principals are responsible for articulating this vision and ensuring that it
aligns with the school’s mission, values, and goals, which should be centered on student learning
and well-being (Grissom et al., 2021; Hallinger, 2011). Developing a shared vision is not a
solitary endeavor; effective principals involve teachers, staff, students, families, and community
members. By engaging stakeholders in the visioning process, principals can build a sense of
ownership and commitment to the school’s direction (Grissom et al., 2021).
In a qualitative case study of two schools, MacNeil et al. (2009) found that the principal
strongly influenced the school’s culture and capacity for improvement through communication,
collaboration, and shared leadership. The researchers concluded that principals who focus on
creating a healthy school culture tend to have higher teacher morale, greater teacher
collaboration, and ultimately improved student outcomes. Likewise, Valentine and Prater (2011)
conducted a comparative analysis of school leadership and student achievement. They found that
schools with higher student performance had principals who emphasized academic achievement,
communicated a clear vision, and promoted a school culture of learning and growth. In contrast,
lower-performing schools had principals focusing more on managerial tasks than instructional
leadership.
The Principal’s Role in Teacher Quality and Effectiveness

26
Research indicates that effective principals improve student achievement by supporting
teachers’ development and shaping the overall quality of teaching staff through ongoing support
and guidance (Grissom et al., 2021; Hallinger, 2011; Robinson et al., 2008). Principals influence
teacher quality through hiring practices, new teacher induction and mentoring, professional
development, teacher evaluation, and retention of effective teachers (Branch et al., 2013). In a
study of principal leadership in urban schools, Grissom and Loeb (2011) found that principals’
time spent on teacher coaching, evaluation, and professional development was positively
associated with increased student achievement in math and reading.
Another study found that effective principals use data to inform decision-making and
promote accountability for teacher effectiveness and student learning (Grissom et al., 2021). This
involves regularly collecting and analyzing data on teacher practice and student outcomes and
using this information to identify areas for improvement and support. Robinson et al. (2008)
found that principals with the most potent effect on student outcomes promote and participate in
teacher learning and professional development. Principals also play a key role in facilitating
professional development that aligns with the school’s vision and goals (Hallinger, 2011).
Principals also indirectly influence teacher quality through the kind of work climate and culture
they create. Teachers cited principal support as one of the most influential factors impacting their
job satisfaction, effectiveness, and retention decisions (Tickle et al., 2011). By fostering
collegiality and providing teachers with essential resources and professional growth
opportunities, principals help attract, develop, and retain highly effective educators.
The Principal’s Role in Shaping Instruction
Research has found that principals contribute to student learning by focusing on highquality instruction and continuous instructional improvement. Effective principals align

27
curriculum, instructional materials, assessment, and professional development to academic
standards and school improvement goals (Horng & Loeb, 2010). This involves communicating
high standards for teaching and learning and ensuring that all students have access to a rigorous
and relevant curriculum (Grissom et al., 2021; Hallinger, 2011). By setting the tone for
instruction and focusing on academic excellence, principals can create a culture of high
expectations and continuous improvement.
Effective principals also promote research-based instructional practices that improve
student learning (Robinson et al., 2008). This involves staying up to date on the latest research
and best practices in teaching and learning and working to incorporate these practices into
classroom instruction. They also provide instructional guidance by giving targeted feedback to
teachers based on classroom observations. Principals also ensure teachers have access to
instructional coaching and modeling of effective teaching practices. In a 4-year study analyzing
leadership and instructional quality, Sebastian and Allensworth (2012) found that the degree of
principal leadership focused on classroom instruction was a significant predictor of student
academic growth. The researchers concluded that principals who made instructional quality the
top priority and provided guidance to improve teaching had a positive effect on student learning.
The Principal’s Role in Managing the Learning Environment
Beyond instruction, principals make an array of organizational decisions that shape a
school’s conditions for teaching and learning, encompassing factors like school culture, student
behavior, classroom management, and physical facilities. Horng & Loeb (2010) found that
principals contribute to student achievement by strategically managing resources and the school
environment to maximize instructional time and minimize disruptions. This includes human
resources decisions such as teacher placement and student assignment policies that can impact

28
equity and access to high-quality instruction. Principals also influence the learning environment
through their disciplinary policies and physical management of school facilities. Effective
principals address behavioral issues while minimizing the loss of instructional time due to
student discipline (Branch et al., 2013). Effective principals also work to create schoolwide
systems and structures that support positive classroom environments, such as common behavior
expectations and routines. By supporting effective classroom management, principals can help
ensure that all students have access to a learning environment conducive to academic success
(Hallinger, 2011). They also spearhead initiatives to improve safety procedures, upgrade
technology infrastructure, and provide safe, clean, and welcoming facilities conducive to
teaching and learning. By ensuring adequate physical facilities and resources, principals can
create a learning environment that promotes academic success (Grissom et al., 2021).
The Evolving Role of the Principal
The role of the principal has shifted and expanded significantly from the traditional focus
on administrative functions. Principals’ roles have evolved to include more complex, diverse,
and demanding responsibilities that require them to become instructional leaders, coaches,
evaluators, community builders, child advocates, and change agents (Lynch, 2012). Researchers
have highlighted principals building solid partnerships with families, community organizations,
and other stakeholders to support student learning and well-being (Khalifa et al., 2016). This
involves actively engaging with the community to understand its needs and assets and working
collaboratively to develop programs and resources that support student success inside and
outside school. Additionally, as achievement gaps and disparities in educational opportunities
have become more widely recognized, researchers have called for principals to take a more
active role in promoting equity and social justice within their schools (Gümüş et al., 2022;

29
Khalifa et al., 2016). This involves actively dismantling systemic barriers to student success,
creating inclusive and culturally responsive learning environments, and advocating for the needs
of marginalized students and families. Furthermore, the principals have faced increased
accountability pressures for student achievement, partly driven by federal and state policies that
have tied school funding and ratings to student test scores and other metrics (Grissom et al.,
2021).
However, researchers caution that the expanding scope of responsibilities makes it
difficult for principals to be highly effective in all aspects of their roles. To maximize principals’
impact on student outcomes, policymakers have focused on reshaping the role to emphasize
responsibilities directly related to teaching, learning, and school improvement. This includes
reducing administrative workload and leveraging school leadership teams so principals can
devote more time to instructional leadership (Grissom & Loeb, 2011). Ongoing support through
high-quality professional development and mentorship is also essential as principals navigate
their evolving, multifaceted role in leading schools.
Leadership Practices Associated With Improved Student Outcomes
In addition to studies on the principal’s role, research also points to specific leadership
practices and behaviors associated with higher levels of student achievement. Waters et al.
(2003) identified 21 key leadership responsibilities significantly correlated with improved
student achievement. These include fostering shared beliefs, monitoring curriculum and
instruction, supporting teachers, and recognizing student and staff achievement. In a literature
review, Leithwood et al. (2004) concluded that effective principals focus on three core practices:
setting direction, developing people, and redesigning the organization. Setting direction involves
establishing high expectations and a clear vision focused on student learning. Developing people

30
involves providing support, modeling effective practices, and building capacity. Redesigning the
organization means aligning resources, policies, and processes to the school’s vision and goals.
Other leadership practices found to have positive effects on student outcomes include distributive
leadership models, instructional leadership, transformational leadership, and sustained, targeted
efforts to improve teaching and learning (Day et al., 2016). At the same time, research shows that
leadership matters and context also influences a principal’s ability to implement practices that
drive school improvement.
Transformative Leadership Theory
Transformative leadership theory in education is a dynamic and critical framework that
seeks to fundamentally change educational environments to achieve equity, inclusion, and
justice. Grounded in an extensive body of research, scholars like Shields (2010), Shields and
Hesbol (2020), and van Oord (2013) detail how this leadership style addresses the root causes of
inequality by implementing profound systemic changes. These changes are accomplished
through critical reflection, cultural competence, and a firm commitment to social justice, as
outlined by transformative leadership theorists. Transformative leaders engage in an activist
agenda, leveraging collaborative and critical processes to inspire personal and organizational
transformation toward more democratic and equitable educational practices. Transformative
leaders’ practices emphasize inclusive decision-making and the need to restructure knowledge
frameworks to enhance individual and collective outcomes in diverse educational settings.
Brown (2004) emphasized transformative leadership in promoting social justice and equity,
integrating these principles into everyday pedagogical and administrative practices. This
approach addresses inequalities and seeks to dismantle systemic barriers to success for
marginalized groups within educational institutions.

31
Shields’s (2018) work on transformative leadership emphasizes its role in creating more
just and equitable social systems. Shields’s work delves into how transformative leaders operate
in diverse educational settings, aiming to address the root causes of inequality by fundamentally
altering the conditions that perpetuate injustice and inequity by providing a powerful framework
and guidelines for school principals seeking to create equitable, inclusive, and social justice
education.
Principals of Title I high schools have a moral duty to recognize and eliminate
institutional barriers that hinder SED students from reaching their full potential (Quantz et al.,
1991). Shields (2010) examined the beliefs and practices of transformative principals to
understand how they produce equitable outcomes and inclusive approaches in schools with
diverse students, including high levels of poverty. Transformative leadership theory questions
inequitable practices to ensure opportunity and economic prosperity for individuals and the
greater good of society. This theoretical approach addresses the mindsets and knowledge
frameworks of those contributing to inequity and transforms them into more equitable
perspectives. The theory consists of eight supporting tenets that guide the process of promoting
equity: a mandate for change; challenging knowledge frameworks; redistributing power;
balancing public and private good; focus on emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion;
interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness; balance critique and promise; and
moral courage.
Eight Tenets of Transformative Leadership
• Mandate for change (effecting deep and equitable change): Shields (2018) explained
that leading with a mandate for change involves leaders who recognize the need for
systemic transformation and actively pursue it, ensuring their actions benefit the

32
students and the wider school community. This involves the willingness to
experiment with innovative educational structures, like reassigning resources,
extending school days, or implementing mentoring programs to ensure equitable
opportunities for every student.
• Challenging knowledge frameworks: Leaders challenge persistent deficit thinking and
assumptions about students from diverse backgrounds, replacing them with a new
paradigm that recognizes and builds upon the capabilities and potential of all
students.
• Redistributing power: Acknowledging power and privilege by recognizing the
dynamics of power and privilege, transformative leaders are prepared to make
unconventional choices that might involve bending the rules to foster equity. Van
Oord (2013) emphasized that this process is not about rejecting existing knowledge
but instead expanding the scope of knowledge recognized as valuable and legitimate.
Additionally, this shift requires educators to critically reflect on the beliefs and biases
that impact their instructional practices.
• Balance public and private good: The concept of balancing the public and private
good in education, as Shields (2018) described, emphasizes that education extends
beyond individual academic achievement and personal accolades. It encompasses
preparing students to contribute actively to society, benefiting everyone. This
approach involves a balance between fostering the community’s collective
development, referred to as “the public good,” and supporting individual academic
and personal success, known as “the private good.”

33
• Focus on emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion: Transformative leadership
changes educational practices to be more inclusive and democratic, ensuring that all
students’ needs are met through equitable instructional approaches. This practice
cultivates an environment where barriers are actively dismantled, enabling students to
integrate their personal experiences into the school setting fully. Quantz et al. (1991,
p. 103) articulate that the essence of this tenet is the continuous evolution of equal
relationships within a democratic framework, fostering an environment in which
every individual, staff, or student can excel, contribute, and feel valued and
supported.
• Interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness: Shields and Hesbol
(2020) emphasized the critical role of transformative practices in education, including
pedagogical shifts to enhance students’ understanding of the global community.
These shifts underscore the teaching of essential concepts such as interrelationships,
interdependence, and global awareness to cultivate an awareness of the profound
connections and dependencies between individual intellectual development and
collective social awareness.
• Balance critique and promise: Transformative leaders critically assess educational
practices and policies, identifying areas for change and proposing new approaches
that promise better outcomes for all students, especially marginalized students.
• Moral courage: Leaders are expected to take risks and stand firm, engaging actively
in the struggle for social justice, especially when facing opposition. Shields and
Hesbol (2020) assert that addressing inequity will inevitably encounter resistance,
calling for courageous actions and engagements.

34
Shields and Hesbol (2020) further explored the leadership practices of three urban school
leaders to assess whether they aligned with transformative leadership theory. This theory
advocates for a dual focus in leadership, one that nurtures the private good through fostering an
inclusive, respectful, and equitable learning environment and another that promotes the public
good, extending beyond individual academic achievements to include broader educational
impacts on democracy, civic life, and citizenship. Transformative leadership framework prepares
students to be knowledgeable, active, and caring citizens. Lodewijk van Oord’s (2013) study on
transformative leadership in education further elaborates on the transformative leadership
framework and describes how school leaders can fundamentally alter the educational landscape
through a critical and collaborative process. His research emphasizes the role of leadership in
inspiring and enacting change in the conditions and outcomes of education systems to achieve
social justice, equality, and a democratic society.
The foundational principles of private and public goods are critical to the transformative
leadership framework, setting the stage for applying eight specific tenets that guide leaders in
effecting substantial and meaningful change. Shields and Hesbol’s research highlight that
effective transformation in schools serving diverse populations requires principals with a clear
and compelling mission and the capability to create a welcoming and inclusive educational
setting. This environment should support the development of personal and communal benefits,
adhering to transformative leadership principles.
Moreover, the study underscores the necessity for school leaders to be well-prepared to
meet students and their families’ evolving and culturally distinct needs, emphasizing an inclusive
approach that transcends differences in background or origin. This preparation is key for leaders

35
who aim to implement transformative changes that genuinely meet their diverse students’ needs,
ensuring that all students are equipped to thrive both personally and as engaged citizens.
Further research indicates the link between transformative leadership and principal
practices prioritizing equity and inclusion to improve students’ academic outcomes (Caldwell et
al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol, 2020). These practices involve school principals critically
addressing social justice issues and challenging the status quo to create equitable and inclusive
educational settings (Grissom et al., 2021; Shields, 2018). Moreover, the emphasis on leveraging
students’ cultural wealth indicates a valuable approach to enriching the learning environment and
promoting intellectual achievement in an educational landscape where all students can thrive.
Cooper (2009) explained that the transformative leadership framework involves significant
cultural work at schools experiencing demographic shifts. Leaders in these environments must
adapt to and respect new languages, customs, and values, ensuring that these cultural shifts
contribute positively to the school community. This involves a high degree of cultural
competence, empathy, and a readiness to learn from and integrate into new cultural contexts.
Key aspects of this approach include building strong relationships with students and families,
fostering a shared sense of ownership, and encouraging collaboration across the school
community.
The challenges of educational disparities and inequities require high school
administrators to adopt transformative leadership practices. Such practices foster equitable and
inclusive learning environments and positively influence student achievement, altering
knowledge frameworks that perpetuate deficit thinking (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol,
2020).

