Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
In the implementation of standards-based reform: what is the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth?
(USC Thesis Other)
In the implementation of standards-based reform: what is the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth?
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDS-BASED REFORM: WHAT IS
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL IN BUILDING SCHOOL
CAPACITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY TO SUSTAIN STUDENT ACADEMIC
GROWTH?
by
Debra E. Rinder
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2007
Copyright 2007 Debra E. Rinder
ii
Dedications
This dissertation is dedicated to my family: Corky, Brendan, Kelly, and
Timmy for their love, support, patience, encouragement, and understanding; My
parents: Jim and Kay who have always challenged me to be somebody; My twin
brother and two sisters: Darrel, Lisa, and Kimmy for believing in me; My nieces and
nephews: Kevin, Johnny, Christopher, Nikki, Katie, Michael, and Pookie who
inspire me as an educator and person to make a difference and stand up for what I
believe in. Well folks, I have set and cleared the bar! No pressure, but who will be
next?
iii
Acknowledgements
Thank you to my committee members, friends, and family who believed in
me, challenged me, encouraged me, stuck by me, and continue to support me in all
that I do. Your wisdom, passion, dedication, knowledge, integrity, and drive to
“make a difference” inspire me and will never be forgotten.
• Dr. Adrianna Kezar for her high standards and endless support
• Dr. Carol Wilson for her strength and ability to tell it how it is
• Dr. Joann Merrick for her encouragement and support
• Dr. Debby Collins for her friendship and drive to be the best
• Dr. Kristen McGregor for hanging in there and persevering
• Ms. Corky O’Rourke for her relentless editing
• My family for their love, support, and understanding
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………….ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………iii
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………...vii
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY…………………………………..1
Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ..................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................. 14
Research Questions ................................................................................................ 15
Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 16
Definitions of Related Concepts ............................................................................ 17
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE……………………………..19
Introduction............................................................................................................ 19
Implementation and Goals of Standards-Based Reform........................................ 19
Improving and Sustaining Student Academic Growth .......................................... 22
Relationships.………………………………………………………………...23
Prinicpal Leadership Roles .................................................................................... 26
Principal Responsibilities.…………………………………………………...30
Standards for Principals….…………………………………………………..31
Empowering Teachers/Shared Leadership.………………………………….34
Change………………...……………………………………………………..35
Principal Leadership Styles and Characteristics .................................................... 37
Visionary Leader.……………………………………………………………38
Instructional Leader.…………………………………………………………39
Transformational Leader.……………………………………………………40
Building School Capacity ...................................................................................... 47
Accountability........................................................................................................ 57
Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 60
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................................. 63
Introduction............................................................................................................ 63
Methodology .......................................................................................................... 64
Research Site.......................................................................................................... 66
Participants............................................................................................................. 70
Sampling…………………………………………………………………….72
Recruitment.…………………………………………………………………73
Data Collection Procedures.................................................................................... 73
Data Analysis Procedures ...................................................................................... 76
Trustworthiness...................................................................................................... 77
v
Limitations of the Study......................................................................................... 78
Ethical Considerations ........................................................................................... 78
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .... 79
Introduction............................................................................................................ 79
School Setting ........................................................................................................ 81
School Culture........................................................................................................ 84
Principal Background, Training and Experience……………………………84
High Expectations……………………………………………………….…..85
Teacher Stability……………………………………………………….……85
Hiring Practices………………………………………………………….….86
Common Vision and Culture....………………………………………..……86
Findings Related to Research Questions................................................................ 88
Common Vision.…………………………………………………………….89
Focus on Instruction.………………………………………………………..90
Leading vs. Managing………………………………………………………91
Collaborative Decision-Making…………………………………………….94
Mutual Trust.………………………………………………………………..95
Use of Data.…………………………………………………………………96
Knowing the Bottom Line.………………………………………………….97
Clearly Defined Expectations.……………………………………………..100
Common Assessments……….…………………………………………….102
Direct Leadership Style..…………………………………………………..103
Accountability….…………………………………………………………..104
Mentoring…….……………...……………………………………………..108
Teachers as Leaders.……………………………………………………….110
Recognitions…..…..……………………………………………………….111
Interventions……….………………………………………………………112
Coordination of Programs...………………………………………………..113
Resource Allocation.………...……………………………………………..117
Principal Leadership Roles .................................................................................. 119
Building School Capacity………………………………………………….119
Monitoring Classroom Instruction…………………………………………120
Principal Leadership Styles.................................................................................. 120
Principal Leadership Characteristics.................................................................... 121
Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 124
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS................................... 128
Major Findings..................................................................................................... 129
Discussion ............................................................................................................ 130
Practical Implications........................................................................................... 146
Future Recommendations .................................................................................... 151
Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 153
vi
REFERENCES......................................................................................................... 155
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PRINCIPAL ............................. 163
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR TEACHERS ............................. 165
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR SUPPORT STAFF ................... 167
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PARENTS ............................... 169
APPENDIX E: DATA ANALYSIS CODES .......................................................... 171
APPENDIX F: DATA ANALYSIS TABLES......................................................... 176
APPENDIX G: RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEMES ................................. 218
vii
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore a high poverty high achieving
intermediate school focusing on principal leadership in this era of standards-based
reform. Due to federal and state mandates, educators are challenged to ensure that
all students succeed as defined by scoring “proficient” on California Standards Tests
(CST) in language arts and math. So why are some schools succeeding and others
failing? The main research question which guided this research was: In the
implementation of standards-based reform, what is the leadership role of the
principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth? To guide the research, the following four sub-questions included:
A. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation
of standards-based reform?
B. How has the principal empowered teachers in the implementation of
standards-based reform and the decision-making process?
C. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementing
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
D. How does the principal build school capacity to sustain student academic
growth in the following five areas?
a. teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions
b. professional community
c. program coherence
d. technical resources
e. principal leadership
viii
A qualitative case study of McGarvin Intermediate School located in the
Garden Grove Unified School District, who is considered a high poverty high
achieving school and has sustained an Academic Performance Index (API) above the
state requirement of 800 for two consecutive years was studied in-depth. Data
collection included a total of 15 participants including one principal, nine teachers
(one from every department), three support staff, and two parents. Face-to-face
semi-structured interviews were conducted over a two month period. In addition,
classroom observations, campus observations, document review, faculty and
leadership meetings were observed.
Three major findings emerged from this study:
1. The principal has used a combination of leadership styles and has
created a unique leadership style through her background, training,
and experience at the district level and her directness in monitoring
and evaluating teacher and student performance. The researcher
describes this unique direct leadership as holding individuals
accountable for meeting clearly defined expectations, focusing on
standards-based instruction, and providing specific support for those
individuals not meeting expectations or standards.
2. The principal empowers teachers through transparent communication,
positive relationships, and collaborative decision-making. In this
study, teachers report the principal openly discusses information,
shares her “bottom line” on where she stands on issues, and “buffers”
teachers from unnecessary tasks that distract from the goal of student
ix
success. Further, the principal maintains a laser-like focus on
instruction and does not let anything or anyone take her school or
teachers away from the vision of success for all.
3. The principal has successfully built school capacity using the
Building School Capacity Model described by Newmann, King &
Youngs (2000) to sustain student academic growth and hold
individuals accountable for improved student achievement.
Specifically, the findings suggest the principal has established
program coherence at McGarvin, through the coordination of school
programs, collegial collaboration, targeted intervention programs, and
promoting co-curricular/elective programs to support student success.