36
Chapter Three: Methodology
Authors: Cristina Prado, Samuel Yi3
The persistent inequality in the education resources available to students from high- and
low-income families has translated into a widening student achievement gap between the two
populations (Jang & Reardon, 2019). The gap between high- and low-income students’ test
scores is about 40% larger among students born in the early 2000s than those born in the 1970s
(Chmielewski & Reardon, 2016). Such widening gaps demonstrate the need to examine how
principals of high-performing Title I schools lead to an increase in the academic achievement of
students.
Purpose of the Study
Socioeconomically disadvantaged students continue to face significant education
disparities and inequities that hinder their academic achievement. To address these, this study
aimed to determine the extent to which school administrators in Title I high schools in Los
Angeles County use transformative leadership practices to promote an inclusive educational
environment for all students. This study’s findings can inform the development of policies and
practices for school principals to promote educational equity. The results can inform school
leaders’ training and professional development to develop equity-focused leaders who integrate
social justice leadership practices. Furthermore, the findings can inspire other principals to
disrupt the status quo and create an equitable learning environment for marginalized students.
Research Questions
1. To what extent do school principals in Title I high schools employ transformative
leadership practices to increase student achievement?
3 This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.

37
2. What transformative leadership practices do teachers in Title I high schools identify in
their principals’ efforts to increase student achievement?
Sample and Population
I selected interviewees through purposeful sampling, in which the researcher selects
individuals based on specific criteria (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The sample population
consisted of principals and teachers with high academic achievement employed in three Title I
high schools in Los Angeles County. This study defined High academic achievement as a
graduation rate higher than 84.4%, and, in the 2021–2022 school year, 47% of Grade 11 students
met or exceeded standards on Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments (SBAC) for English
language arts and 45% doing so on SBAC for mathematics. I conducted semi-structured
interviews with a principal and four teachers from three high schools, yielding 15 semistructured interviews with three principals and 12 teachers. The research sampling is purposeful
since these educators require unique experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) needed to complete
the interview regarding the high achievement of students in Title I high schools.
Design Summary
The research design for this study is qualitative. A qualitative case study is an empirical
inquiry that provides an in-depth description and analysis of a bounded system (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016; Yin, 2014). This study represents a fixed system by the three Title I high schools
with high student achievement. Specifically, this study is case study research. Case study
research allows researchers to answer how and why research questions and explain or evaluate
why specific organizational initiatives are successful or not (Yin, 2014). I asked participants
questions to understand better the practices that principals used to foster high academic

38
achievement in Title I schools and to identify correlations with transformative leadership
practices.
Overall, case study qualitative research is best suited to answer this study’s research
questions because it allows for the collection of real-life data necessary to grasp the relationship
between the principal participants’ transformative leadership qualities and high student
achievements in a bounded system of Title I high schools in Los Angeles County. Additionally,
Yin (2014) asserted that case studies are more effective when focusing on contemporary issues in
real-life situations. This case study consisted of interviews to understand the real-life experiences
of the participants. This study is based on the steps of Lochmiller and Lester’s (2017) research.
In Chapter One, the study presents the research problem and purpose; Chapter Two reviews the
literature related to poverty, Title I, and transformative leadership theory. Chapter Three
discusses the study’s methodology, and Chapters Four and Five share the analysis and
interpretation of the data.
Methodology
The methodology includes qualitative data from interviews with principals and teachers
in Title I high schools in Los Angeles County. When developing the interview protocol, I
employed a semi-structured interview with flexible questions depending on the participant’s
responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition to understanding the principals’ transformative
leadership practices to promote high student achievement, it was necessary to interview teachers
to gather their experiences with principals’ leadership practices that led to this achievement. The
interview protocol for principals consists of nine questions (Appendix A), including additional
probing questions for Questions 4, 5, 6, and 7. The interview protocol for teachers consists of 10
questions (Appendix B), with additional probing questions in Questions 4, 5, 6, and 7.

39
Qualitative Instrument and Protocols
I gathered qualitative data through semi-structured interviews conducted in person or via
Zoom. The first interview protocol targeted principals and aimed to collect examples of
transformative leadership practices to answer the first research question (Appendix A). All
questions in the protocol are open-ended, and Questions 4, 5, 6, and 7 include additional probing
questions. These probing questions were necessary to gather clarifying information, as
recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2016). The second interview protocol targeted teachers
and was designed to confirm and add to the examples of transformative leadership practices
exhibited by principals to answer the second research question (Appendix B). Similar to the first
protocol, all questions in this protocol are open-ended, and Questions 4, 5, 6, and 7 include
additional probing questions. Both interview protocols have been field-tested with school
principals and teachers to ensure validity.
Data Collection
Purposeful sampling ensured that the responses addressed the study’s purpose and
provided relevant answers to the research questions. Before completing the interviews, I
identified Title I high schools with high student achievement. As mentioned earlier, high
academic achievements in this study are defined as graduation rates over 95% and having 50%
of Grade 11 students meeting or exceeding standards in the 2021–2022 school year for SBAC in
English language arts and 45% for SBAC in mathematics. I contacted participants several weeks
before the interviews to obtain informed consent and schedule a convenient day, time, and
location (Appendix C).
Obtaining informed consent was necessary to ensure the confidentiality of participants’
identities (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I used Zoom videoconferencing due to the availability of

40
both the interviewee and me. At the beginning of each interview, I shared the purpose of the
study and once again explained the confidential nature of the responses. I recorded the interviews
with the participants’ permission to capture their responses accurately. The expected duration of
each interview was approximately 45 minutes. After each interview, I transcribed and reviewed
the recordings. I stored the transcriptions securely on a password-protected device and kept the
notes in a locked cabinet for the duration of the study. After I completed the study, I stored the
transcriptions and notes securely and saved them for three years.
Data Analysis
I followed Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) data analysis steps for categorizing the interview
data and field notes, which include (a) constructing categories, (b) sorting categories and data,
and (c) naming the categories. To aid in this process, I utilized the Atlas.ti computer-assisted
software to code, analyze, and store data. Throughout the analysis, I read the transcripts multiple
times to gain familiarity with the interviews and identify relevant data about the research
questions. Appropriate codes were established and assigned by identifying recurring themes,
categories, and subcategories. The subcategories were then linked to one of Shields’s (2020)
eight tenets of transformative leadership theory. After coding the data, I analyzed them and
reported the findings.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Data sources were principal and teacher interviews to determine how school
administrators utilized transformative leadership practices to increase student achievement. To
ensure credible and trustworthy data, the research design addressed validity threats that could
lead to misinterpretation of the data. A few threats to the validity of the research include my

41
biases about school administrators who use transformative leadership strategies being more
effective at fostering equitable teacher expectations.
To rule out this validity threat, I collected rich data. Maxwell (2013) described rich data
as “detailed and varied enough to provide a full and revealing picture of what is going on” (p.
126). Instead of selecting administrators whom I thought had experience in fostering equitable
teacher expectations, I used the results to gather perspectives on school administrators’
leadership practices. Using anonymous teacher interview data to correlate the administrator’s
practices to Shields’s (2020) eight tenets of transformative leadership theory helped minimize the
teachers’ reactivity. Anonymous interview data can reduce reactivity by providing a sense of
confidentiality and reducing the fear of negative consequences. If the teacher’s name is
unknown, teachers will be more likely to provide honest feedback without the fear of retribution
or the pressure to potentially provide biased responses to make their principals appear like better
leaders.
In addition to using teacher interviews to identify the principal’s transformative practices,
I also interviewed the principals to collect enough detailed data to analyze. According to
Maxwell (2013), compiling various detailed data will help with member checks. Data collection
included recording and verbatim transcripts of the interviews and organizing the data according
to the eight tenets of transformative leadership theory. Once I received feedback about the data, I
employed triangulation of the data. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) argued that triangulation
increases the creditability of research by comparing and crosschecking data obtained via multiple
data collection methods (p. 245). As a transformative leader, I remained objective and avoided
biases affecting the research findings.

42
Personal Positionality
This research aimed to determine how school administrators in high-achieving Title I
high schools utilize transformative leadership practices to foster equitable learning and
classroom instruction for SED students. This study sought to identify the specific transformative
leadership approaches school administrators adopt to address teachers’ biases and assumptions
and explore how the leaders implement transformative practice to enhance educational outcomes
for SED students.
With 29 years of experience as an educator and currently serving as an assistant principal
at a high school with a 90% SED population, I possess both authority and expertise in education.
This position may create power imbalances, as the participants could have felt pressured to
conform to my expectations or hesitated to provide honest feedback during the study. However,
this position could give rise to power imbalances, as principals who are my colleagues and
friends might have experienced pressure to align with my expectations or been reluctant to offer
honest feedback during the study. I must emphasize the significance of maintaining transparency
throughout the research (Maxwell, 2013). Transparency entailed being candid about my
positionality and possible conflicts of interest while offering comprehensive information
regarding research methodology, data collection procedures, and participant confidentiality.
Additionally, employing an introductory protocol guide to offer participants a consistent
summary of the study established a well-defined boundary between the participants and me.
Finally, my experience and positionality may also have contributed to power imbalances,
given my background as a first-generation Mexican American from a low SED background. My
interests could not overshadow those of the participants. Ladson-Billings (2000, as cited in
Milner (p. 389, 2007), posited that “the nature of reality or our truths shapes and guides our ways

43
and systems of knowing and our epistemological systems of knowing.” As the researcher, I had
to be prepared to navigate the commonalities and tensions that could arise during the study.
Milner (2007) recommended that researchers self-reflect about others to address this issue. A
question he suggests I consider throughout the study is, “How will I negotiate and balance my
own interests and research agenda with those of my participants, which may be inconsistent with
or diverge from mine?”
Summary
This study used a qualitative approach, specifically a case study approach with extensive
interviews. I conducted interviews with principals and teachers at high-achieving Title I high
schools to address both research questions: To what extent do school principals in Title I high
schools employ transformative leadership practices to promote high student achievement, and
what transformative leadership practices, if any, do teachers in Title I high schools identify their
principals employ to promote high student achievement? Chapter Four will present the findings.

44
Chapter Four: Results
The study evaluated how school administrators employ transformative leadership
practices in three high-achieving Title I high schools in Los Angeles County. It sought to
understand the impact of these practices on creating an equitable and inclusive educational
environment, paying particular attention to SED students. Additionally, the research investigated
correlations between effective leadership practices and the eight key principles of Shields’s
(2018) transformative leadership theory. Moreover, it examined teachers’ perspectives on their
principals’ leadership approaches, evaluating their alignment with any of the eight transformative
leadership tenets to increase student achievement. The study and data collection processes
followed these questions as guidance:
1. To what extent do school principals in Title I high schools employ transformative
leadership practices to increase student achievement?
2. What transformative leadership practices do teachers in high-achieving Title I high
schools identify in their principals’ efforts to increase student achievement?
This chapter will focus exclusively on the results in Los Angeles County, with data
collected from three public high schools. In addition to a detailed discussion of interview
responses, Chapter Four will identify the results of transformative leadership, which comprises
eight principles: mandate for change; challenging knowledge frameworks; redistributing power;
balancing public and private good; focusing on emancipation democracy, equity, and inclusion;
interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness; balance critique and promise; and
moral courage.
The research results are presented below and organized by research question. For each
research question, there is a brief review of relevant literature and a preview of the results.

45
Results are presented according to each transformative leadership practice. Finally, a summary of
the results related to each research question is given, with a cumulative summary at the end of
this chapter.
Participants
All interviewees were principals and teachers employed at three Los Angeles County
Title I high schools with high academic achievement. This achievement means having
graduation rates exceeding 84%. Also, 47% of 11th-graders met or exceeded standards in the
2022–2023 school year on SBAC in English language arts, and 34% did so for SBAC in
mathematics (Table 2). Additionally, the principals had to serve at their current schools for over
3 years. The study employed semi-structured interviews to gather data from three principals and
four teachers from each high school (Table 3).
Table 2
Title 1 High School 2023 Academic Achievement, California Dashboard Academic Performance and
Graduation Rate
County/school Socioeconomically
disadvantaged
English language
arts
Math Graduation
rate
Los Angeles
County
67.5% 47.18% met or
exceeded
standard
34.75% met or
exceeded
standard
84.4%
High school 1 85.7% 61.75% met or
exceeded
standard
34.20% met or
exceeded
standard
95.8%
High school 2 64.6% 79.22% met or
exceeded
standard
64.65% met or
exceeded
standard
94.7%
High school 3 79.9% 67.19% met or
exceeded
standard
42.37% met or
exceeded
standard
96.9%

46
Table 3
Interview Participants’ Background Information
School pseudonym Participant
pseudonym
Years at school Participant race
School 1 Principal 1
Teacher A
Teacher B
Teacher C
Teacher D
8 years
27 years
26 years
13 years
18 years
White
School 2 Principal 2
Teacher E
Teacher F
Teacher G
Teacher H
9 years
21 years
16 years
9 years
26 years
White
School 3 Principal 3
Teacher I
Teacher J
Teacher K
Teacher L
8 years
21 years
15 years
17 years
20 years
Latine/Black
Results Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked the extent to which school principals in Title I high schools
employed transformative leadership practices to increase student achievement. Interview data
analysis revealed the implementation of these practices through the principals’ descriptions of
their leadership styles. A noteworthy preliminary observation suggests a potential correlation
between SED student achievement and the principals’ overall experience, as well as their
experience at the current school. Vanderhaar et al. (2006) and Grissom and Sutcher (2018)
highlighted a link between student achievement among SED students and principals’ experience
levels. Their research suggests that schools led by principals with 7 or more years of experience
tend to exhibit higher student achievement compared to those led by principals with 4 to 6 years

47
of experience. In this study, two principals have led their schools for eight years, while another
had a tenure of 9 years.
Based on interviews with principals, the study’s findings present an overview of
implementing transformative leadership practices, with eight identified practices being adopted
to various degrees (Figure 1). Principals discussed the varying frequency of practices such as
challenging knowledge frameworks, focusing on emancipation, democracy, equity, and
inclusion, balancing critique and promise, and redistributing power. In their responses, all
referenced balancing public and private good and moral courage at least once. Moreover, two
recognized the significance of interconnectedness, interdependence, global awareness, and the
need for change. One principal more frequently emphasized the mandate for change.
Figure 1
Principal Responses to Transformative Leadership Practices

48
Balance Critique and Promise
One significant theme emerged from the interview data analysis: principals described
actions that promote equity, inclusion, and social justice, aligning with Shields’s (2018) practice
of balancing critique with promise. Transformative leaders critique the current state of their
school and act, leading to a better future for all students.
Principal 1 underlined their dedication to student success with critical statements: “I lead
with the belief that we must support our kids, regardless of who they are, empowering what
happens in the classroom and ensuring our teachers have the necessary tools to be effective.”
School Principal 1 elaborated, “We are committed to doing whatever it takes to ensure our
students have a wide range of opportunities upon graduating, which is the essence of providing
real opportunities.” School Principal 2 highlighted the imperative to reevaluate practices: “Our
mission statement supports and fosters students, urging them to achieve their utmost potential so
that they leave with as many opportunities and choices.” Similarly, School Principal 3
emphasized their approach to their leadership: “I aim to alter the course and offer diverse
opportunities and experiences, assuring that our school provides top-notch academics, athletics,
and activities.” This shared commitment to critique, act, and promise a better educational future
reflects the core of transformative leadership—striving for a school environment where equity,
inclusion, and justice are ideals and realities.
Focus on Emancipation, Democracy, Equity, and Inclusion
When transformative leaders focus on emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion,
they foster a unified culture steeped in democratic principles. This approach cultivates an
environment where barriers are actively dismantled, enabling students to integrate their personal
experiences into the school setting fully. Quantz et al. (1991) articulated that the essence of

49
transformative leadership theory is the continuous evolution of equal relationships within a
democratic framework, suggesting that effective leadership fosters an environment in which
every individual—staff or student—can excel, contribute significantly, and feel valued and
supported (p. 103).
School Principal 1 shared their strategy for nurturing a cohesive school culture: “My task
is to bolster classroom activities and simplify teachers’ responsibilities, encouraging a collective
focus on providing opportunities for our students.” School Principal 2 described their leadership
as collaborative, as someone who builds capacity through shared leadership and decisionmaking: “By leveraging the collective strengths of our staff and teacher leaders, we enhance the
overall potential of our students.” Similarly, School Principal 3 linked their leadership style to
that of a coach, emphasizing building strong relationships: “My approach revolves around
supporting staff, valuing their strengths, and ensuring they are positioned to succeed, thereby
fostering a deep-seated investment in their well-being as part of the demanding work we
undertake.”
In addition to creating a democratic environment that supports staff members’ growth and
transformation, these principals also implement practices that strengthen the relationships
between teachers and students, focusing on principles of equality, mutual respect, and shared
authority. School Principal 1 underscored the significance of such interactions, stating,
“Education transcends textbooks and curricula; it is about engaging in meaningful dialogue,
understanding students’ lives, and involving both parents and students.” School Principal 2
added, “Remembering to build capacity involves supporting those directly working with our
students, encouraging actions that teachers believe in out of love for their students. This
approach enriches our school, making it more diverse and inclusive.” School Principal 3

50
highlighted the role of teacher-student relationships: “The essence of our culture lies in the
relationships between teachers and students, supported by all adults on campus who share a
belief in the success of our students, creating a community committed to our educational goals.”
The principals’ responses highlight their dedication to fostering an inclusive, equitable
educational environment where democratic values guide actions and decisions, strengthening the
community.
Balancing the Public and Private Good
Shields (2018) described balancing the public and private good in education, emphasizing
that education extends beyond individual academic achievement and personal accolades. It
encompasses preparing students to contribute actively to society, benefiting everyone. This
approach involves a balance between fostering the community’s collective development, referred
to as the public good, and supporting individual academic and personal success, known as the
private good.
School Principal 1 emphasized the significance of individual academic success, using the
“A through G” requirements as a foundational benchmark. They remarked, “By establishing the
A through G baseline, we define what success in high school entails. This approach ensures
every student has the opportunity for success.” Similarly, School Principal 3 focuses on making
these requirements accessible and understandable to students and their families, emphasizing
keeping students on track for graduation and college readiness. Principal 3 noted, “Often,
families and students are unaware of what A through G means until it becomes critical for
college applications. By aligning every course with these requirements, we are committed to
keeping students on the path to success.”

51
Alternatively, School Principal 2 looks beyond academics to the holistic development of
students, highlighting the value of engagement in leadership, clubs, and sports. They explained,
“Our school culture is not solely focused on academic achievements but also on the importance
of participation, leadership, and giving back to the community.” Principals demonstrate a
comprehensive approach to education that values individual success, and the broader
contributions students can make to society. This approach reflects a subtle understanding of the
balance between the public and private good in education.
Moral Courage
Transformative leaders need determination and resilience to challenge and dismantle
inequities, striving for equity, justice, and the well-being of all students. Shields and Hesbol
(2020) asserted that addressing inequity will inevitably encounter resistance, calling for
courageous actions and engagements. School Principal 1 provides instances of moral courage,
stating,
Criticism is part of leadership. While I aim to meet diverse needs, it is impossible to
satisfy everyone. However, I am content with my leadership approach and the positive
rapport with my staff, accepting that not all will be pleased.
They further noted, “Effective collaboration with our staff is crucial, especially since they
significantly impact our students’ lives daily, particularly those who are underrepresented.”
School Principal 2 shared their experience with moral courage: “Navigating the
challenges and sacrifices required to prioritize students’ needs involves tough conversations
about educational philosophies and overcoming biases. It is a deeply emotional journey.”
Similarly, School Principal 3 discussed the challenges of maintaining academic standards:

52
“Managing personnel and upholding high educational standards requires making difficult
decisions, from hiring individuals to letting go of those who do not align with our goals.”
Through their leadership, these principals exemplify the critical role of moral courage in
transformative leadership, showcasing their unwavering commitment to creating a more
equitable and just educational environment.
Challenging Knowledge Frameworks
Transformative leaders aim to dismantle barriers that prevent marginalized students from
reaching their full potential. They do this by shifting the knowledge frameworks among teachers
that perpetuate deficit thinking and replacing them with a new paradigm that values equity,
inclusion, and cultural wealth. Van Oord (2013) emphasized that this process is not about
rejecting existing knowledge but instead expanding the scope of knowledge recognized as
valuable and legitimate. This shift requires educators to critically reflect on their beliefs and
biases impacting their instructional practices. School Principal 1 promotes broadening
knowledge, noting,
It is intriguing how difficult it is for some to see A through G not just as a college
preparatory metric but as a broader indicator of student success. The assumption that
pushing for A through G means pushing all students toward college puts philosophical
barriers up. To address this, we have shifted the dialogue this year by adopting the term
“academic achievers.”
School Principal 2 emphasizes revising teaching approaches and encouraging teachers to reflect
on their practices. They explained,
Creating a new framework has changed how we communicate and focus on the
classroom. When observing classes, we have shifted from the belief of teacher critique to

53
focus on student ownership of learning. Reviewing the teacher’s instructional practices
that facilitate student engagement has transformed our approach to observations and
discussions.
Furthermore, Principal 2 discussed the challenge of changing traditional educational mindsets,
stating,
We advocate for a collective responsibility for all students learning, emphasizing the
need for consensus on teaching the essential concepts. Disagreeing on essential learning
outcomes hinders students’ learning progression. We must recognize our collective duty
to educate all students, making thoughtful decisions about what students should learn to
succeed in subsequent courses.
School Principal 3 described their approach to changing teacher mindsets, emphasizing
the constant reinforcement of the school’s core message: “My role consistently reinforces our
core message. In all our interactions—during meetings, data discussions, or within our leadership
teams—I emphasize the importance of considering all students and engaging directly with data.”
Moreover, School Principal 3 elaborated on the systems established to examine detailed,
disaggregated data:
We have [professional learning community] structures to ensure we can have those
conversations. And then they have time to have those tough conversations about how kids
are performing and when they are not performing. The real key is not about why they are
not performing. It’s how am I doing?
This quote underscores the proactive and reflective approach encouraged among teachers,
focusing on personal accountability and the collective effort to enhance student performance

54
through critical, data-informed discussions within a framework of supportive professional
learning communities.
Interconnectedness, Interdependence, Global Awareness
Shields and Hesbol (2020) emphasized the role of transformative practices in education,
including pedagogical shifts to enhance students’ understanding of the global community. These
shifts underscore the teaching of essential concepts such as interrelationships, interdependence,
and global awareness to cultivate an awareness of the connections and dependencies between
individual intellectual development and collective social awareness (Shields, 2018). While two
principals acknowledged the importance of these concepts, their primary focus remained on
equipping students with a rigorous and relevant curriculum that prepares them for post-secondary
opportunities.
School Principal 1 articulated the goal of education as ensuring students have a wide
range of opportunities for individual intellectual development: “We’re committed to providing
our students with the opportunities they deserve.” They further explained, “This commitment is
rooted in the belief that a high-quality classroom experience, fostered by exceptional teaching.”
Similarly, School Principal 3 highlights the school’s dedication to fostering individual
intellectual development, “The performance of our population of students … measured through
A to G rate, which has ranged in the 60% the last 8 to 10 years.” Alternatively, School Principal
2 believes in preparing students academically and in other areas critical for success beyond high
school: “It’s about more than just academics; it’s about involvement in leadership, clubs, and
athletics. This involvement builds our school’s culture, emphasizing the importance of giving
back.”

55
Mandate for Change
Two principals acknowledged the need for change at their schools, with one particularly
highlighting the urgency of a mandate for change more consistently. This tenet is central to
transformative leadership, aimed at addressing and dismantling systemic inequities related to
race, ethnicity, social class, and economic conditions to achieve meaningful and equitable
change. Quantz et al. (2001) suggested that leaders seeking to transform schools must understand
the inherent conflicts and contradictions. Further emphasizing this point, Shields and Hesbol
(2020) argued that a mandate for equitable change necessitates a leader’s deep knowledge of
oneself, the organization, and the broader community, acknowledging and addressing the
inequalities and injustices disproportionately affecting marginalized students.
School Principal 2 shared a strategy to foster student autonomy and advocacy, aiming for
self-efficacy and self-directed learning. They committed to empowering students beyond
academic achievements, stating, “Our goal is to help them become independent and selfadvocate. … We hope that is our goal.” Principal 2 also highlighted a focus beyond SES,
pointing out the success of economically disadvantaged students at their school. They elaborated
on their approach, mentioning, “The MTSS team focuses on trying to capture why the lowestperforming incoming ninth-grade students are struggling. We identify incoming ninth-grade
students’ needs through articulation with our feeder middle schools.” This quote underscores the
proactive measures taken to identify and address the challenges students face when transitioning
into high school, highlighting a strategic focus on early intervention and support.
School Principal 3 discussed their staffing strategy, which aims to mirror the student
body’s demographic composition. They noted, “We hire intentionally to try to match our
demographics. … It is something that people do not always talk about.” This approach reinforces

56
representation and relatability in the educational environment. It is grounded in a district-wide
philosophy that demographics do not determine destiny, a belief that has guided their practices
for over 2 decades. Principal 3 emphasized the significance of a collective belief in the potential
of all students to achieve, irrespective of socioeconomic or ethnic backgrounds, shaping a school
culture that supports every student’s success.
Further, Principal 3 shared insights into their life experiences and diverse cultural
backgrounds, growing up in a multi-racial, multi-ethnic family and community. Their personal
history enables empathy with the challenges confronting students and their families, allowing
them to demand a supportive and inclusive educational environment. His education purpose
emphasizes “changing trajectory and providing opportunities and experiences.” School Principal
3’s leadership showcases their commitment to leveraging diversity as a strength, ensuring deep
and equitable change (Shields, 2018)
Redistributing Power
According to Shields (2018), the eighth tenet of transformative leadership centers on
redistributing power in organizations to ensure equitable participation and use of power. This
approach seeks to democratize power, moving from traditional hierarchical structures to more
inclusive, collaborative models. Redistributing power involves critically examining and altering
the “culture of power” (Shields, 2018, p. 61) that perpetuates inequality, fostering an
environment where diverse voices are valued. This involves engaging in inclusive decisionmaking, providing professional development, encouraging teacher leadership, amplifying student
voice and agency, practicing culturally responsive leadership, and fostering community
empowerment (Aguayo et al., 2023; Campos-Moreira et al., 2020; Khalifa et al., 2016; Levitan,
2020).

57
School Principal 1 exemplifies engaging in an inclusive decision-making process:
If there is one initiative we want to try here, it will be more grassroots. We want our
department chairs on board, letting it grow from the ground up instead of coming from
the top down. … That has always been the most effective way to enact any type of
change.
Echoing this sentiment, School Principal 2 demonstrated inclusive decision-making, “a
lot of the programs that have been implemented have not necessarily been spearheaded by me.
People come to me, and my answer is always yes.” Likewise, School Principal 3 adopted a
unique stance on reversing the traditional power dynamic: “We also talk about like an inverted
triangle, the principal is on the bottom. And we then just support all the work.”
Moreover, School Principal 2 described how they alter the culture of power by
empowering teachers to lead:
We have been working with a consulting firm since 2018. With the help of our leadership
team, we chose three teacher facilitators who now facilitate the collegial lesson studies.
Each teacher participates with a partner once a semester, and it is not administratively
driven.
In addition to developing teacher autonomy and leadership, School Principal 2 emphasized
student voice and agency, explaining the role of the student senate:
The purpose of student senate is to explore the culture and climate of the school. They
tell me what they like and what they do not like. We do not necessarily have an agenda
outside of what typically starts the meeting: is there anything you want me to know?
Sometimes, I come to them and ask for their input on the proposed bell schedule or new

58
civic engagement pathway. We spend most of the second semester focusing on an action
plan to design changes.
Practicing culturally responsive leadership is only evident in School Principal 3. This
philosophy extends to hiring practices and creating a leadership team that mirrors the student
body’s diversity: “I shared with you my background. … I have built a team of people who all
have a similar lens, not the same background, but everyone could have been one of these kids on
our campus at any time.”
Discussion Research Question 1
The analysis of interviews across each high school unveils insight into the transformative
beliefs and practices embraced by school principals, forming the foundation of their leadership
approaches. Drawing on the foundational research by Vanderhaar et al. (2006), an early
observation identifies a correlation between the achievements of SED students and the tenure of
the principals at their current schools. This insight suggests that experience, particularly
leadership spanning more than 7 years, is crucial in fostering higher student achievement. The
principals in this study, who have served their schools for 8 and 9 years, reflect this pattern,
showcasing the impact of experienced leadership on student achievement outcomes.
Further analysis of the principals’ interview responses reveals that their leadership is
deeply rooted in the transformative beliefs and practices outlined by Shields (2018) and Quantz
et al. (1991). Shields’ concept of balancing critique with promise resonates strongly in the
principals’ actions, highlighting their commitment to critiquing systemic barriers while actively
pursuing equitable and promising futures for their students. This dual approach aims to address
current inequities and foster an inclusive culture that promotes all students’ success, as seen in