The principal is a visionary, instructional, transformational leader who uses a unique
direct leadership style to build school capacity and accountability to sustain student
academic growth.
This study recommends further research of successful principal leadership in
high poverty high achieving schools, and the principal’s perceived role as an
instructional leader. Additional exploration in principal background, training,
experience, including district level experience, and principal hiring practices from
the superintendent’s perspective warrant further study. Lastly, future research
should consider examining the sustainability of student academic growth after the
current principal leaves and the school is under new leadership.
1
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
In the national search for ways of raising academic achievement, there seems
to be widespread agreement that a “standards-based” education system is the key to
improvement (National Commission on Education Standards and Testing, 1992;
Smith & O’Day, 1990, in Briars & Resnick, 2000). Standards-based reform is
defined as a set of standards for what children should know and be able to do at
particular grade-levels, align their curricula and teacher training to the standards,
create statewide tests to measure student achievement, and based on the results,
provide rewards, sanctions, or assistance (Lake, Hill, O’Toole, & Celio, 1999).
Although standards are one path in the roadmap used to increase student
achievement, “standards, even when well implemented, can take us only part way to
successful large-scale reform; it is only leadership that can take us all the way”
(Fullan, 2003, p. 16). The leadership at the school level must begin with the
principal. The principal must be the visionary leader at the school site and establish
himself/herself as the instructional leader. Standards-based reform has caused the
role of the principal to be redefined. Today’s principal can no longer be the manager
and must strive to define the principalship as an instructional leader who must build
school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth. However,
with the increased responsibilities of the principalship and the high stakes of
accountability, principals continue to struggle with defining their leadership role and
balancing their managerial responsibilities.
2
Background of the Problem
“Since the beginning of the principalship in American education, educators
have struggled to define a distinctive role for the position” (Lashway, 2003, p.2).
Lynn Beck & Joseph Murphy (1993), in Lashway (2003) suggest the role of the
principal has evolved over the years, from bureaucratic executive, to humanistic
facilitator, and then to instructional leader. Principals’ struggle with the role
definition by asking questions such as, How should I spend my time? What do
students, teachers, parents, and board members expect of me? What should be at the
top of the to-do list? (Lashway, 2003). Why do some schools succeed when other
schools fail? (Sagor, 1992). What leadership skills will principals need to be
effective in the 21
st
century? (Whitaker, 2003). The leadership role of the school
principal has changed dramatically in the past 20 years (Glasman & Heck, 1992). As
education continues to change over time, so too must the leadership role of the
principal, especially when implementing standards-based reform, while building
school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth. The
leadership role of the principal in schools is often considered the make or break of
reform efforts (Fullan, 2003). According to Fullan (2003), leadership is to the
current decade what standards were to the 1990’s for those interested in large-scale
reform such as, standards-based reform. Fullan cautions educators by stating;
“standards, even when well implemented, can take us only part way to successful
large-scale reform; it is only leadership that can take us all the way” (Fullan, 2003,
p. 16). Standards-based reform continues to challenge many educators and requires
a change in teaching, change in the leadership role of the principal, specifically the
3
principal’s ability to build school capacity and accountability in an effort to sustain
student academic growth.
With the implementation of standards-based reform and the increased level of
principal, teacher, and student accountability, the questions of role conflict and how
time is spent continue to challenge the leadership role of the principal as they are
encouraged to become instructional leaders in an effort to sustain student academic
growth. The Institute for Educational Leadership (2000), in Hale & Moorman
(2003) state schools of the 21
st
century will require an instructional leader who
focuses on strengthening teaching and learning, builds school capacity, allocates
resources, provides professional development, uses data-driven decision making, and
develops accountability. In order to accomplish this changing role of the principal,
the leadership role must move from manager to instructional leader. “Principals who
serve as instructional leaders add a focus on helping teachers’ improve their
classroom performance and making academic instruction the school’s top priority”
(National Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 3). “Instructional leaders shape the
environment in which teachers and students succeed or fail, and instructional leaders
must be able to coach, teach, and develop the teachers in their schools” (National
Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 1). The Interstate School Leaders Licensure
Consortium (1996) developed standards for principals and instructional leaders and
suggests leaders should be able to:
4
• Facilitate the development, articulation, implementation, and
stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by the
school community;
• Advocate, nurture, and sustain a school culture and instructional program
conducive to student learning and staff professional growth;
• Ensure management of the organization, operations, and resources for a
safe, efficient, and effective learning environment;
• Collaborate with families and community members, responding to diverse
community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources;
• Act with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner; and
• Understand, respond to, and influence the larger political, social,
economic, legal, and cultural context (National Staff Development
Council, 2000, p. 4).
Standards-based reform has required the principal to reexamine their
leadership role in schools, shifting from manager, to community leader, to visionary
leader, to instructional leader, and beyond (Hale & Moorman, 2003). Standards-
based reform is defined as a set of standards for what children should know and be
able to do at particular grade-levels, align their curricula and teacher training to the
standards, create statewide tests to measure student achievement, and based on the
results, provide rewards, sanctions, or assistance (Lake, Hill, O’Toole, & Celio,
1999). The standards-based reform movement was initiated due to lack of consistent
curriculum, variations in grading practices, lack of educational outputs, and the
5
existence of national curricula among other countries with reputations of academic
excellence (Marzano & Kendall, 1996). Brenda Welburn, Executive Director of the
National Association of State Boards of Education, in Marzano et al., (1996)
believes, “there are few issues more important to education policymakers today than
the development of standards and assessments that fundamentally define what
students should know and be able to do – and how these students should demonstrate
their knowledge and skill” (p. 4). Although standards define for students, teachers,
parents, and the community what our education system is all about, most educators
will agree that the process of designing a standards-based education system is a
difficult, technical task, and one that should not be taken lightly (Marzano et al.,
1996). Ravitch (1995), in Marzano et al., (1996) state standards can improve
achievement by clearly defining what is to be taught and what kind of performance is
expected. The leadership role of the principal is important in the implementation of
standards-based reform because if teachers are not teaching the required content
standards and assessing those standards, students who are tested on these standards
are less likely to perform well. An historical perspective of standards-based reform
is important to discuss as we examine the changing leadership role of the principal to
implement standards-based reform to improve student achievement.
As educational leaders, specifically principals, it is important to review what
has caused the leadership role of the principal to change throughout the years. Many
educators and researchers cite the publication of, A Nation at Risk (1983), Goals
2000: Educate America Act, and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of (2002), as
critical factors contributing to the modern standards-based reform movement.
6
Collectively, these educational directives arose as an effort to improve the
educational system, increase student achievement, and create a belief that all students
can, will, and must learn.
First, A Nation at Risk, made five recommendations:
• strengthening the high school graduation requirements
• adopting rigorous and measurable standards and higher expectations for
academic performance
• increasing the length and quality of time for learning
• improving the preparation of teachers
• educators and elected officials are held accountable for providing the
necessary leadership, along with garnering the fiscal support necessary to
implement reform efforts (Nation at Risk, 1983).
In subsequent years, due to the disappointing results of A Nation at Risk to reform
the education system and the lack of preparation of our nation’s youth, Goals 2000:
Educate America Act was developed in 1989, by President Bush and the nation’s
governors. Goals 2000, focused on all students reaching their full potential,
emphasized higher student expectations, and had six goals to be accomplished by the
year 2000. Goals 2000 included:
• all children in America will start school ready to learn
• the high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent
7
• all students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated
competency over challenging subject matter including English,
mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government,
economics, the arts, history, and geography, as well as every school in
America, will ensure all students learn to use their minds well, so they
may be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and
productive employment in our nation’s modern economy
• United States students will be first in the world in mathematics and
science achievement
• every adult American will be literate and will possess the knowledge and
skills necessary to compete in a global economy and exercise the rights
and responsibilities of citizenship
• every school in the United States will be free of drugs, violence, and the
unauthorized presence of firearms and alcohol and will offer a disciplined
environment conducive to learning (Paris, 1994).
Later, goals seven and eight were added to Goals 2000, which include:
• the nation’s teaching force will have access to programs for the continued
improvement of their professional skills and the opportunity to acquire
the knowledge and skills needed to instruct and prepare all American
students for the next century
8
• every school will promote partnerships that will increase parental
involvement and participation in promoting the social, emotional, and
academic growth of children (Paris, 1994).
Paris (1994) concluded these standards-based reform efforts of achievement
were the guiding force to identify what all students should know and be able to do, to
live, and work in the 21
st
century. It was the belief that Goals 2000 would fund
systemic reform at the state and local levels and would provide a framework within
which to organize all state and federally funded education programs. Despite the
publicity given to Goals 2000, the federal support and public’s concern began to
surface. This standards-based reform effort was seen by many as a major drain on
educational resources that were needed for the basic educational materials,
burdensome for those students who traditionally do not do well in school, and a new
attempt at previous failed reforms (Marzano & Kendall, 1996). Principals, who are
successful in becoming instructional leaders, building school capacity and utilizing
resources to sustain academic student growth, may change the perception of
standards-based reform. The implementation of standards-based reform has proven
to be extremely challenging and no easy task. “The leadership ability and leadership
values of the principal determine in large measure what transpires in a school; what
transpires in a school either promotes, nourishes, or impedes and diminishes student
academic success” (Reyes & Wagstaff, 2003, in Hale & Moorman, 2003, p. 7).
According to Marzano & Kendall (1996), standards-based approaches to
school reform must be tailor-made to the specific needs and values of individual
9
schools and districts. Hence, California has developed state adopted content
standards (what students should know and be able to do) in all subject areas specific
at each individual grade level. These content standards are tested every year and
measured according to the standards of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002. No
Child Left Behind Act amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, by requiring testing and accountability of all students, which will require
changes in education practices at many levels (Linn, Baker, Betebenner, 2002). The
No Child Left Behind Act is legislation used to test standards-based reform efforts
that “substantially increases the testing requirements for states and sets demanding
accountability standards for schools, districts, and states with measurable Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) objectives for all students and subgroups of students defined
by socioeconomic background, race—ethnicity, English language proficiency, and
disability” (Linn, et al., 2002, p. 3). Student achievement is defined as those students
who score “proficient or higher” on the California Standards Test (CST) in language
arts and math. All students are expected to perform at the proficient level or higher
by the end of year 2013-2014. Schools must demonstrate steady gains in student
achievement and close the achievement gap between various subgroups on an annual
basis. In California, individual schools must reach a minimum score of 800 (out of
1000) on the Academic Performance Index (API) to be considered proficient.
Failure to meet improvement targets would earn the school and/or district the stigma
of a “program improvement school.” “The challenge before us is the implementation
of legislative intent in a way that will provide the information needed to assess and
improve school level educational quality—information that must be simultaneously
10
relevant to teachers, administrators, policy makers, and of course, parents and
students” (Linn, et al., 2002, p.15). Creating relevant information for educators is
essential and requires strategic systemic implementation from the state and school
level. Smith & O’Day (1991), in Ahearn (2000) concluded that “state initiated
reform and school-based restructuring has a far greater chance of success than either
type of reform carried out independently” (p. 3). For the purpose of this study,
school based restructuring refers to building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth. Accountability is “an accountable education
system defined as one which ensures that all children, including those with
disabilities, benefit from their educational experience through equal access, high
standards, and high expectations” (p. 14). Educational professionals are notorious
for waiting until the pendulum swings back to the other side before committing to
action. However, it is evident through the high stakes accountability of NCLB that
standards-based reform is here to stay, and requires a change in the leadership role of
the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student
academic growth.
The internal struggle between manager and instructional leader continues to
create role conflict in principals. “Surveys consistently find that principals feel torn
between the instructional leadership that almost everyone agrees should be the top
priority and the daily management chores that are almost impossible to ignore; often,
the managerial responsibilities seem to take precedence” (Cooley & Shen; Rebecca
Goodwin & colleagues 2003; Tak Cheung Chan & Harbison Pool 2003; Diane
Ricciardi & Joseph Petrosko 2001; Karen Osterman & colleagues 1997, in Lashway,
11
2003, p. 2). Despite the internal conflict, the leadership role of the principal
continues to change especially with the implementation of standards-based reform
and the emphasis on sustained student academic growth.
As the leadership role of the principal changes and expectations of student
achievement increase, it is understood that the principal cannot accomplish this goal
alone. Van Cooley & Jianping Shen (2003), in Lashway (2003) found that
secondary principals reported they were engaged in new roles that had simply been
“layered” over the old job. This means, instead of replacing former responsibilities
or being integrated into the job, the new duties were simply added to what was
already there. As mentioned earlier, with the implementation of standards-based
reform, principals cannot single-handedly transform a school. Principals must assist
teachers in becoming leaders in their schools and teachers need opportunities to
serve on governance committees, mentor less experienced staff and coach peers
(Elmore, 2000). As principals become instructional leaders, they must establish
shared or distributed leadership that focuses on building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth. According to Elmore (2000),
“leadership is the guidance and direction of instructional improvement” (p. 13) and
“he promotes distributed leadership in which formal leaders widely distribute
leadership responsibilities among various role groups in the organization” (p. 15).
With the demands of implementing standards-based reform, building school capacity
and the increased level of accountability to improve and sustain student academic
growth, distributed leadership is needed. Elmore (2000) states in a distributed
leadership system, “the job of leaders is to buffer teachers from extraneous and
12
distracting non-instructional issues so as to create an active arena for engaging and
using quality interventions on instructional issues” (p. 24). Distributed leadership
also supports building school capacity. Fullan (2003) states “capacity-building is
about giving people the training, resources, and opportunity to pursue complex tasks,
and then to hold them accountable” (p. 102). In the implementation of standards-
based reform, building school capacity and accountability to sustain student
academic growth must be addressed in the changing leadership role of the principal.
A Nation At Risk, Goals 2000, and No Child Left Behind have dictated the
“what” of standards-based reform. The research on “how” to implement standards-
based reform through principal leadership roles in building school capacity, and
accountability to sustain student academic growth is needed. What we know is
standards-based reform and accountability will require significant changes in the
educational system, specifically the leadership role of the principal in building
school capacity. Building school capacity is a significant leadership responsibility of
the principal. As mentioned earlier, “Capacity-building is about giving people the
training, resources, and opportunity to pursue complex tasks, and then to hold them
accountable” (Fullan, 2003, p. 102). Capacity building requires the principal to be
an instructional leader, which is a role conflict when exploring past practices in the
leadership role of the principal. The principal’s ability to develop and build school
capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth is worthy of further
exploration. Therefore, in the implementation of standards-based reform, a case
study, describing the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth is timely.
13
According to Fullan (2002a), “the more that large scale, sustainable
educational reform [standards-based education] becomes the agenda, the more that
leadership becomes the key” (p.1). Principals must develop relationships with
people and master being an instructional leader to build school capacity. According
to Newman, King, & Youngs (2000), at the heart of building school capacity is the
principal’s leadership that focuses on the development of five dimensions:
• teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional development)
• professional community (organizational development/relationships)
• program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning
goals/sustainability)
• technical resources (materials, time, resources, and access to expertise)
• principal leadership (building school capacity/responsible for previous four
factors getting better and better).