59
School Principal 1’s dedication to empowering teachers and providing students with a
comprehensive array of opportunities.
The principals’ emphasis on emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion signifies
their alignment with transformative leadership tenets that support balanced relationships within
educational settings. Such an emphasis is critical for developing an environment where every
student and staff member feels valued and supported, thus fostering a democratic and unified
school culture. This principle of transformative leadership is evident in School Principal 2’s
collaborative and shared leadership style and School Principal 3’s focus on building strong
relationships to enhance the school community.
The mandate for change, another cornerstone of transformative leadership, is articulated
through the principals’ proactive strategies for student support and advocacy. Reflecting the
mandate for equitable change, as Quantz et al. (1991) discussed, the principals demonstrate a
deep understanding of and response to the inherent conflicts and contradictions within the
educational system. School Principal 2’s commitment to fostering student autonomy, selfefficacy, and self-directed learning serves as an example. Additionally, School Principal 3’s
intentional hiring practices aim to mirror the student body’s demographics and foster a sense of
belonging and representation.
Through the commitment among the school principals to create a democratic, inclusive
educational environment, interview responses demonstrate how they actively alter the culture of
power that perpetuates inequality. They exemplify this through inclusive decision-making,
empowering teacher leadership via professional development, amplifying student voice and
agency, and employing culturally responsive leadership. For instance, one principal emphasizes
grassroots initiative growth, another empowers teachers to lead professional development and

60
values student senate input on school decisions, and a third ensures the leadership team reflects
the student body’s diversity. These practices challenge traditional hierarchical structures and
foster a culture where the voices of teachers and students actively shape the learning
environment. This approach demonstrates a meaningful shift toward equity and inclusivity,
showcasing the transformative potential of redistributing power in educational settings.
Significantly, School Principal 3, the only principal of color among interviewees,
exhibited the highest number of responses aligned with the mandate for change. This observation
prompts a deeper consideration of the potential correlation between the principal’s personal
experiences as a person of color and an understanding of the urgency for social justice education.
This connection highlights the possible influence of a principal’s background on their leadership
priorities and strategies, particularly in championing reforms that advance equity and inclusion
within the educational landscape.
Throughout the interviews, the transformative beliefs and practices of the school
principals are evident in their strategic focus on challenging knowledge frameworks, promoting
equity and inclusion through redistributing power, and driving systemic change. These
narratives, enriched by the theoretical frameworks of Shields (2018), Quantz et al. (1991), and
Vanderhaar et al. (2006), illuminate the dynamic and multifaceted nature of transformative
leadership in high-achieving Title I high schools. The principals’ approaches, deeply rooted in
transformative leadership principles, exemplify a commitment to creating learning environments
where every student can achieve and thrive.
Results Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked what transformative leadership practices teachers in Title I
high schools identified in their principals’ practices to increase student achievement. Analysis of

61
the interviews reveals the implementation level of these practices through the teachers’
descriptions of their principal leadership styles. A noteworthy preliminary observation suggests a
strong correlation between the teachers’ identified transformative practices and their principals’
practices and the implementation level of these practices through the principals’ descriptions of
their leadership styles.
Based on teacher interviews, the study’s findings present an overview of implementing
transformative leadership practices, with eight identified practices adopted to various degrees
(Figure 2).
Figure 2
Teacher Responses to Transformative Leadership Practices

62
Teachers across all participating high schools highlighted several practices associated
with transformative leadership, including emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion, an
emphasis on a mandate for change, and balancing critique with promise. Teachers from Schools
1 and 3 noted their principals’ efforts to balance the public and private good, with School 2
teachers reporting this slightly more frequently. The challenge to knowledge frameworks was a
theme across all schools, though mentioned with differing emphasis. Additionally, the concepts
of moral courage and interdependence, global awareness, and interconnectedness were touched
upon by teachers in their responses. Interestingly, recognizing power redistribution as a
transformative leadership practice was less common, with only two of the three schools’ teachers
highlighting its importance.
Focusing on Emancipation, Democracy, Equity, and Inclusion
Principals who embrace transformative leadership prioritize collaboration and delegate
decision-making to their staff, cultivating an atmosphere of democracy, equity, inclusion, and
emancipation. This active leadership style significantly boosts the effectiveness of the
educational setting by fostering a sense of ownership and accountability among staff members,
leading to a more engaged and committed team. Van Oord (2013) highlighted that at the core of
transformative leadership lies engagement in a critical and collaborative process.
Teachers’ feedback highlights the principals’ commitment to this inclusive and
democratic leadership approach. Teacher B noted, “Their style is very open. They are
comfortable delegating and entrusting their leadership team with significant decision-making
responsibilities. This includes giving department chairs and the leadership team numerous
opportunities to make decisions, thereby distributing leadership across the school.” Moreover,
Teacher J detailed the consultative decision-making process: “Any new proposal is first taken to

63
the leadership team, discussed thoroughly, and then relayed to the departments for further
discussion. This cyclical dialogue ensures that all decisions are reflective of collective input.”
Teacher K appreciated the principal’s efforts to foster a collaborative atmosphere: “Our
principal always encourages staff to come up with creative solutions together, emphasizing it is a
team effort and showing genuine trust and sincerity in our abilities.” Finally, Teacher F
highlighted the establishment of leadership teams as a concrete example of this approach:
The principal has formed leadership teams among staff and students, promoting a
collaborative mindset across departments and providing students a platform for their
voices to be heard, reflecting the school’s commitment to upholding the vision and
mission through collective efforts.
These accounts underscore how transformative leadership advocates for a democratic and
inclusive educational setting and actively engages both staff and students in the governance and
decision-making processes, reinforcing the significance of building balanced relationships in the
school community.
Mandate for Change
The teachers’ interviews depict the principal’s commitment to mandating change, a
hallmark of transformative leadership, as Shields and Hesbol (2020) described. This leadership
style is characterized by self-awareness and an intimate understanding of the school’s needs and
inequities. Shields (2018) explained that leading with a mandate for change involves leaders who
recognize the need for systemic transformation and actively pursue it, ensuring their actions
benefit the students and the wider school community. Teachers recognize principals for this
approach, noting a leadership style deeply rooted in addressing students’ needs and community
engagement.

64
Teacher E highlights the principal’s alignment with the English learner population and
community needs, stating, “The principal is closely aligned with the English learner population
here, as well as the parents in the community,” underscores an inclusive strategy. Additionally,
Teacher F acknowledges the principal’s intent to uplift often overlooked student groups, noting,
“Our principal has been exceptional at focusing on groups that typically don’t get much
attention, working to elevate them from their current standing,” showing a broad commitment to
the success of all student groups.”
Teacher I remarked on the principal’s thorough understanding of the community: “Our
principal’s strength lies in [their] deep knowledge of the community,” pointing to a leader fully
engaged with and responsive to the community’s needs. Teacher J praised the principal’s
advocacy for students and parents as exceptional, “Our principal’s advocacy for students and
parents is outstanding, genuinely feeling that all actions taken are in the best interest of our
students, staff, and community,” thus demonstrating leadership grounded in ethical principles
and community connections.
Emphasizing the student-centric nature of the principal’s leadership, Teacher A
explained, “The central question always comes back to what is best for the students, ensuring our
approach remains student-focused,” which highlights a leadership consistently oriented toward
student well-being. Finally, Teacher H described the principal’s style as inherently supportive,
“always aligning with the school’s mission and vision when addressing the needs of various
student groups.” Guaranteeing equitable access to educational resources and opportunities for all
students epitomizes the principal’s adherence to the transformative leadership’s mandate for
change, fostering a culture of equity, inclusion, and empowerment.

65
Balance Critique and Promise
Teachers’ insights into their principal’s practice of balancing critique with promise
highlight leadership practices that navigate educational challenges with a focus on equity and
inclusion, as Shields (2010) described. This approach critiques current inequities while
promoting a vision for a more equitable future, embodying an essential aspect of transformative
leadership. Their responses illustrate the principals’ skill in inspiring collective action toward an
inclusive learning environment, regardless of students’ background.
Teacher J pointed to the principal’s critical focus on closing the achievement gap,
especially among English learners, highlighting an area for improvement: “Our principal always
discusses how we can close the achievement gap.” Similarly, Teacher A discussed the principal’s
identification and removal of roadblocks to education as a critical component of leadership: “Our
principal wants to give access to all students … to take care of any roadblocks along the way.”
Teacher F illustrated the principal’s vision of an inclusive educational environment where every
student has equal opportunities for success regardless of background: “A student is a student. It
doesn’t matter their background, color, or where they’re from; they have every opportunity and
every right to the opportunities and the tools necessary for their success, just as anybody else.”
Building on the foundation of critique, teachers described how principals foster a
promising and equitable future for all students. Teacher H noted the principal’s commitment to
supporting underperforming students through resources and personal attention: “True and
genuine commitment to underperforming populations, investing in those teachers, educators,
programs. … Our principal meets with these students and talks to them in [their] office.” Teacher
C spoke to the principal’s promise of diverse educational pathways, ensuring students are aware
of and prepared for their futures:

66
Providing education at different levels for the students to choose the direction they’re
heading. … We want to make sure that if that avenue is open to them, they know what
they need to do as far as being A through G.
Finally, Teacher B highlighted the principal’s commitment to maintaining high academic
standards, pushing students toward challenging coursework as part of the promise of a better
educational outcome: “A through G is taking the right courses. … We push students to take the
right courses whenever possible.”
Balancing the Public and Private Good
Some teachers’ interview responses highlight their principal’s commitment to balancing
the private and public good. The balance, as Shields (2010) described, focuses on personal
academic success and societal contribution, which is essential in transformative leadership. The
tenet balance reflects a dedication to nurturing students as scholars and responsible citizens,
embodying the synergy of private and public benefits in education.
Like principal responses, teachers demonstrated that their principals value academic
success and their students’ holistic development. They described principals who embody the
transformative leadership tenet of balancing the private and public good, focusing on individual
achievements and societal contributions. Teacher H commended one principal’s deep care for the
school’s future and the impact on individual students, stating, “I think our principal truly cares
about the future of our school and the individual lives affected, wanting every student to graduate
prepared to face the world with numerous options.” Teacher D highlighted holistic development:
“We aim to ensure students are whole and safe, becoming better global citizens. Our principal
wants our students to feel seen, supported, and secure, ensuring their success beyond our
school.” Furthermore, Teacher F articulates the connection to the school’s mission, emphasizing

67
readiness for college and career, ownership of learning, and community contribution as critical
goals. “Keeping that consistent message is instrumental,” they noted, highlighting the principals’
dedication to nurturing students as scholars and responsible global citizens.
Challenging Knowledge Frameworks
Teachers articulate how their principals actively challenge traditional knowledge
frameworks and foster the development of new, equitable approaches to reduce inequities,
eliminate deficit thinking, and confront racism and other prejudices. These actions reflect the
core principles of transformative leadership, as scholars like Ladson-Billings (1995) and Gay
(2010) noted when stressing inclusive and equitable educational practices. This process in two of
the three school principals involves expanding course offerings, encouraging reflective practice
among educators, and promoting a growth mindset. Teacher D illustrated this by describing the
principal’s strategic choice in assigning skilled teachers to diverse student groups, countering
conventional practices: “Our principal has tapped those teachers who are successful with highachieving students to work with more diverse groups, encouraging collaboration and high
expectations for all students.”
Encouraging reflective practices and promoting a growth mindset is evident in the
responses of three teachers. Teacher G discussed the introduction of consultant work to enhance
classroom practice, emphasizing self-reflection among teachers: “We’ve engaged in reflective
practice with consultants, creating our effective strategies for improvement and better classroom
management.” Teacher F highlighted the effort to shift teacher perceptions toward embracing
new educational paths, acknowledging the challenges posed by rapid changes in education:
“Early on, the challenge was helping some teachers see the benefits. … However, as they see
positive outcomes and student engagement, we’re witnessing a significant shift in perspective.”

68
Lastly, Teacher E touched on the challenge of fostering a growth mindset among staff, especially
regarding collaborative practices and data use: “The most challenging part might be getting
people to switch their mindset, to see [professional learning communities] and data gathering as
opportunities for growth and improvement.” Through these responses, it is clear that School
Principal 2 is committed to deconstructing knowledge frameworks and reconstructing a more
inclusive pedagogy. This approach challenges inequities and empowers teachers and students to
engage in a more responsive and dynamic educational experience.
Moral Courage
Principals demonstrate moral courage through their commitment to ethical actions and
tough decision-making, a fundamental aspect of transformative leadership. Shields (2010)
described this leadership quality as the ability to identify and challenge inequities in educational
settings while courageously advocating for ethical change. Teachers observed their principal’s
demonstrating courage by implementing practices prioritizing every student’s welfare and
academic success, from supporting marginalized groups to eliminating educational obstacles and
ensuring difficult decisions served the school community’s best interests. Teacher A highlighted
the principal’s transparency and inclusive approach to challenges: “[They have] a great level of
transparency, … approaching any challenge as a team, empowering teachers by saying, ‘We are
gonna come up with this together.’” This emphasis on openness and teamwork affirms the
principal’s moral courage in fostering a collaborative environment.
The willingness to engage in challenging discussions is evident in the experiences
Teachers A and F shared. Teacher A noted, “[They] always [facilitate] difficult conversations, …
keeping it student-centered. Let’s return to the essential question: what is best for students.”
Meanwhile, Teacher F added, “Communication is key. … Our principal doesn’t hold anything

69
back, sharing the good, bad, or ugly.” These insights reveal the principals’ commitment to honest
dialogue, even when the topics are challenging. Moreover, Teacher J and Teacher I discussed the
principal’s focused commitment to ethical actions for underrepresented students. Teacher J
mentioned, “Making time to discuss that population of students. … Willing to take risks.”
Teacher, I add, “Our principal communicates very well. … [They are] honest, which is crucial
when making hard decisions.” These actions illustrate the principals’ moral courage in
advocating for equity and inclusion at their schools.
Interconnectedness, Interdependence, Global Awareness
Teachers highlight their principals’ focus on interconnectedness, interdependence, and
global awareness, aligning with transformative leadership principles, as Shields (2010)
discussed. These practices cultivate a school culture that extends learning beyond the classroom,
integrating global perspectives and underscoring the world’s interconnected nature. This
approach aims to prepare students as global citizens aware of their roles within a larger
community, demonstrating the transformative leadership goal of fostering equity and social
justice.
Teachers highlight a holistic approach to education to prepare students as well-rounded
global citizens. Teacher D emphasizes enhancing academic outcomes like A through G and
graduation rates but clarifies that the aim extends beyond college preparation: “We want to
ensure students are wholly prepared and safe so they become better global citizens upon leaving
school. … Our students are seen, supported, safe, secure, and successful.” Teacher C spoke about
providing diverse educational pathways to ensure students are aware of and prepared for various
futures, whether that involves college, the workforce, or military service. “The mission is to
guide and mold students, offering them different levels of education to choose their direction, …