Today’s leadership is more than setting high expectations or implementing
standards. Elmore (2000) contends the job of administrative leaders is about
enhancing the skills and knowledge of people in the organization, creating a common
culture of expectations within the organization, building relationships within the
organization, and holding individuals accountable for their contributions within the
organization, or lack thereof. In the implementation of standards-based reform, the
principals will be required to become instructional leaders to impact student
achievement. Therefore, a case study describing the leadership role of the principal
14
in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth
will contribute to the educational leadership literature.
Purpose of the Study
Using a case study approach, this study will explore the leadership role of a
principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth. According to Reyes & Wagstaff (2003), in Hale & Moorman (2003), “the
leadership ability and leadership values of the principal determine, in large measure,
what transpires in school” (p. 7). “Principals today must serve as leaders for student
learning” (Lashway, 2003, p. 2). Student learning must drive what principals,
teachers and parents do when making decisions and allocating resources to improve
the educational experience for our youth. As education continues to change over
time along with the leadership role of the principal, the ability and pressure of
principals to sustain student academic growth remains a challenge. Convincing the
school organization that the implementation of standards-based reform is not a “this
too shall pass,” reform is no easy task. The study will examine the leadership role of
the principal in building school capacity and accountability in sustaining student
academic growth, which is what leaders are held accountable for in today’s
educational system. According to Bryk & Schneider (2003), when principals
implement reform, they must assume risks, deal with organizational conflict, attempt
new practices, and take on extra work, such as engaging with colleagues in planning,
implementing, and evaluating improvement initiatives. For principals, implementing
reform creates conflict in the leadership role of the principal and requires principals
to balance the demanding managerial responsibilities with that of becoming an
15
instructional leader. This study aims at contributing to the phenomenon of
implementing standards-based reform, the changing leadership role of the principal
in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Research Questions
The aim of this qualitative research study is to gain insight into the
implementation of standards-based reform and the leadership role of the principal in
building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth. The
main research question is:
In the Implementation of Standards-Based Reform: What is the Leadership Role of
the Principal in Building School Capacity and Accountability to Sustain Student
Academic Growth?
Sub questions to guide the research will include:
A. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the
implementation of standards-based reform?
B. How has the principal involved teachers in the implementation of
standards-based reform?
C. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for
implementing standards-based reform to improve and sustain student
academic growth?
D. What has the principal done to build school capacity in these five
areas: teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional
development), professional community (organizational
development/relationships), program coherence (coordinate school
16
programs/clear learning goals/sustainability), technical resources
(materials, time, resources, and access to expertise), and principal
leadership to sustain student academic growth?
The information presented in this chapter clearly demonstrates the need for further
exploration of the changing role of the principal as instructional leader and the focus
on sustaining student academic growth.
Significance of the Study
It is a national concern that our youth be educationally prepared to be
contributing members of society. Schools are mainly responsible for preparing
pupils for this changing world in which we live. In the implementation of standards-
based reform, the leadership role of the principal has required a change in leadership
style from manager to instructional leader. Although there are many factors that
affect and contribute to student achievement, according to Hale & Moorman (2003),
“principals of today’s schools must have as a priority instructional leadership—
leadership for learning and must be able to 1) lead instruction, 2) shape an
organization that demands and supports excellent instruction and dedicated learning
by students and staff and 3) connect the outside work and its resources to the school
and its work” (p. 7).
“The leadership ability and leadership values of the principal determine in
large measure what transpires in a school; what transpires in a school either
promotes, nourishes, or impedes and diminishes student academic success” (Reyes &
Wagstaff, 2003, in Hale & Moorman, 2003, p. 7). Through the leadership role of the
17
principal, this study will contribute to the research literature in building school
capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Information obtained from this study will assist other principals in their journey of
“how” to become instructional leaders through building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth. The Southern Regional
Education Board (SREB) in Hale & Moorman (2003) summarizes the important role
of the principal by stating, “Good Principals Are the Key to Successful Schools”
(p. 8).
Definitions of Related Concepts
1. Standards-based reform- is defined as a set of standards for what children
should know and be able to do at particular grade-levels, align their curricula
and teacher training to the standards, create statewide tests to measure student
achievement, and based on the results, provide rewards, sanctions, or
assistance (Lake, Hill, O’Toole, & Celio, 1999).
2. Accountability legislation-federal (AYP) and state standards (API) for school
and student achievement.
3. California Standards Test (CST)-given annually to students in language arts,
math, science and social science and used to determine school and student
achievement.
4. Academic Performance Index (API) – state gives the school a score ranging
from 200-1000. A minimum score of 800 is the goal for all schools.
18
5. Annual Yearly Progress (AYP)-federal government establishes a
percentage of students who must score “proficient” or above on the CST tests
in language arts and math.
6. Building school capacity- capacity building is about giving people the
training, resources, and opportunity to pursue complex tasks (implementing
standards-based reform) and then to hold them accountable (Fullan, 2003).
7. Instructional leaders-“shape the environment in which teachers and students
succeed or fail” (National Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 1), and focus
on strengthening teaching and learning, professional development, data-
driven decision making and accountability (Hale & Moorman, 2003).
8. School achievement – in California, is determined by a school who scores
800 or above as measured by the academic performance index (API).
9. Student academic achievement- in California, is defined as those students
who score “proficient or higher” on the California Standards Test (CST) in
language arts and math and requires students to score 350 or higher in
language arts and/or math on the California Standards Test (CST).
10. Program coherence-“the extent to which the school’s programs for student
and staff learning are coordinated, focused on clear learning goals, and
sustained over a period of time” (Newmann, King, & Youngs, 2000, p. 5).
19
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to
achieve a common goal and both leaders and followers are involved together in the
leadership process (Northouse, 2004, p. 15).
As previously described in Chapter One, an historical perspective on the
development and implementation of standards-based reform has created a change in
the leadership role of the principal. Chapter Two, will discuss goals of standards-
based reform, the leadership roles, style and characteristics of principal leadership,
and define building school capacity and accountability in an effort to sustain student
academic growth. These concepts are important to contribute to the literature and
support the purpose of this study which is to explore the leadership role, style and
characteristics of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth.
Implementation and Goals of Standards-Based Reform
The leadership role of the principal is essential when implementing
standards-based reform. “The ultimate goal in implementing any school reform is to
improve student learning” (Schiff, 2002, p. 2).
Goals of Standards-Based Reform
Implementing standards-based reform requires a change in “how” principals
lead and requires building school capacity and accountability in order to sustain such
a large scale reform (Fullan, 2001b). These four major goals of standards-based
reform fall under the leadership role of the principal:
20
• high academic standards for all students
• accountability for student outcomes
• inclusion of all students in reform initiatives
• flexibility for instructional change (Goertz, 2001).
Goal one: High academic standards for all students (Goertz, 2001). Nation
wide, students in K-12 education are not achieving up to the required federal and
state standards. Students and schools often fall short of their required Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API) targets. Hess
(1999) states changes in student achievement corresponded to changes in principal
leadership roles. It is up to the school to develop the means of meeting these
standards through the implementation of standards-based reform and effective
leadership.
Goal two: Accountability for student outcomes (Goertz, 2001). In today’s
era of accountability, principals, teachers, and district administrators are all held
accountable as leaders to meet these required performance targets through the
implementation of standards-based reform and effective leadership. According to
Abelmann & Elmore (1999), in response to the demand for accountability in
standards-based reform, schools with strong principals willing to nurture and develop
a common vision are crucial aspects of principal leadership. When implementing
standards-based reform the leadership role of the principal in building school
capacity and accountability systems to sustain student academic growth is critical.
21
Goal three: Inclusion of all students in reform initiatives (Goertz, 2001).
Standards-based reform efforts apply to all students, including special education
students, English language learners and children from all different socioeconomic
backgrounds. According to NCLB, by the year 2014, all students are required to be
“proficient,” thereby, instilling the belief and establishing the expectation that all
students can, will, and must learn.
Goal four: Flexibility for instructional change (Goertz, 2001). A collaborative
effort between principal and teacher is essential leadership when a change such as
standards-based reform is implemented.
Implementation of Standards-Based Reform
Implementation of standards-based reform requires instructional change.
According to Fullan (2001b), “the question of implementation is simply whether or
not a given idea, practice or program gets “put in place” and “the logic is
straightforward—no matter how promising a new idea may be, it cannot impact
student learning if it is superficially implemented” (p. 2). Implementation of a
reform requires a change in behaviors and beliefs. The principal must be cognizant
and respectful of the change process when implementing standards-based reform in
an effort to build school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth.
Sustaining Standards-Based Reform
Reform efforts must be sustained in order to have an affect on student
academic growth. According to Datnow & Stringfield (2000), the initial and
continuing implementation of reform is a concern. In a study of eight schools that
22
had implemented reform, only three had continued use after a few years. In
another district, by the third year of the four-year study, only one of thirteen schools
was still continuing to implement its chosen reform design; and reform in six other
schools had expired. “There has been a growing sense of urgency in society that
schools must do a better job of teaching the young. Moreover, policy makers and
citizens have demanded large-scale reform involving all or most schools, not just an
innovative few. Models of Whole School Reform have been generated to help the
spread and depth of reform” (Fullan, 2001b, p.2).
Improving and Sustaining Student Academic Growth
Schools are responsible for preparing students for this changing world.
According to Stoll (1999), the ultimate goal of school improvement is to enhance
pupils’ progress, achievement and development as defined by a student’s ability to
demonstrate learning, citizenship, relating to people, managing situations and
managing information. In the implementation of standards-based reform, models of
whole school reform require building school level capacity in an effort to improve
and sustain student achievement. In the implementation of standards-based reform,
the purpose of this study is to examine the leadership role of the principal in building
school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
The following characteristics and research findings are important for
principals to consider in their systematic reform strategy to implement standards-
based reform and build school capacity. A 1996 study conducted in New York set
out to improve academic growth in literacy and numeracy using a systematic reform
strategy. In 1988 it ranked tenth in reading and fourth in mathematics out of thirty-
23
two sub-districts (Fullan, Rolheiser, Mascall, & Edge, 2001). Eight years later, by
1996, it ranked second in both reading and mathematics. Initially, Elmore & Burney
(1999) in Fullan et al., (2001) identified seven organized themes or principles of the
successful reform strategy: (1) it’s about instruction and only instruction;
(2) instructional improvement is a long, multistage process involving awareness,
planning, implementation, and reflection; (3) shared expertise is the driver of
instructional change; (4) the focus is on system-wide improvement;
(5) good ideas come from talented people working together; (6) set clear
expectations, then decentralize; (7) collegiality, caring, and respect are paramount
(pgs. 2-3). However, if whole school reform efforts are not fully implemented and
there is a lack of building school level capacity, the likelihood of improved student
achievement decreases.
Building School Capacity/Program Coherence
An additional factor to consider in building school capacity is program
coherence, “the extent to which the school’s programs for student and staff learning
are coordinated, focused on clear learning goals, and sustained over a period of time”
(Newmann, King & Youngs, 2000, p. 5). Program coherence is one of the five
characteristics associated with building school capacity that will be described later in
this chapter under the heading; Building School Capacity.
Relationships
When exploring avenues to improve student academic growth while
implementing standards-based reform, it is important to acknowledge the teacher-
student relationship. According to Ferguson (2002), standards-based reform has
24
been heavily emphasized by policymakers and educators for the past several years
and has become a national reform strategy for raising student achievement and
closing the achievement gap. Standards-based reform focuses on content standards
(i.e. the prescribed knowledge that students are supposed to learn) and course
alignment (i.e. the content tested on state assessments and the content teachers are
trained to understand and teach) with some exceptions, the possibility that teacher-
student relationships might affect whether students actually learn the content that
teachers are trying to teach but seldom enters the equation for improving student
achievement (Ferguson, 2002).
According to Fullan (2002), the single factor common to successful change is
that relationships improve and when relationships improve, schools get better. When
building school capacity and implementing whole school reform, in addition to
focusing on content standards, course alignment, and teaching strategies, it is
important to consider the student-teacher relationship and its potential impact on
student academic growth.
A principal’s key task is to build a structure of relationships in the school so
that all children have the opportunity to learn (Barker, 2000, p. 4). Ferguson (2002)
describes the Tripod Project. “The goal of the Tripod Project is to enhance school-
level capacity to attend to all three legs of the tripod—content, pedagogy and
relationships” (p. 23). The Tripod project has identified five tasks and stages of
social and intellectual engagement in primary and secondary school classrooms.
These five tasks are entailed in achieving and sustaining cooperation among people
who share particular contexts and must work together to achieve their goals
25
(i.e. teacher and student). The basic idea is that students will be most likely to
excel if they:
1. begin the semester feeling trustful of the teacher and interested (instead of
mistrustful and uninterested);
2. experience a good balance between teacher control and student autonomy
(instead of too little or too much of either);
3. are ambitiously goal-oriented in their learning (instead of feeling ambivalent);
4. and work industriously in pursuing their goals for learning (instead of
becoming discouraged in the face of difficulty or disengaged due to
boredom).
5. The fifth task is for teachers to help students consolidate their new knowledge
and, thus equipped, to be and feel well prepared for future classes and life
experiences (pgs. 23-24).
In an effort to address implications of NCLB, Ferguson (2002) has developed
a tripod model with emphasis on content, pedagogy and relationships. Content,
pedagogy and relationships are three legs of what Ferguson calls the instructional
tripod, and if one leg of the tripod is too weak, it falls over. Ferguson believes when
“teachers have strong content knowledge and are willing to adapt their pedagogies to
meet student needs, adding good teacher-student relationships and strong
encouragement to the mix” (p. 4) may be the key to increase student achievement.
Ferguson suggests student achievement may be improved through the development
of positive relationships between teacher and student.
26
Standards-based reform has dictated the content and pedagogy which has
been the focus of teacher professional development for many decades. However,
according to the Ferguson study, teacher-student relationships affected whether
students actually learned the content the teacher was trying to teach. In fact,
Ferguson’s findings suggest that “teacher-student relationships may be quite
important resources for raising achievement and narrowing achievement gaps”
(p.22). When building school capacity, leaders should not overlook the importance
of encouragement and teacher-student relationships in their journey to improve and
sustain student academic growth.
Building School Capacity/Professional Development
Principals should consider “providing professional development in all three
legs of the instructional tripod—content, pedagogy and relationship in an effort to
prepare teachers better to inspire the trust, elicit the cooperation, stimulate the
ambition and support the sustained industriousness that making No Child Left
Behind a success will require” (Ferguson, 2002. p. 29). As educators continue to
implement standards-based reform and build school capacity to sustain student
academic growth, a transformation in the leadership role of the principal is essential.