70
ensuring there are avenues available to them,” illustrating the emphasis on tailored educational
experiences.
Teacher F discussed engaging students’ interests and connecting them to real-world
opportunities: “We focus on what students are interested in and how we can make that happen,
offering access to education, internships, and growth opportunities.” This statement reflects how
the school supports students in pursuing their goals and preparing for future challenges. Further
elaborating, Teacher F noted the positive impact on student motivation and engagement,
indicating a shift toward fostering critical thinking and assertiveness: “Students work harder and
smarter, recognizing their role in their education and asking questions.”
Finally, Teacher J highlighted the value of active participants in their learning: “It’s about
helping students realize they’re the owners of their education. We support them in learning how
to process information and inquire meaningfully, fostering an environment where asking
questions and seeking relevance becomes a norm.” This statement underscores raising student
awareness about their education. The principals’ practice of offering students a “social justice
education” (Shields, p. 96, 2018) ensures the development of students as engaged, informed, and
adaptable individuals ready to navigate and contribute to a complex global society.
Redistributing Power
Teachers described their principals’ efforts to redistribute power in the school, an
essential aspect of transformative leadership inspired by Freire’s (1978) concept of critical
pedagogy. The high school principals are recognized for promoting shared decision-making and
empowering staff and students, reflecting Freire’s advocacy for a more democratic and
participative educational environment. By decentralizing authority, they foster collaboration and

71
a sense of ownership among all school community members, challenging traditional power
dynamics and encouraging active participation.
Teachers’ reflections illustrate how their principals redistribute power at their schools,
aligning with transformative leadership ideals that encourage shared decision-making and
empowerment across the school community. Teacher F highlighted the principal’s facilitation of
collaborative environments: “We can access and share information with the departments, …
allowing us to take ownership and have our ideas heard among colleagues.” This approach
fosters a sense of agency among staff and promotes a participatory culture. Moreover, Teacher D
discussed the inclusive decision-making process: “We had a voice in the material and learning
direction, … leading to greater buy-in from us and, subsequently, our students.” This
engagement translates into a more committed implementation of educational strategies. Further
elaborating, Teacher D added, “We become force multipliers with our departments and students,
spreading levels of support organically.” This statement underscores the ripple effect of
empowering educators, which enhances student support networks.
Teacher G described how the principal encourages innovation and risk-taking: “Our
principal allowed some people to take it on, sell it, show that it works, … encouraging us to take
ownership of our teaching and to innovate in our way.” This autonomy supports a culture where
teachers feel empowered to try new methods and contribute to the school’s direction. Lastly,
Teacher B noted the principal’s trust in staff expertise: “Our principal is very confident in our
abilities and lets the experts handle things without mandating specifics.” This confidence allows
professionals at the school to leverage their strengths, enhancing the overall educational
experience.

72
Discussion Research Question 2
Interview data revealed the transformative leadership practices teachers identified that
contribute to increasing student achievement. Through detailed interviews, teachers provided
insights into their principals’ leadership styles, revealing a strong alignment between the
transformative practices identified by teachers and those enacted by their principals. Teachers
across all participating high schools emphasized several transformative leadership practices,
emphasizing emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion, a strong mandate for change, and a
balanced approach to critique and promise. This indicates a shared vision for a learning
environment that is inclusive, equitable, and responsive to all students’ needs. The effort to
balance the public and private good was observed, with a slightly higher emphasis noted in
School 2, illustrating an understanding of the dual goals of personal academic success and
preparing students for societal contribution.
The challenge to knowledge frameworks was consistently noted across schools, although
with varying emphasis, reflecting a commitment to critically evaluating and evolving educational
practices to serve students better. Moral courage, interconnectedness, global awareness, and the
necessity for interdependence were also recognized, emphasizing a holistic approach to
leadership that prepares students for a complex global society. Interestingly, the practice of
redistributing power was acknowledged similarly by principals as a critical leadership practice.
Nevertheless, it was only highlighted by a few teachers in two schools, suggesting a need for
more democratic and participative decision-making processes.
The prioritization of collaboration and shared decision-making encapsulates the
principals’ dedication to creating a democratic, equitable, and inclusive school culture. For
instance, teachers described how their principals delegate significant decision-making

73
responsibilities, fostering a sense of ownership and collective responsibility among staff and
students. This approach, highlighted by van Oord (2013), emphasizes engaging in a critical and
collaborative process to achieve effective educational leadership. Additionally, teachers shared
examples of how their principals advocate for and implement changes that directly benefit
student learning and well-being. This includes aligning educational practices with the needs of
diverse student populations and emphasizing seeing students as whole individuals, prepared for
various life paths beyond high school. Such practices demonstrate a commitment to the mandate
for change and reflect a deep understanding of the principals’ roles in navigating and addressing
the complexities of the educational environment.
Moreover, the principals’ efforts to foster a collaborative environment and encourage
staff to engage in creative problem-solving illustrate a practical application of their commitment
to inclusivity and empowerment. The formation of leadership teams among staff and students
exemplifies how principals actualize their vision for a social justice education.
In summary, the findings from teacher interviews reveal that principals in Title I high
schools actively implement transformative leadership practices to increase student achievement.
These practices encompass a broad spectrum of strategies aimed at fostering an educational
setting that is academically rigorous, socially equitable, and inclusive. The recognition of the
need to challenge and evolve knowledge frameworks, alongside the emphasis on moral courage
and fostering a global perspective, underscores the multifaceted approach these principals take
toward leadership. Despite the variability in the explicit recognition of redistributing power as a
leadership practice, the overarching commitment to democratizing the educational process is
evident in the principals’ actions and the positive impact these actions have on the school
community.

74
Summary
Research Question 1 focused on the extent to which principals in Title I high schools
implement transformative leadership practices to enhance student achievement, revealing
significant insights. Highlights from the study, informed by Vanderhaar et al. (2006), revealed a
strong link between principals’ tenure and increased achievement among SED students.
Principals with tenures of 8 and 9 years exemplify the benefits of experienced leadership on
student achievement. Interviews with principals show their deep commitment to transformative
leadership principles, particularly the balance between critique and promise, as outlined by
Shields (2018) and Quantz et al. (1991). This dual focus aims to critique systemic barriers and
pursue equitable futures for all students, highlighted by efforts to empower teachers and expand
opportunities for students.
Key transformative leadership themes emerged, including emphasizing democratic
values, equity, and fostering a supportive learning environment for all students. This is evident in
the varied leadership styles, from collaborative decision-making to building meaningful
relationships within the school community. Furthermore, the principals’ dedication to the
mandate for change demonstrates their strategic approach to overcoming educational challenges,
such as fostering student autonomy and aligning hiring practices with student demographics to
enhance community belonging. Notably, School Principal 3, the sole principal of color, aligned
profoundly with the mandate for change, suggesting a unique insight into the necessity of social
justice education. This observation indicates that a principal’s background might significantly
influence their approach to leadership, especially in advocating for reforms that promote
educational equity and inclusion.

75
Research Question 2 focused on the transformative leadership practices teachers
identified in their principals’ practices to increase student achievement. Interviews with teachers
revealed a strong alignment between the practices they identified and those their principals
emphasized. Transformative leadership practices highlighted include a focus on emancipation,
democracy, equity, inclusion, a mandate for change, and a balanced approach to critique and
promise, indicating a vision for an inclusive, equitable, and responsive learning environment.
Teachers at School 2 especially noted an effort to balance the public and private good,
pointing to a deep understanding of individual academic success and societal contributions.
Challenges to knowledge frameworks were acknowledged across all schools, although with
varying frequency, showcasing a commitment to evolving educational practices for better student
outcomes. Moreover, the significance of moral courage, interconnectedness, global awareness,
and interdependence was recognized, advocating for a holistic leadership approach that prepares
students for the complexities of a global society. Principals’ strategies for supporting and
implementing changes for student well-being, such as aligning educational practices with diverse
student populations and emphasizing holistic student development, demonstrate a commitment to
systemic transformation.
Lastly, while principals frequently acknowledged the redistribution of power through
inclusive decision-making and empowering teacher leadership via professional development,
teachers in two of the three schools underscored its importance, suggesting a value for
democratic and participatory decision-making. Teachers’ descriptions of principals delegating
significant decision-making responsibilities emphasize a dedication to fostering a democratic,
equitable, and inclusive school culture, as emphasized by the engagement in critical and

76
collaborative processes van Oord (2013) highlighted. The next chapter provides implications for
practice and recommendations for future research.

77
Chapter Five: Discussion
Chapter Five summarizes findings related to the implications of adopting transformative
leadership practices to increase the academic achievement of SED students. It examined the
critical role of leadership practices in challenging mindsets and knowledge frameworks
perpetuating inequities to foster an educational environment centered on equity, inclusion, and
social justice. This chapter discusses key research findings to inform current and aspiring
education leaders to develop competencies in equity-focused leadership and foster equitable
outcomes among students to ensure they are contributing members of society. The chapter
concludes with recommendations for future research to explore the nuanced dynamics of
leadership in promoting educational equity.
This study explored the leadership practices of school principals in three high-performing
Title I high schools in Los Angeles County. Its primary aim was to determine the influence of
these practices on creating equitable and inclusive educational environments for SED students.
Recent studies indicate that approximately one in five schoolchildren lives in poverty (Brighouse
et al., 2018). Because of higher poverty rates, the achievement gap between SED students and
their affluent peers widened, underscoring the persistent disparity in educational opportunities
(Jang & Reardon, 2019). This growing disparity emphasizes the need to examine effective
leadership practices at high-performing Title I schools, which predominantly serve SED students
with increased academic achievement.
The challenges of educational disparities and inequities require high school
administrators to adopt transformative leadership practices (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields &
Hesbol, 2020). Such practices foster equitable and inclusive learning environments and
positively influence student achievement by altering knowledge frameworks that perpetuate

78
deficit thinking. Further research indicates a strong link between transformative leadership and
principal practices prioritizing equity and inclusion (Caldwell et al., 2012; Shields & Hesbol,
2020). These practices involve school principals critically addressing social justice issues and
challenging the status quo to create equitable and inclusive educational settings (Grissom et al.,
2021; Shields, 2018). Moreover, the emphasis on leveraging students’ cultural wealth indicates a
valuable approach to enriching the learning environment and promoting intellectual achievement
where all students can thrive.
This study sheds light on using transformative leadership practices to increase student
achievement in the context of Title I schools serving SED students. Bridging the gap in the
literature, it investigates the correlation between effective leadership practices and the principles
of transformative leadership theory, underscoring their collective impact on educational equity
and student success. Transformative leadership, characterized by its focus on equity, inclusion,
and social justice, empowers leaders to inspire change in knowledge frameworks that perpetuate
deficit thinking and pedagogical practices, fostering a learning environment that promotes
students’ intellectual achievement (Shields, 2018). Other studies indicate the significant
influence of principal leadership on student academic outcomes (Grissom et al., 2021; Shields &
Hesbol, 2020), highlighting the necessity for principals to critically evaluate traditional
leadership models and embrace approaches that address the multifaceted, culturally unique needs
of students and their families. The following questions guided this research:
1. To what extent do school principals in Title I high schools employ transformative
leadership practices to increase student achievement?
2. What transformative leadership practices do teachers in Title I high schools identify in
their principals’ efforts to increase student achievement?

79
This qualitative case study gathered data from principals and teachers in three Title I high
schools in Los Angeles County. This method allowed strategic comparison of separately
analyzed qualitative data. I conducted separate semi-structured interviews with flexible questions
at each site with the school principal and four teachers. A qualitative analysis of the school
principal and teachers’ interview findings was performed in correlation to Shields’s (2018) eight
tenets of transformative leadership to explain, refine, and develop the quantitative results.
Findings
Study findings unveil a strong connection between effective leadership practices and the
eight principles of transformative leadership theory. The study confirms an alignment between
three high school principals’ leadership practices and the transformative framework, yet it also
reveals various implementation levels. This variation suggests that while some leadership
practices strongly reflect transformative leadership tenets, others are adopted to a lesser degree.
There is a notable consensus between the three principals and 12 teachers on the transformative
practices of emancipation, democracy, and equity, balance critique with promise, and a mandate
for change. However, discrepancies emerge in areas such as challenging knowledge frameworks,
redistributing power, exhibiting moral courage, balancing private and public good, and the tenet
of interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness. Although some leadership
practices are deeply infused with the transformative framework, others are applied with varying
degrees of emphasis. This analysis bridges the theoretical foundation of transformative
leadership and its practical implementation, illuminating areas of strength and highlighting
opportunities for further alignment with educational leadership practices. The following
discussion integrates these findings with the literature and current educational practices, offering
insights into future leadership development and research implications.