Principal Leadership Roles
Improving the quality of America’s school leaders is the most feasible way to make a
significant difference in American education
(National Staff Development Council, 2000, p.15).
“Since the beginnings of the principalship in American education, educators
have struggled to define a distinctive role for the position” (Lashway, 2003, p. 2).
Many studies have looked at the leadership roles of principals. Traditionally,
27
principals were known and trained as managers. However, since the
implementation of standards-based reform the leadership role of the principal
continues to be redefined to focus on student achievement. The major principal
research has been conducted by Mid-continent for Education and Learning
(McREL). In the article Balanced Leadership: What 30 years of research tells us
about the effect of leadership on student achievement Waters, Marzano & McNulty
(2003) determined there is, in fact, a substantial relationship between leadership and
student achievement. “The results of the first two meta-analyses have provided
practitioners with specific guidance on the curricular, instructional, and school
practices that, when applied appropriately, can result in increased student
achievement” (Waters et al., 2003, p. 2). This information continues to guide
principal leadership. However, the third meta-analysis examined the effects of
leadership practices on student achievement. The McREL research identified 21
principal leadership responsibilities that are significantly associated with student
achievement and are considered the first half of the Balanced Leadership
Framework. These 21 principal leadership responsibilities include:
1. Situational awareness: is aware of the details & undercurrents in the running
of the school and uses this information to address current & potential
problems.
2. Intellectual Stimulation: ensures that faculty and staff are aware of the most
current theories and practices and makes the discussion of these a regular
aspect of the school’s culture.
3. Change Agent: is willing to and actively challenges the status quo.
28
4. Input: involves teachers in the design and implementation of important
decisions and policies.
5. Culture: fosters shared beliefs and a sense of community and cooperation.
6. Monitor/Evaluate: monitors the effectiveness of school practices and their
impact on student learning.
7. Outreach: is an advocate and spokesperson for the school to all stakeholders.
8. Resources: provides teachers with materials and professional development
necessary for the successful execution of their jobs.
9. Order: establishes a set of standard operating procedures and routines.
10. Ideals/Beliefs: communicates and operates from strong ideals and beliefs
about schooling.
11. Affirmation: recognizes and celebrates school accomplishments and
acknowledges failures.
12. Knowledge of Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment: is directly involved
in the design and implementation of curriculum, instruction, and assessment
practices.
13. Focus: establishes clear goals and keeps those goals in the forefront of the
school’s attention.
14. Discipline: protects teachers from issues and influences that would detract
from their teaching time or focus.
15. Communication: establishes strong lines of communication with teachers and
among students.
29
16. Flexibility: adapts his or her leadership behavior to the needs of the
current situation and is comfortable with dissent.
17. Optimize: inspires and leads new and challenging innovation
18. Relationships: demonstrates an awareness of the personal aspects of teachers
and staff.
19. Visibility: has quality contact and interactions with teachers and students.
20. Curriculum, instruction, and assessment: is directly involved in the design
and implementation of curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices.
21. Contingent rewards: recognizes and rewards individual accomplishments.
(Waters et al., 2003, p. 4).
The research concluded that leaders can have both a positive and negative impact on
student achievement. Effective leadership “means more than simply knowing what
to do—it’s knowing when, how, and why to do it” (Waters et al., p. 2)
The second half of the McREL Balanced Leadership Framework consists of
four types of knowledge. The four types of knowledge are:
1) Contextual Knowledge – Knowing when to fulfill specific responsibilities and use
appropriate leadership practices, 2) Experiential Knowledge – Knowing why
specific responsibilities and practices are important, 3) Declarative Knowledge –
Knowing what leadership responsibilities to fulfill and which practices are used to
fulfill them, and 4) Procedural Knowledge – Knowing how to fulfill specific
leadership responsibilities and use research-based practices (Waters, Marzano, &
McNulty, 2003, p. 13, in Waters & Grubb, 2004, p. 7).
30
Principal Responsibilities
“The primary responsibility of school leaders is student learning. In an era of
high-stakes accountability, standards for school leaders must reflect what is essential
to improving student achievement” (Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 15). Principals’
time is often fully absorbed by the day to day responsibilities of running a school.
Although, principals assume a myriad of responsibilities that are important in
running a school, perhaps these responsibilities are not essential. “One way to make
a seemingly impossible job more manageable is to achieve clarity on what is
essential to student learning, which can help principals prioritize the demands of the
job” (Waters et al., 2005, p. 16). Clearly defining essential principal responsibilities
is similar to teachers defining essential standards for students. Time is valuable and
so time must be spent on what is essential.
As leaders, the principal is accountable for the continuous growth of students
and increased school performance as measured over time by state standards and
locally determined indicators. Baker’s (2000) research concluded the principal’s
responsibilities include:
1) develop, implement, and monitor procedures and practices that promote a
safe and orderly school environment; 2) influence, establish, and sustain a
school culture conducive to continuous improvement for students and staff;
3) lead the development, implementation, and evaluation of data-driven plans
for improvement of student achievement; 4) assist instructional staff in
aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment with state and local learning
31
goals; 5) monitor, assist, and evaluate staff implementation of school
improvement plans and effective instructional and assessment practices;
6) manage human and financial resources to accomplish student achievement
goals; 7) communicate and partner with colleagues, parents, and community
members to promote student learning. Responsibilities outlined in 3, 4, and 5
above are at the heart of the principal’s new role (p. 2).
Principal responsibilities continue to be studied and modified as the leadership role
of the principal evolves with the implementation of standards-based reform and the
pressures to have all students succeed increases.
Standards for Principals
To accomplish these principal responsibilities, Waters & Kingston (2005)
determined “the profession needs a coherent set of performance standards for school
leaders that reflects the most current research on school-level leadership” (p. 37).
A comparative analysis of performance standards for school leaders between
McREL’s and Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) shows us
what is essential for principals to know and be able to do to improve achievement.
The study concluded what future leadership standards for school-level leaders should
encompass. Murphy (2002) describes the school administrator as an educational
leader who promotes the “success of all” students through the identified “six
essential criteria which form the foundation of a comprehensive effort to transform
principals from managers to learning leaders” (p. 22).
32
These include:
1. facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of
a vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community;
2. advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional
program conducive to student learning and staff and professional growth;
3. ensuring management of the organization, operations, and resources for a
safe, efficient, and effective learning environment;
4. collaborating with families and community members, responding to diverse
community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources;
5. acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner; and
6. understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social,
economic, legal, and cultural context (Murphy, 2002, p.24).
Joseph Murphy (2002) states: “if principals are to be successful in leading
schools that provide the best possible education for all children, learning and school
improvement need to form the core of their responsibilities” (p. 25). Principal
leadership requires more leading and less managing in order to build school capacity.
During the fall 2000, the Milken Family Foundation (MFF) in collaboration
with the National Association of Secondary School Principal (NASSP) developed a
survey to examine the role of the principal (Milken, 1999; NASSP, 2001, in Schiff,
2002). The results provide an interesting picture of what principals in secondary
schools are experiencing: principals work long hours doing many things; however,
the findings reveal some conflicts between expectations and practices. “Principals
feel the most important aspects of their job are establishing a learning climate,
33
dealing with such personnel issues as hiring and evaluations, and providing
curricular leadership” (Schiff, 2002, p. 1). Yet of the average 62 hours a week
principals work, only about 23 hours are spent on curricular or learning environment
activities. The remaining time is spent dealing with parent issues, discipline,
community relations, and school management (Schiff, 2002, p. 1).