80
Research Question 1
Analyzing interview responses from each Title I high school reveals insights into the
transformative beliefs and practices school principals adopt. These findings correlate their
current leadership practices with the eight transformative leadership principles. The first findings
of the principals’ interview responses disclose that their leadership is deeply rooted in the
transformative beliefs and practices outlined by Shields (2018) and Quantz et al. (1991).
Shields’s concept of balancing critique with promise resonates strongly in the principals’ actions,
highlighting their commitment to critiquing systemic barriers while actively pursuing equitable
and promising futures for their students. As seen in School Principal 1’s dedication to
empowering teachers and providing students with various opportunities, this dual approach
addresses inequities and fosters an inclusive culture that promotes students’ success.
The mandate for change resonated through the principals’ proactive strategies for student
support and advocacy. Reflecting on the mandate for equitable change Quantz et al. (1991)
discussed, the principals demonstrate a deep understanding of and response to the inherent
conflicts and contradictions in the educational system. School Principal 2’s commitment to
fostering student autonomy, self-efficacy, and self-directed learning serves as an example.
Additionally, School Principal 3’s intentional hiring practices aim to mirror the student body’s
demographics and foster a sense of belonging and representation. Significantly, School Principal
3, the only principal of color among those interviewed, exhibited the highest number of
responses aligned with the mandate for change and challenging and reshaping knowledge
frameworks. This finding prompts a deeper consideration of the potential correlation between the
principal’s personal experiences as a person of color and an understanding of the urgency for
social justice education. This connection highlights the possible influence of a principal’s

81
background on their leadership priorities and strategies, particularly in advocating reforms that
advance equity and inclusion (Waite & Wilkerson, 2023).
Principals’ interview responses confirmed that practices emphasizing emancipation,
democracy, equity, and inclusion support balanced relationships in educational settings. School
principals’ collaboration and shared decision-making style are critical for developing an
environment where every student and staff member feels valued and supported, thus fostering a
democratic and unified school culture (Bieneman, 2011). Through the commitment among the
school principals to create a democratic, inclusive educational environment, interview responses
demonstrate how they actively alter the culture of power that perpetuates inequality. School
principals exemplify this through inclusive decision-making, empowering teacher leadership,
amplifying student voice and agency, and employing culturally responsive leadership. These
practices challenge traditional hierarchical structures and foster a culture where the voices of
teachers and students actively shape the learning environment (Madhlangobe & Gordon, 2012).
While the findings assert a strong emphasis on the transformative practices of
emancipation, democracy, equity, and inclusion; mandate for change; balance critique with
promise; and redistributing power, there is a lack of explicit emphasis on challenging knowledge
frameworks, exhibiting moral courage, balancing private and public good, and the tenet of
interconnectedness, interdependence, and global awareness.
The three school principals demonstrated distinct approaches to challenging knowledge
frameworks at their schools, each emphasizing a different aspect of transformative leadership.
Transformative leaders shift knowledge frameworks among teachers that perpetuate deficit
thinking and inequity (Bieneman, 2011). They shift conversations, conduct classroom
observations, and establish professional learning communities to promote a new paradigm that

82
values inclusion (Shields, 2018; Vanderhaar et al., 2006). Principal 1 focused on collective
responsibility by redefining the A through G requirements from merely college readiness metrics
to broader indicators of student success, thereby challenging the narrow perceptions of academic
achievement. This approach aligns with the concept of collective responsibility highlighted by
Fullan (2007), who stresses the shared duty among educators to ensure every student’s learning
and success. Conversely, Principals 2 and 3 promoted critical reflection among teachers through
varied methods. Principal 2 utilized collegial classroom visits to foster a culture of open dialogue
and reflective practice, while Principal 3 implemented professional learning communities that
use data analysis to inform teaching strategies. Both methods underscore the importance of
critical reflection in educational transformation, as Caldwell et al. (2012) and Shields (2018)
advocate.
While the findings assert a strong focus on increasing student academic achievement
among principals, there needs to be a more explicit emphasis on the tenet of the balance of
private and public good and the principle of interconnectedness, interdependence, and global
awareness. Shields (2018) emphasized that education extends beyond individual academic
achievement and personal accolades. It encompasses preparing students to contribute actively to
society, benefiting everyone. Principals 1 and 3 emphasize meeting academic benchmarks like
the A through G requirements. Conversely, Principal 2 stresses holistic student development
through extracurricular activities. However, these efforts primarily target individual achievement
rather than broader societal contributions. Further clarity of implementation on preparing
students for societal roles is needed to ensure a well-rounded education (Shields & Hesbol,
2020).

83
Moreover, findings from principal interviews describing interconnectedness,
interdependence, and global awareness revealed that their primary focus remains on equipping
students with a rigorous and relevant curriculum that prepares them for post-secondary
opportunities. Analysis of the responses found that principals identified the goal of education as
ensuring students have a wide range of opportunities for individual intellectual development.
School Principal 3 highlights the school’s dedication to fostering individual intellectual
development, “The performance of our population of students … measured through A to G rate.”
School Principal 2 believes in preparing students in skills and knowledge they will need beyond
high school: “It’s about more than just academics; it’s about involvement in leadership, clubs,
and athletics.”
A finding unrelated to transformative leadership confirmed the correlation between SED
student achievement and the principals’ tenure. In this study, two principals have led their
schools for 8 years, while another for 9 years. This finding suggests that experience, particularly
leadership spanning more than 7 years, is critical in fostering higher student achievement. The
tenure and knowledge of school leaders are consistent with the work of Vanderhaar et al. (2006)
and Grissom and Sutcher (2018), showcasing the impact of experienced leadership on student
achievement outcomes.
Research Question 2
Interview data revealed the transformative leadership practices teachers identified that
contribute to improving student achievement. Teachers provided insights into their principals’
leadership styles, revealing a strong correlation between the eight transformative practices and
those enacted by their principals. Teachers across the three high schools emphasized several
transformative leadership practices, emphasizing emancipation, democracy, equity, and

84
inclusion, a strong mandate for change, and a balanced approach to critique and promise. This
indicates a shared vision for a learning environment that is inclusive, equitable, and responsive to
all students’ needs. The prioritization of collaboration and shared decision-making encapsulates
the principals’ dedication to creating a democratic, equitable, and inclusive school culture. For
instance, teachers said their principals delegate significant decision-making responsibilities,
fostering a sense of ownership and collective responsibility among staff and students. This
approach, as van Oord (2013) highlighted, emphasizes engaging in a critical and collaborative
process to achieve effective educational leadership.
Additionally, teachers shared examples of how their principals advocate for and
implement changes that directly benefit student learning and well-being. This includes aligning
educational practices with the needs of diverse student populations and emphasizing seeing
students as whole individuals, prepared for various life paths beyond high school. Such practices
demonstrate a commitment to the mandate for change and reflect a deep understanding of the
principals’ roles in navigating and addressing the complexities of the educational environment.
In addition to the mandate for change, the teachers’ responses to their principals’
practices underscore a strategic approach to leadership that navigates educational challenges to
create opportunities for all students, disregarding their background. The balance between critique
and promise is a crucial aspect of transformative leadership, as it involves acknowledging current
inequities and challenges while fostering a vision for a more equitable and inclusive future. This
aspect of transformative leadership is particularly significant for Title 1 schools, where students
often face numerous barriers. It embodies the principle that transformative leaders must critique
current practices and policies to envision and implement strategies that promote equity and
excellence for all students.

85
The effort to balance the public and private good was evident, with a slightly higher
emphasis noted in School 2, illustrating an understanding of the dual goals of personal academic
success and preparing students for societal contribution (Bieneman, 2011). Teacher F described
the school culture as equitable and inclusive but change-oriented:
Our principal has been exceptional at focusing on groups that typically don’t get much
attention. A student is a student. It doesn’t matter their background, color, or where
they’re from. They have every opportunity and every right to the opportunities and the
tools necessary for success.
Teacher interview responses also found that their administrator identified and challenged
inequities while courageously advocating for equity and making tough decisions. At least two
teachers from each school conveyed their principal’s willingness to engage in challenging
decisions and discussions to prioritize students’ welfare and academic success through open,
inclusive, and transparent communication. Teacher A noted, “Our principal always facilitates
difficult conversations, … keeping it student-centered. Let’s return to the essential question:
what is best for students?” Meanwhile, Teacher F added, “Communication is key. … Our
principal doesn’t hold anything back, sharing the good, bad, or ugly.” Shields (2010) described
this leadership quality as the ability to identify and challenge inequities in educational settings
while courageously advocating for ethical change.
At least one teacher from each site also mentioned the importance of interconnectedness,
global awareness, and interdependence, emphasizing the role of principals in fostering a holistic
approach to leadership that prepares students for a complex global society. The teachers
emphasized extending learning beyond the classroom to encompass global perspectives. The
principals’ practice of offering students a social justice education ensures the development of

86
students as engaged, informed, and adaptable individuals ready to navigate and contribute to a
complex global society. The teachers’ emphasis on academic outcomes, while acknowledging
the broader goal of preparing students for a complex global society, further underscores the role
of principals in fostering a global perspective among students.
Principals acknowledged redistributing power and challenging knowledge frameworks as
a critical leadership practice. Yet, only a few teachers in two schools highlighted it. Teachers
described their principals’ efforts to redistribute power in the school, an essential aspect of
transformative leadership inspired by Freire’s (1978) concept of critical pedagogy. The high
school principals are recognized for promoting shared decision-making and empowering staff
and students, reflecting Freire’s advocacy for a more democratic and participative educational
environment. Teachers illustrate redistributing power from Teacher F’s appreciation for the
collaborative environments to Teacher G’s reflection on encouraging innovation. Teacher D’s
insights on the participatory decision-making process and the organic support spread throughout
the school community.
All three principals identified challenging knowledge frameworks, but only a small
number of teachers in two schools recognized this. Teachers articulated how their principals
actively challenge traditional knowledge frameworks and foster the development of new,
equitable approaches to reduce inequities and eliminate deficit thinking. Teacher D noted the
strategic assignment of skilled teachers to diverse student groups to encourage high expectations
and collaboration. Moreover, Teacher G highlighted the engagement in reflective practice to
create effective strategies for classroom improvement. Lastly, Teacher E discussed the
importance of fostering a growth mindset, especially about collaborative practices and data use.

87
These actions reflect the importance of inclusive and equitable educational practices, as scholars
like Ladson-Billings (1995) and Shields and Hesbol (2020) noted.
Limitations
Although the study’s findings regarding transformative leadership practices in highachieving Title I schools align with the literature, it is important to acknowledge several
limitations that affect the study’s generalizability, internal validity, and potential for biases. A
significant constraint to generalizability arises from the study’s small sample and the specific
contexts of the schools involved. As Patton (2002) pointed out, broadly applying research
findings is a crucial aspect of research validity. However, this study’s focus on three highachieving Title I schools in LA County limits the range of educational environments and
contexts explored, thereby narrowing the applicability of its findings.
Its reliance on self-reported interview data also challenges the study’s internal validity.
While rich in qualitative information, such data are susceptible to selection bias, where
participants may present an overly favorable view of their environment (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The dependence on self-reporting can obscure a genuinely objective understanding of the
success factors in the three high schools. Additionally, the method used to select interviewees
may have introduced selection bias. The principals’ autonomy in choosing which teachers to
interview might have skewed the selection toward those with views similar to their own or whom
they perceived as more positive toward the school’s practices, thus not fully representing a wide
range of perspectives (Maxwell, 2013). The process by which my dissertation chair contacted the
superintendent to remind principals to select teachers for interviews could have exacerbated the
selection bias. This might have caused the principals to choose participants who were more

88
accessible or familiar rather than ensuring a thoughtful and balanced selection of interviewees
(Patton, 2002).
To mitigate these limitations, future research should include a more extensive and diverse
sample of schools across the United States to enhance the generalizability of the findings.
Employing mixed-methods research designs would strengthen the study’s internal validity by
providing a more complex analysis that integrates qualitative and quantitative data (Lochmiller
& Lester, 2017). Moreover, implementing randomized procedures for selecting interviewees
could help reduce biases, ensuring a more comprehensive collection of perspectives is
represented (Patton, 2002).
Implications for Practice
This study explored the relationship between effective leadership practices and the
principles of transformative leadership theory, examining how the eight tenets of transformative
leadership correlate with school principal practices. The findings confirm a connection between
school principals’ leadership practices and the transformative framework, yet they also uncover
varied levels of practice implementation. This variability highlights that while some practices
closely align with the tenets of transformative leadership, others still need to be fully adopted.
Such insights offer guidance for aspiring and current educational school site and district leaders,
suggesting the importance of consistently applying transformative leadership principles to
promote equitable educational outcomes and empower students as active, contributing members
of society.
Two critical implications from this study address leadership practice and future research
directions. The first is the need for revisions in principal preparation programs to integrate
transformative leadership theory. The second implication calls for aligning the California

89
Professional Standards for Education Leaders (CPSELs) and transformative leadership and social
justice theory, ensuring school leaders consistently implement equity-focused practices. These
recommendations aim to foster theoretically informed leadership that is practical in achieving
equity and social justice in K–12 or higher education settings.
Principal Preparation Programs
An essential implication for educational leadership preparation programs is integrating
curriculum and pedagogy that acknowledges and engages with power, positionality, and
privilege dynamics. Drawing upon critical pedagogy theories pioneered by Paulo Freire and the
principles of transformative leadership Shields (2010) outlined, programs should prepare future
school leaders to identify and challenge systemic inequalities for marginalized students,
including SED students. The theoretical perspectives of critical social theory and transformative
leadership will only be helpful to preservice administrators if the programs can make the learning
engaging and relevant. According to Brown (2004), “the bridge to theory and practice is to make
connections between course material and the broader social context” (p. 89). Theory and
implementation include
• Integration of social, cultural, and transformative frameworks into the curriculum
• Exploration of critical pedagogy: Building on Paulo Freire’s (1970) work in
Pedagogy of the Oppressed, courses can introduce future leaders to the
importance of dialogical education and problem-posing methods. This
foundation encourages educators to see students as co-creators of knowledge
and critically examine educational systems’ power structures.
• Understanding power, positionality, and privilege: Courses must guide future
administrators through a deep understanding of how societal power dynamics,

90
personal positionality, and unearned privilege affect educational opportunities
and outcomes, as advocated by researchers such as Eve Tuck, Kimberle
Crenshaw, Ty-Ron Douglas & Christine Nganga, and W.E. Du Bois. This
includes examining how leaders’ backgrounds and beliefs impact their
decisions and interactions with students and staff.
• Culturally responsive leadership: Integrating curricula that emphasize
culturally responsive leadership, as advocated by researchers such as Daniel
Solorzano, Geneva Gay, Gloria Ladson-Billings, and Tara Yosso, helps
leaders recognize the cultural assets and strengths that students of diverse
backgrounds bring to the educational environment. This approach encourages
educational leaders to create inclusive and affirming school cultures that
respect and utilize marginalized students and their communities’ cultural
knowledge, prior experiences, and frames of reference.
• Transformative leadership: Drawing on Shields’ (2010, 2018, 2020) research,
programs can explore and apply the eight principles of transformative
leadership that prioritize equity, justice, and the removal of systemic barriers
in education. Shields’ work, particularly in “Transformative Leadership in
Education: Equitable and Socially Just Change in an Uncertain and Complex
World” (2018), offers a framework for leaders to enact change that supports
all students. Developing transformative leaders for social justice.
• Pedagogical practices
• Critical reflection (Brown, 2004; Gordon & Ronder, 2016) - Reflective
practice enables future school leaders to continually assess their biases,

91
decision-making processes, and the impacts of their leadership on students
and communities. This reflective practice is essential for developing
leadership that is both aware and adaptive to the needs of diverse student
populations. Examples of critical reflection include
• Reflective dialogue or writing journal with the response from a
professor or cohort member.
• Auto-ethnography – analysis or narrative of students’ cultural identity
and views on diversity.
• Rational discourse, defined by Brown (2004), is a commitment to extended
and repeated conversations that validate meaning by assessing reasons,
weighing supporting evidence, examining alternative perspectives, and
assessing assumptions. Activities include:
• Conduct cross-cultural interviews
• Community mapping. McCausland and Bateman (2023) described
walking tours as a way for students to learn firsthand what is essential
about their community. The process includes creating an initial map,
going on a tour with a tour guide (student, parents, community
member, etc.), asking questions during the walk, reflecting on your
map, and creating a final map.
• Field experience: Perez et al. (2011) referred to field-based experiences as an
intensive, 18-month internship designed to address genuine and authentic
issues within the context of education. More importantly, it provides aspiring
leaders with critical reflection, enabling them to observe and understand the

92
leadership practices of school principals committed to equity and social
justice.
• Action research is inquiry-based research that involves identifying an
achievement problem of a target student group, planning, gathering
data, reviewing the literature on the theory and best practices, making
observations, and developing professional development to support
student achievement and reflection.
• Conduct equity audits to examine school structures that support
student academic achievement. It includes a group of educators
conducting classroom observation and other data collection activities
focused on an equity-related problem of practice (Roegman et al.,
2020).
Integrating Transformative Leadership Theory Into California Professional Standards for
Education Leaders
As school leader preparation programs redesign their curricula to focus more on social,
cultural, and transformative frameworks, the CPSELs must be revised to reflect these contextual
changes. Incorporating elements that address diversity, inclusion, equity, and social justice
within the CPSELs will ensure that future school leaders are prepared to create educational
environments that promote equitable academic outcomes and cultivate students as successful,
responsible members of a diverse society (see Appendix C).
The integration of the Transformative Leadership tenets organizes CPSEL Standard 2
(Instructional Leadership) and CPSEL Standard 5 (Ethics and Integrity) through Shields’s (2010)
transformative leadership tenets. This integration aims to deepen the application of

93
transformative principles in education leadership, focusing on diversity, inclusion, equity, and
social justice within instructional and ethical standards.
Future Research
The study’s review of literature and findings highlight a need for more research into how
transformative leadership practices enhance the academic readiness and social awareness of all
students. Despite uncovering a strong link between effective leadership practices and the
principles of transformative leadership theory, the results revealed variations in implementation
levels. Therefore, further investigation should explore the factors affecting these variations and
examine how to integrate transformative leadership practices for the academic success of all
students, including those marginalized.
The first recommendation for future research involves triangulating additional data
sources to comprehensively understand school principals’ practices. This includes observations,
interviews with students, parents, and community members, and member checks. These methods
are pivotal for verifying that the interpretations align accurately with the principals’ actions and
the school’s culture. Using more than one data collection approach enriches the analysis,
allowing for a more nuanced and robust evaluation of leadership practices within the educational
setting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016)
There is a need for specific research on exemplary principal preparation programs that
foster transformative practices and social justice. As Trujillo and Cooper (2014) highlighted, it is
imperative to understand how theoretical concepts of social justice are integrated into preparation
programs and their practical applications. This includes analyzing the curriculum, course
sequencing, and the theoretical application within leadership preparation programs. Furthermore,
it is vital to explore the types of assessments used to measure the construction of knowledge,

94
attitudes, and skills to foster social justice (Trujillo & Cooper, 2014). Moreover, evaluating how
principal preparation programs maintain their integrity, mainly when introducing new staff or
faculty, is essential for ensuring they remain aligned with the principles of social justice and
transformative leadership. Lastly, it is necessary to investigate how principal preparation
programs can adapt and evolve in alignment with the current educational research and theories
that impact student achievement. Coviello et al. (2023) pointed out the need for preparation
programs to systematically implement data collection systems to foster continual improvement.
The final recommendation for future research emphasizes the necessity of incorporating
transformative and social justice frameworks into the performance standards for educational
leaders. This exploration should consider whether states have revised their performance
standards to encompass diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as core transformative and social
justice theory elements. Further inquiry is required to determine if, following such integration,
the evaluation processes for administrators have been updated to mirror these changes.
Integrating equity-focused standards that resonate with transformative and social justice theories
ensures these approaches are applied practically, not just theoretically (Gordon & Ronder, 2016).
Brown (2004) suggested that leaders committed to equity are dedicated to ongoing
learning. Aligning school principals’ evaluations with professional standards incorporating
transformative and social justice theories could facilitate continuous support. This alignment
allows for identifying specific professional development opportunities and mentoring
relationships that address gaps in meeting these standards. Research on highly effective principal
preparation programs highlights mentorship and the desire for further professional development
among leaders post-program completion (Grissom & Sutcher, 2018; Pounder, 2011; Perez et al.,
2011). Therefore, revising performance standards for administrators and aligning evaluation

95
tools for school principals set benchmarks for current practices and encourage continuous
improvement and professional growth in transformative leadership and social justice.
Conclusions
This study confirmed that high-achieving Title I high school principals implement
transformative leadership practices. They adopt various transformative practices that ensure
academic rigor and advocate for social equity and inclusivity. The drive to refine and challenge
knowledge paradigms and a dedication to mandating change and cultivating a global perspective
are testaments to the principals’ holistic and multifaceted approach to leadership.
Incorporating transformative leadership values into the professional standards for
education leaders requires collaborative efforts from policymakers and educational leaders. This
partnership aims to develop standards that foster equitable, inclusive education based on a
transformative theory framework. Moreover, it guarantees that professional standards accurately
reflect the complexities of providing all students with equitable, inclusive, and social justice
education. However, it is imperative to give the principals continuous support with a precise
alignment of professional standards and multiple frameworks, such as transformative leadership,
to inform and guide their practices. This foundation equips school principals to advocate for
equity and social justice and drives the larger educational field toward greater inclusivity and
fairness.
In summary, this study underscores the essence of transformative leadership implemented
by effective principals, highlighting an educational philosophy that transcends mere academic
success. It reveals a leadership style that intertwines critique with vision, empowering educators,
promoting a leadership framework for student development, and nurturing an environment
steeped in equity and inclusion. Such leadership prepares students for meaningful societal

96
engagement and showcases moral courage in confronting inequalities and challenging deficitoriented narratives. By integrating concepts of interconnectedness, advocating for systemic
change, and promoting culturally responsive practices, these principals create an educational
environment that is both inclusive and conducive to empowering students to achieve
academically and make impactful societal contributions.

97
References
Aguayo, D., Good, M. W., Diem, S., Herman, K. C., Burke, J., Davis, T., Hall, K., London, C.,
& Reinke, W. M. (2023). Promoting District-Level Culturally Responsive Practices.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(3), 471–506.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X231161041
Altonji JG, Mansfield RK. The Role of Family, School, and Community Characteristics in
Inequality in Education and Labor-Market Outcomes. In: Whither Opportunity?. Russell
Sage Foundation; 2011:339-358.
Allensworth, E., Hart, H., & Gordon, M. F. (2018). How do principals influence student
achievement? UChicago Consortium. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/howdo-principals-influence-student-achievement
Berends, M. (2014). Achievement gap. In D. Brewer & L. O. Picus (Eds.), Encyclopedia of
education economics & finance (Vol. 2, pp. 18–22). SAGE Publications.
Bieneman, P. D. (2011). Transformative leadership: The exercise of agency in educational
leadership. Counterpoints, 409, 221–237.
Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2013). School leaders matter: measuring the
impact of effective principals. Education Next, 13(1), 62-.
Brighouse, H., Kurlaender, M., Reardon, S., Doss, C., Reber, S., Kalogrides, D., & Reed, S.
(2018). Outcomes and demographics of California’s schools. Getting Down to Facts II.
https://gettingdowntofacts.com/publications/outcomes-and-demographics-californiasschools

98
Brown, K. M. (2004). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative
framework and pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 77–108.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X03259147
Burney, V., & Beilke, J. (2008). The constraints of poverty on high achievement. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 31(3), 295–321. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2008-771
Caldwell, C., Dixon, R. D., Floyd, L. A., Chaudoin, J., Post, J., & Cheokas, G. (2012).
Transformative leadership: Achieving unparalleled excellence. Journal of Business
Ethics, 109(2), 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1116-2
California Department of Education. (n.d.). The Williams Case - An Explanation - Williams
Case (CA Dept of Education). https://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/ce/wc/wmslawsuit.asp.
California Department of Education. (2021). DataQuest. http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
Campos-Moreira, L. D., Cummings, M. I., Grumbach, G., Williams, H. E., & Hooks, K. (2020).
Making a case for culturally humble leadership practices through a culturally responsive
leadership framework. Human Service Organizations, Management, Leadership &
Governance, 44(5), 407–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2020.1822974
Chmielewski, A. K., & Reardon, S. F. (2016). Patterns of cross-national variation in the
association between income and academic achievement. AERA Open, 2(3).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416649593
Cooper, C. W. (2009). Performing cultural work in demographically changing schools:
Implications for expanding transformative leadership frameworks. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 45(5), 694–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X09341639
Curto, V., Fryer, R., & Howard, M. It May Not Take a Village: Increasing Achievement Among
the Poor. In: Whither Opportunity?. Russell Sage Foundation; 2011:483-505.

99
Coviello, J., Birringer-Haig, J. I., & Aquino, K. C. (2023). Structures for continuous
improvement in principal preparation. Phi Delta Kappan, 105(4), 32–36.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217231219402
Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: How
Successful School Leaders Use Transformational and Instructional Strategies to Make a
Difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258.
Dayton, J., & Dupre, A. P. (2006). The Spirit of Serrano Past, Present, and Future. Journal of
Education Finance, 32(1), 22–35.
Douglas, T. R., & Nganga, C. (2015). What’s Radical Love Got to Do with It: Navigating
Identity, Pedagogy, and Positionality in Pre-Service Education. International Journal of
Critical Pedagogy, 6(1).
Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ. Whither Opportunity?: Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life
Chances. 1st ed. Russell Sage Foundation u.a; 2011:xix-xix.
Dutta, V., & Sahney, S. (2016). School leadership and its impact on student achievement.
International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), 941–958.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2014-0170
Frankenberg, E., & Taylor, K. (2015). ESEA and the Civil Rights Act: An Interbranch Approach
to Furthering Desegregation. RSF : Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social
Sciences, 1(3), 32–49. https://doi.org/10.7758/rsf.2015.1.3.02
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.
Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

100
Gay G. Acting on Beliefs in Teacher Education for Cultural Diversity. Journal of teacher
education. 2010;61(1-2):143-152. doi:10.1177/0022487109347320
Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2007). The race between education and technology. Harvard
University Press.
Gordon, S. P., & Ronder, E. A. (2016). Perceptions of culturally responsive leadership inside and
outside of a principal preparation program. International Journal of Educational Reform,
25(2), 125–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/105678791602500202
Gordon, S. P., & Solis, R. D. (2018). Teacher leaders of collaborative action research:
Challenges and Rewards. i.e.: inquiry in education, 10(2), article 3.
Gottfried, M., & Ream, R. (2014). Socioeconomic status and education. In D. Brewer & L. O.
Picus (Eds.), Encyclopedia of education economics & finance (Vol. 2, pp. 688–691).
SAGE Publications.
Grissom, J. A., Egalite, A. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (2021). How principals affect students and
schools: A systematic synthesis of two decades of research. The Wallace Foundation.
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/principalsynthesis
Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating Principal Effectiveness: How Perspectives of
Parents, Teachers, and Assistant Principals Identify the Central Importance of Managerial
Skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1091-1123.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211402663
Grissom, J. A., & Sutcher, L. (2018). The development and distribution of school leadership in
California. Getting Down to Facts II.
https://gettingdowntofacts.com/publications/development-and-distribution-schoolleadership-california

101
Guinier, L. (2004). From Racial Liberalism to Racial Literacy: Brown v. Board of Education and
the Interest-Divergence Dilemma. The Journal of American History (Bloomington, Ind.),
91(1), 92–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/3659616.
Gümüş, S., Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Pietsch, M. (2022). School leadership and achievement gaps based
on socioeconomic status: A search for socially just instructional leadership. Journal of
Educational Administration, 60(4), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-11-2021-0213
Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: lessons from 40 years of empirical research.
Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111116699
Harding D, Gennetian L, Winship C, Sanbonmatsu L, Kling J. Unpacking Neighborhood
Influences on Education Outcomes: Setting the Stage for Future Research. In: Whither
Opportunity?. Russell Sage Foundation; 2011:277-296.
Heckman, J. J. & LaFontaine, P. A. (2010). The American high school graduation rate: Trends
and levels. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(2), 244-262.
Hicks AL, Handcock MS, Sastry N, Pebley AR. Sequential Neighborhood Effects: The Effect of
Long-Term Exposure to Concentrated Disadvantage on Children’s Reading and Math
Test Scores. Demography. 2018;55(1):1-31. doi:10.1007/s13524-017-0636-5
Horng, E., & Loeb, S. (2010). New Thinking About Instructional Leadership. Phi Delta Kappan,
92(3), 66–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171009200319
Jang, H., & Reardon, S. F. (2019). States as sites of educational (in)equality: State contexts and
the socioeconomic achievement gradient. AERA Open, 5(3).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419872459

102
Jerdborg, S. (2022). Educating school leaders: Engaging in diverse orientations to leadership
practice. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(2), 287–309.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1770867
Johnson, R. C., & Tanner, S. (2018). Money and freedom: The impact of California’s school
finance reform (research brief). Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
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.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316630383
Kirst, M. W. (2007). The evolution of California’s state school finance system. Stanford, CA:
Stanford Institute for Research on Education Policy.
Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S. and Wahlstrom, K. (2004) How Leadership
Influences Student Learning. https://wallacefoundation.org/sites/default/files/2023-
07/How-Leadership-Influences-Student-Learning-Executive-Summary.pdf.
Levitan, J. (2020). Incorporating participant voice in culturally responsive leadership: A case
study. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 19(3), 390–406.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2019.1585546
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lynch, J. M. (2012) Instructional Leadership for Middle School Students with Disabilities in the
General Education Classroom: The Role of the Principal. Graduate Theses, Dissertations,
and Problem Reports. 641. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/641

103
MacNeil, A. J., Prater, D. L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects of school culture and climate on
student achievement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12(1), 73–84.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120701576241
Madhlangobe, L., & Gordon, S. P. (2012). Culturally responsive leadership in a diverse school:
A case study of a high school leader. NASSP Bulletin, 96(3), 177–202.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636512450909
Massey, K. J., Warrington, A. S., & Holmes, K. (2014). An overview on urban education: A
brief history and contemporary issues.Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design:
An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mccausland, J., & Bateman, K. M. (2023). Bringing the outside in: Using community mapping
and tours to create community in science classrooms. [National Science Teachers
Association]. Science Teacher, 90(7), 70–75.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00368555.2023.12315973
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 1999.
Milner, H. R., IV. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers
seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309471
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of
Education. https://nces.ed.gov/
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). The Condition of Education, 2020.