The Roles of the Principal: According to the MFF survey, the following roles of the
principal are the most important (from 1-7, with 1 being the most important):
Establish learning climate - 1
Personnel (hiring, firing, evaluation) – 2
Curricular leadership – 3
Operational management – 4
Student services – 5
Strategic planning – 6
Community relations – 7
(Schiff, 2002, p. 2).
The results of the MFF survey describe establishing a learning climate as the most
important role of a principal and developing a professional learning community
promotes a positive learning climate.
Professional Learning Communities
Another leadership role of the principal in the implementation of standards-
based reform and building school capacity is to develop a professional learning
community (PLC). “When everyone works collectively to seek and share learning
and act on that learning to improve their effectiveness as professionals so that
34
students benefit, they are functioning as a professional learning community”
(Hord, 1997, in Dean, 2005, p. 1). The leadership role of the principal is
instrumental in developing a professional learning community.
Empowering Teachers/Shared Leadership
Principals cannot lead alone. “To share leadership effectively and develop a
cadre of potential future school leaders, principals have to promote and support the
development of others” (Waters & Grubb, 2004, p. 6). When principals share
leadership teachers feel a sense of empowerment. With all the demands placed on
today’s principal, it is essential that principals share or distribute leadership so they
can focus on what is essential. Principals can no longer micromanage and must
encourage shared leadership through clearly defined roles and responsibilities.
Teacher leadership is defined as “a teacher leader who has a positive influence on the
school as well as in the classroom” (Barth, 2001a, p. 88, in Collinson, 2004, p. 363).
This supports the notion that good teachers positively impact student achievement.
Teachers influence student achievement, therefore the leadership role of the principal
should be to empower teacher leaders. We know from research that teachers are the
most important school-related factor that affects student achievement (Winship &
Korenman, 1999; Sanders & Rivers, 1998; Jordan, Mendro & Weerasinghe, 1998, in
Schiff, 2002).
Shared leadership is a common theme in the literature on educational
leadership. Shared leadership is critical for school leaders because it provides a way
for principals to focus on essential responsibilities, and it is a way to develop
leadership in others (Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 36). Elmore (2000) characterizes
35
successful distributive leadership by collective responsibility and sharing of
knowledge and roles (Elmore, 2000, in Schiff, 2002, p. 4). “Distributive leadership
emphasizes leadership by many members instead of just the titular head, leadership
as the role and responsibility of the entire education community, and learning as the
primary value of each member of the community” (Neuman & Simmions, 2000, in
Collinson, 2004, p. 368).
According to Fullan (2005), a major responsibility required for sustaining
effective school leadership is developing others as leaders; particularly teacher
leaders (Cotter & Buchanan, 2003, in Waters & Grubb, 2004, p. 6).
Shared leadership also addresses the need to develop and sustain leadership at the
school level and is a fundamental problem on the horizon that must be addressed
(Hargreaves, 2004; Fullan, 2005, in Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 36-37).
Shared leadership is critical for sustaining current school leaders and attracting,
developing and sustaining the future leaders we need to achieve high levels of
student achievement for all students and to redesign the system (Waters et al.,
2005, p. 37).
Change
McREL defines change using first order and second order change. McREL
research identified two major conclusions from the research related to change that
provide research-based guidance to principals. Effective change leadership rests on
the ability of leaders to accurately estimate the magnitude of a change (first and
second order change) and adjust their approach to leadership accordingly.
36
According to Waters, Marzano & McNulty (2003), there is a growing
recognition among communities around the world that second-order changes are
needed to improve education systems. These changes must be led by school leaders
who are able to distinguish and maintain a relentless focus on what is essential; who
can skillfully apply effective change in leadership practices to address the increasing
demands on schools and to redesign the system; and who practice shared leadership
to continuously develop others as well as themselves.
According to the McREL research, there are two types of change defined by specific
characteristics of first order change and second order change. “First order change is
maintaining the status quo. First order change is when they are perceived as
1) consistent with existing values and norms, 2) advantageous for stakeholders, and
3) readily implemented with existing knowledge and resources” (Waters & Grubb,
2004, p. 4). Second order change, is not obvious how it will make things better for
people with similar interests, requires individuals or groups of stakeholders to learn
new approaches, or it conflicts with prevailing values and norms” (Waters et al.,
2003, p. 7). Second order change is when stakeholders 1) are unclear about how it
will make things better for them; 2) must master new knowledge, practices, or
approaches to implement the change; or 3) feel the change conflicts with prevailing
personal values and organizational norms (Waters et al., 2004, p. 4).
The challenge for principals is to understand and determine that a proposed
change might represent a first-order change for some and a second-order change for
others depending on the individuals’ values, norms, and knowledge. This creates a
37
challenge for the leader who must be able to quickly adjust to assist in facilitating
the change process (Waters & Grubb, 2004).
The McREL study concluded when leading changes are perceived as second-
order, principals should emphasize seven of the 21 leadership responsibilities:
change agent; flexibility; ideals/beliefs; intellectual stimulation; knowledge of
curriculum, instruction and assessment; monitor/evaluate and optimize, and when
sharing leadership principals should emphasize these four responsibilities:
communication, culture, input and order (Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 36).
“The profound and rapidly increasing changes affecting schools call for
standards that define a scope of essential research-based leadership responsibilities
that reflect what school leaders need to know and be able to do to achieve high levels
of student achievement while, at the same time, leading the redesign of the system.
This requires a shift in focus from ensuring that all schools educate students in the
same way (learning becomes more important than instruction and the student takes
center stage from the teacher)-to-requiring that all children achieve the same
outcomes from their education” (Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 15). Therefore, as
leaders focus more on what they “do,” the leadership role of the principal may have
different leadership styles and characteristics.
Principal Leadership Styles and Characteristics
According to the National Staff Development Council (2000), without a sustained
focus on improving the quality of school leadership, this nation’s reform efforts will
falter, and the ultimate losers will be our children (p. 15).
According to the Institute for Educational Leadership (2000), the high
accountability in schools requires a new kind of principal for the 21
st
century. The
38
research concludes the old “command and control” models and the separation of
management and production are no longer effective (Hale & Moorman, 2003).
Principals traditionally were known as managers who exhibited a top-down
leadership style approach. Today’s principals display a leadership style more
conducive to community leaders, visionary leaders, and most recently in the field of
education are shifting to instructional and transformational leaders. Hale et al.,
(2003) suggest a variety of styles are needed from principals: community leader,
visionary leader, and instructional leader and provides a definition for each.
Community Leader
Principal as community leader “is imbued with a big picture awareness of the
school’s role in society; shared leadership among educators, community partners and
residents; close relations with parents and others; and advocacy for school capacity
building and resources” (Hale & Moorman, 2003, p. 4).
Visionary Leader
Principal as visionary leader “has a demonstrated commitment to the
conviction that all children will learn at high levels and is able to inspire others
inside and outside the school building with this vision” (Hale & Moorman, 2003,
p. 5). In the research, there is a widely accepted position related to leadership in that,
all good leaders must possess vision, strength, and commitment (Bolman & Deal,
2003). In a study, Keller (1998) concludes schools that have raised student
achievement in spite of students’ socioeconomic backgrounds almost invariably do
so with the guidance of an effective leader. The education literature has come to a
consensus that leaders of effective schools have a vision of where they are going and
39
focus on instruction (Stoll, 1999). This concept of visionary leadership is
important in the field of education since the implementation of standards-based
reform, which is currently challenging the leadership roles of the principal.