104
National Poverty Center. (n.d.). Poverty in the United States: Frequently asked questions.
University of Michigan. https://poverty.umich.edu/research-funding-opportunities/keyissues/poverty-facts
Nelson CA, Sheridan MA. Lessons from Neuroscience Research for Understanding Causal Links
Between Family and Neighborhood Characteristics and Educational Outcomes. In:
Whither Opportunity?. Russell Sage Foundation; 2011:27-46.
Nichols, S. L. & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts
America’s schools. Harvard Education Press.
Payen C. & Ortiz C. Doing the Impossible: The Limits of Schooling, the Power of Poverty. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2017;673(1):32-59.
doi:10.1177/0002716217719019Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation
methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Perez, L. G., Uline, C. L., Johnson, J. F., Jr., 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.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378614
Pounder, D. G. (2011). Leader preparation special issue: Implications for policy, practice, and
research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 258–267.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378615
Putnam, R. (2015). Our kids: The American Dream in crisis. Simon & Schuster.
Quantz, R. A., Rogers, J., & Dantley, M. (1991). Rethinking transformative leadership: Toward
democratic reform of Schools. Journal of Education, 173(3), 96–118.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002205749117300307

105
Reardon, S. (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 70(8), 10–
16.
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student
outcomes : an analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
Rodems, R., & Pfeffer, F. T. (2021). Avoiding material hardship: The buffer function of wealth.
Journal of European Social Policy, 31(5), 517–532.
https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211059043
Roegman R, Allen D, Leverett L, Thompson S, Hatch T. Equity Visits : A New Approach to
Supporting Equity-Focused School and District Leadership. Corwin, A SAGE company;
2020.
Rogers, J., Mirra, N., Seltzer, M., & Jun, J. (2014). It’s about time: Learning time and
educational opportunity in California high schools. UCLA IDEA.
Rosenbaum, S., & Schmucker, S. (2017). Viewing health equity through a legal lens: Title VI of
the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 42(5), 771–788.
https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-3940423
Sebastian, J., & Allensworth, E. (2012). The Influence of Principal Leadership on Classroom
Instruction and Student Learning: A Study of Mediated Pathways to Learning.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 626–663.
Shafiq, M. (Ed.). (2014). Benefits of primary and secondary education. In D. Brewer & L. O.
Picus (Eds) Encyclopedia of education economics & finance (Vol. 1, pp72-76). SAGE
Publications.

106
Shields, C. M. (2010). Transformative leadership: Working for equity in diverse contexts.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(4), 558–589.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X10375609
Shields, C. M. (2018). Transformative leadership in education: Equitable change in an uncertain
and complex world. Routledge.
Shields, C. M., & Hesbol, K. A. (2020). Transformative leadership approaches to inclusion,
equity, and Social Justice. Journal of School Leadership, 30(1), 3–22.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684619873343
Skinner, R. (2020). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESSA): A primer. [Library of
Congress public edition]. Congressional Research Service.
Stewner-Manzanares, G. (1988). The Bilingual Education Act: Twenty years later. The National
Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, Number 6. Retrieved from
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/rcd/BE021037/Fall88_6.pdf.
Thomas, W., & Brady, K. (2005). Chapter 3: The Elementary and Secondary Education Act at
40: Equity, accountability, and the evolving federal role in public education. Review of
Research in Education, 29(1), 51-67.
Tickle, B. R., Chang, M., & Kim, S. (2011). Administrative support and its mediating effect on
US public school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 342–349.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.09.002
Timar, T. (2006). Financing K-12 education in California: A system overview. Stanford, CA:
Stanford Institute for Research on Education Policy.
Trujillo, T., & Cooper, R. (2014). Framing social justice leadership in a university-based
preparation program: The University of California’s Principal Leadership Institute.

107
Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 9(2), 142–167.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775114525046
Tucker, P. D., Young, M. D., & Koschoreck, J. W. (2012). Leading research-based change in
educational leadership preparation: An introduction. Journal of Research on Leadership
Education, 7(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775112455267
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). U.S. Department of
Education. https://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Title I - Improving the Academic Achievement of the
Disadvantaged. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2017, March 22). IASA legislation, regulations, and guidance -
OESE. Home. Retrieved March 12, 2023, from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/legreg.html.
U.S. Department of Education. (2021, February 22). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/nclbinfo.html.
Valentine, J. W., & Prater, M. (2011). Instructional, Transformational, and Managerial
Leadership and Student Achievement: High School Principals Make a Difference.
NASSP Bulletin, 95(1), 5-30.
Vanderhaar, J. E., Munoz, M. A., & Rodosky, R. J. (2006). Leadership as accountability for
learning: The effects of school poverty, teacher experience, previous achievement, and
principal preparation programs on student achievement. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 42(4), 462–487.
van Oord, L. (2013). Towards transformative leadership in education. International Journal of
Leadership in Education, 16(4), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2013.776116

108
Waite, S. R., & Wilkerson, C. (2023). Are educational leaders of color truly able to lead for
equity? Maintaining the status quo or disrupting unequitable systems? Journal of Cases in
Educational Leadership, 26(4), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554589231198443
Walton-Fisette, J. L., & Montgomery, K. (2018). The impact of transformational leadership on
teacher expectations and student achievement. Journal of Educational Leadership in
Action, 6(3), 1–15.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Mid-continent
Research for Education and Learning.
Yin, R. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

109
Appendix A: Principal Interview Protocol
The following sections present the interview protocol used with principals in this study.
Introduction
Hello__________. How are you doing today? Thank you for taking the time to
participate in the interview. As I mentioned in my email, I am currently a student at USC and
conducting a study on the role of school principals in high-achieving Title I high schools. The
interview should take approximately 45 minutes to an hour. Is today still a good time for us to
meet?
This study aimed to determine the impact of school principal’s leadership practices on
enhancing student achievement for socioeconomically disadvantaged students, also known as
(SED) in Title I schools. The study specifically aims to investigate whether high-performing
Title I schools’ principals employ transformative leadership practices. I want to give you more
information about this study and answer any questions you may have about participating in this
interview. As previously stated in my email, this interview is confidential. Your name will not be
shared with anyone outside the research team, including other administrators or the district
office. The data gathered from this study will be compiled into a report. Although some of your
statements may be used as direct quotes, none of the data will directly link to you. Finally, I will
make every effort to keep any data gathered from you anonymous.
If you are interested, I will provide you with a copy of my final paper. All data will be
stored in a password-protected computer and destroyed after 3 years.
Before we begin, do you have any questions about the study? I have brought a recorder
with me (in-person interview), and I will record this Zoom today to ensure that I capture your
insights accurately. Please note that the recording is for my research purposes only and will not

110
be shared with anyone outside the research team. Is it okay with you if I record our conversation?
Finally, I want to remind you that you are welcome to skip any questions or stop participating
anytime. Ready?
Principal Interview Questions (With Transitions)
Introduction and Background
1. How did you become interested in the field of education? (background)
2. How long have you been the principal of this school?
3. What do you think is the purpose of education?
Topic: Your Leadership Perspective
In the following section, you will be asked to share more about your beliefs about
supporting SED students at your school site. Please respond to the following questions honestly;
your responses will remain anonymous, and your identity will remain confidential.
4. How would you describe your leadership style?
a. Can you describe an example of what it looks like in your practice?
b. How would your staff describe your leadership style?
c. How does your leadership style support the SED students’ academic
achievement?
5. What is your personal mission and vision as a school principal?
a. Why is that important?
b. How specifically does that benefit SED students in a Title I high school?
c. Can you give me an example of what that looks like on your campus?
d. Can you give me an example involving a student?
e. How do you ensure teachers commit to your mission and vision?

111
f. What are your expectations for your teachers?
Topic: Leadership Practices
Part of the school leader role typically requires making important and difficult decisions
for the school site. School leaders will often share the responsibilities of establishing and
supporting schoolwide goals, mentoring and providing constructive feedback to faculty, and
managing available school funds. In the following section, you will be asked to share more about
how you manage these processes as it relates to the needs of SED students.
6. What are some things you have done for students at your campus that you are most
proud of?
a. How were you able to accomplish this through your leadership?
b. Can you give me a specific example involving a student, class, or grade level?
c. How did this impact the school culture?
d. Why was it essential for you to accomplish this?
e. How does it align with your mission and vision as a principal?
f. How specifically does it benefit SED students at your campus?
g. How did it lead to high student achievement?
7. What are the most challenging tasks you have undertaken to promote the academic
success of SED students?
a. Can you give me one or more specific examples?
b. How were you able to accomplish this through your leadership?
c. Why was it essential for you to accomplish this?
8. Can you tell me one or more schoolwide initiatives you have implemented at your
school to support the learning needs of SED students?

112
Closing Question
9. Is there anything else you want to share regarding your leadership practices that increased
SED students’ academic achievement?
If, for some reason, you would like to add to the interview, here is my phone number and
email. Please let me know, and I will include it in my interview.

113
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Protocol
The following sections present the interview protocol used with teachers in this study.
Introduction
Hello__________. How are you doing today? Thank you for taking the time to
participate in the interview. As I mentioned in my email, I am currently a student at USC and
conducting a study on the role of school principals in high-achieving Title I high schools. The
interview should take approximately 45 minutes to an hour. Is today still a good time for us to
meet?
This study aims to determine the impact of school principals’ leadership practices on
enhancing student achievement for socioeconomically disadvantaged students, also known as
(SED) in Title I schools. The study specifically aims to investigate whether high-performing
Title I schools’ principals employ transformative leadership practices. I want to give you more
information about this study and answer any questions you may have about participating in this
interview. As previously stated in my email, this interview is confidential. Your name will not be
shared with anyone outside the research team, including other administrators or the district
office. The data gathered from this study will be compiled into a report. Although some of your
statements may be used as direct quotes, none of the data will directly link to you. Finally, I will
make every effort to keep any data gathered from you anonymous.
If you are interested, I will provide you with a copy of my final paper. All data will be
stored in a password-protected computer and destroyed after 3 years.
Before we begin, do you have any questions about the study? I have brought a recorder
with me (in-person interview), and I am going to record this Zoom today to ensure that I capture
your insights accurately. Please note that the recording is for my research purposes only and will

114
not be shared with anyone outside the research team. Is it okay with you if I record our
conversation? Finally, I want to remind you that you are welcome to skip any questions or stop
participating anytime. Ready?
Introduction and Background
1. How did you become interested in the field of education? (background)
2. How long have you been at this school site, and how long have you worked with
the current principal?
3. What do you think is the purpose of education?
Topic: Your Principal’s Leadership Perspective
In the following section, you will be asked to share more about your principal’s personal
beliefs in relation to supporting SED students at your school site. Please respond to the following
questions honestly; your responses will remain anonymous, and your identity will remain
confidential.
4. How would you describe your principal’s leadership style?
a. Can you describe an example of what it looks like in their practice?
b. How does their leadership style support the SED students’ academic
achievement?
5. What do you think is your principal’s mission and vision as a school principal?
a. Why do you think that is important to them?
b. How specifically does that benefit SED students in your Title I high school?
c. Can you give me an example of what that looks like on your campus?
d. Can you give me an example involving a student?
e. How does s/he ensure the faculty commits to their mission and vision?

115
Topic: Principal’s practices
Part of the school leader role typically requires making important and difficult decisions
for the school site. School leaders will often share the responsibilities of establishing and
supporting schoolwide goals, mentoring and providing constructive feedback to faculty, and
managing available school funds. In the following section, you will be asked to share more about
how your principal manages these processes as it relates to the needs of SED students.
6. What are some things your principal has done for students that you are most
proud of?
a. How was s/he able to accomplish this through their leadership?
b. Can you give me a specific example involving a student, class, or grade level?
c. How did this impact the school culture?
d. Why do you think it was essential for them to accomplish this?
e. Does this align with the mission and vision of the principal?
f. How specifically does it benefit SED students at your campus?
g. How did it lead to high student achievement?
7. What are the most challenging tasks your principal has undertaken to promote the
academic success of SED students?
a. Can you give me one or more specific examples?
b. How were they able to accomplish this through their leadership practices?
c. Why was it essential for them to accomplish this?
d. How did this affect your expectations?
8. Can you tell me one or more schoolwide initiatives your school principal has
implemented at your school to support the learning needs of SED students?

116
Closing Question
9. Is there anything else you want to share regarding your principals’ leadership
practices that increased SED students’ academic achievement?
If, for some reason, you would like to add to the interview, here is my phone number and
email. Please let me know, and I will include it in my interview.

117
Appendix C: Revised California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders With DIE

118

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative case study explored the application of transformative leadership practices by principals in high-achieving Title I high schools across Los Angeles County. The focus was on understanding how these practices create an equitable and inclusive learning environment for socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) students. By examining the relationship between effective leadership practices and the eight principles of transformative leadership theory, the study sought to uncover how school leaders implement such practices and how teachers perceive these implementation practices. Two research questions guided this study: To what extent do principals in Title I high schools employ transformative leadership practices to increase student achievement? What transformative leadership practices do teachers in Title I schools identify in their principals’ efforts to improve student achievement? Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with principals and teachers, allowing for a detailed comparison and analysis of perspectives. The study’s findings reveal a significant link between the principals’ leadership practices and transformative leadership principles, highlighting the strengths and areas for further development. This analysis reinforces the theoretical underpinnings of transformative leadership. It offers insights into its practical application, suggesting a pathway toward more aligned and effective educational leadership centered on equity, inclusion, and social justice.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused high school principals

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused high school principals

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused elementary school principals

PDF

Leadership matters: the role of urban school principals as transformational leaders in influencing parent engagement to disrupt educational inequities

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused elementary principals

PDF

Effective school leadership: practices that promote a culture of high student achievement

PDF

Let's hear it from the principals: a study of four Title One elementary school principals' leadership practices on student achievement

PDF

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

PDF

The positionality and power dynamics of high school math departments

PDF

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

PDF

Inclusive gender practices in high schools: a study on supports and practical solutions for California administrators

PDF

Principal leadership practice: the achieving principal coaching initiative

PDF

Why can’t I see myself in my school? Hiring and retaining ethnically diverse leadership in public schools

PDF

An exploration of leadership capacity building and effective principal practices

PDF

Why I can't see myself in school? Hiring and retaining ethnically diverse leadership in public schools

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

Principal leadership -- skill demands in a global context

PDF

The art of leadership: investigating the decision-making process of how charter school leaders utilize the arts

PDF

Leadership styles conducive to creative tension in decision making among principals, vice principals, and deans at K-12 school sites

Asset Metadata

Creator Prado, Cristina (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2024-08

Publication Date 07/15/2024

Defense Date 04/25/2024

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

Tag diversity,effective principal,equity,inclusion,SED academic achievement,Title I high schools,transformative leadership

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Cash, David (committee chair), Crew, Rudolph (committee member), Franklin, Gregory (committee member)

Creator Email crojas7762@gmail.com,rojascri@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113997P16

Unique identifier UC113997P16

Identifier etd-PradoCrist-13237.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-PradoCrist-13237

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Prado, Cristina

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240716-usctheses-batch-1183 (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