Instructional Leader
Beck & Murphy (1993), in Lashway (2003) define the role of the principal in
one decade as a “bureaucratic executive” followed ten years later by a “humanistic
facilitator” and now principals are being asked to be “instructional leaders.”
“Instructional leaders shape the environment in which teachers and students succeed
or fail” (National Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 1). Fink & Resnick (2001),
describe five core strategies for the role of the principal as instructional leader:
nested learning communities, principal institutes, leadership for instruction, peer
learning, and individual coaching. In a case study of principals identified by their
peers as outstanding instructional leaders Supovitz & Poglinco (2001) concluded
these instructional leaders cultivated a community of instructional practices and
created safe and collaborative environments for teachers to engage with one another.
Instructional leaders must be able to coach, teach, empower, and develop the
teachers in their schools. This is an added responsibility to the leadership role of the
principal who must also perform what Elmore (2000) in National Staff Development
Council (2000) calls “the ritualistic tasks of organizing, budgeting, managing, and
dealing with disruptions inside and outside the system” (p. 1). “Today’s principal
must be prepared to focus time, attention and effort on changing what students are
taught, how they are taught, and what they are learning” (Bottoms & O’Neill, 2001,
p. 6). What students are taught is driven by the California content standards
40
developed in the late 1990’s. Standards-based education also determines what
students should know and be able to do in each content area which requires changes
in past practices from teachers and administrative leaders.
In becoming an instructional leader, principals need to spend the majority of
their time leading opposed to managing. According to Bottoms & O’Neill (2001),
this formidable challenge demands a new breed and style of school leaders with
skills, knowledge, and leadership characteristics far greater than those expected of
“school managers” in the past. As leaders, we must spend the majority of our time
leading, not managing. “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are
people who do the right thing” (Bennis & Nanus, 1985, p. 221). According to
Whitaker (2003), “the difference between more effective principals and their less
effective colleagues is not what they know. It is what they do” (p. 1).
Principal as instructional leader “is focused on strengthening teaching and
learning, professional development, data-driven decision making and accountability”
(Stoll, 1999, pgs. 7-8). As principals become more of an instructional leader, it may
require teachers to change past practices. Change can be difficult if not executed
properly. In education, the leadership role and style of the principal may be
contributing factors to successful change and require some form of transformational
leadership.
Transformational Leadership
Northouse (2004) defines transformational leadership as “a process that
changes and transforms individuals. Transformational leadership involves an
exceptional form of influence that move followers [teachers] to accomplish more
41
than what is usually expected of them” (p. 169). This style of leadership describes
a leader who is “attentive to the needs and motives of followers [teachers] and tries
to help followers [teachers] reach their fullest potential” (Northouse, 2004, p. 170).
Further, Northouse (2004) describes characteristics of transformational
leaders as creating connections or relationships that raise the level of motivation,
express high expectations for followers, display a strong set of internal values and
ideals, and they are effective at motivating followers to act in ways that support the
greater good rather than their own self-interest (Kuhnert, 1994, in Northouse, 2004,
p. 174). In addition, there are four “I” factors of transformational leadership which
include:
1. Idealized Influence: leaders act as strong role models; followers identify and
want to emulate them; leaders have high moral and ethical standards; leaders
are respected by followers who trust them; leaders provide a vision and sense
of mission.
2. Inspirational Motivation: leaders communicate high expectations; leaders
inspire and motivate followers toward the vision; leaders create a team spirit.
3. Intellectual Simulation: leaders stimulate creativity and innovation; leaders
challenge their own beliefs and values; leaders support followers in new
approaches; leaders engage in problem solving.
4. Individualized Consideration: leaders provide a supportive climate in which
they listen carefully to the individual needs of the followers; leaders act as
coaches and advisors (Northouse, 2004, pgs. 174-177).
42
Transformational leadership also “plays a pivotal role in precipitating change”
(Northouse, 2004, p. 170) and “acts as change agents who initiate and implement
new directions within organizations” (Northouse, 2004, p. 183). Through clearly
defined roles and an understanding regarding how individuals contribute to the
greater purpose when leaders create change, transformational leaders are perceived
by followers as:
• strong role models for their followers
• possessing high moral values and self determined sense of identity
• confident, competent, articulate and they express strong ideals
• listening to followers
• a spirit of cooperation often develops between these leaders and their
followers
“Followers emulate leaders because they learn to trust them and believe in the ideas
for which they stand” (Northouse, 2004, p.182).
Many researchers have conducted studies contributing to the development of
goals, strategies and results of transformational leadership. What are the goals of
transformational leadership? Leithwood (1992), in Liontos & Balster (1992) finds
that transformational leadership pursues three fundamental goals. These include:
1) Helping staff develop and maintain a collaborative, professional school
culture
2) Fostering teacher development
3) Helping teachers solve problems more effectively (pgs. 2-3).
43
Transformational leadership uses these three goals to guide leadership and develop
strategies which produce results.
What strategies do transformational leaders use? Several sources Sagor,
1992; Leithwood, 1992; Leithwoor & Jantzi, 1990; Poplin, 1992, in Liontos &
Balster (1992) have defined specific strategies associated with transformational
leadership. These include:
• Visit each classroom every day; assist in classrooms; encourage teachers to
visit one another's classes.
• Involve the whole staff in deliberating on school goals, beliefs, and visions at
the beginning of the year.
• Help teachers work smarter by actively seeking different interpretations and
checking out assumptions; place individual problems in the larger perspective
of the whole school; avoid commitment to preconceived solutions; clarify
and summarize at key points during meetings; and keep the group on task but
do not impose your own perspective.
• Use action research teams or school improvement teams as a way of sharing
power. Give everyone responsibilities and involve staff in governance
functions. For those not participating, ask them to be in charge of a
committee.
• Find the good things that are happening and publicly recognize the work of
staff and students who have contributed to school improvement. Write private
notes to teachers expressing appreciation for special efforts.
44
• Survey the staff often about their wants and needs. Be receptive to
teachers' attitudes and philosophies. Use active listening and show people
you truly care about them.
• Let teachers experiment with new ideas. Share and discuss research with
them. Propose questions for people to think about.
• Bring workshops to your school where it's comfortable for staff to participate.
Get teachers to share their talents with one another. Give a workshop yourself
and share information with staff on conferences that you attend.
• When hiring new staff, let them know you want them actively involved in
school decision-making; hire teachers with a commitment to collaboration.
Give teachers the option to transfer if they can't wholly commit themselves to
the school's purposes.
• Have high expectations for teachers and students, but don't expect 100
percent if you aren't also willing to give the same. Tell teachers you want
them to be the best teachers they possibly can be.
• Use bureaucratic mechanisms to support teachers, such as finding money for
a project or providing time for collaborative planning during the workday.
Protect teachers from the problems of limited time, excessive paperwork, and
demands from other agencies.
• Let teachers know they are responsible for all students, not just their own
classes (pgs. 3-4).
Transformational leadership uses these strategies in which to produce results.
45
What are the results of this kind of leadership? According to Leithwood
(1992), the effect of transformational leadership is “uniformly positive.” He cites two
findings from his own students: 1) “transformational leadership practices have a
sizeable influence on teacher collaboration, and 2) significant relationships exist
between aspects of transformational leadership and teachers’ own reports of changes
in both attitudes toward school improvement and altered instructional behavior”
(Liontos, Lynn & Balster, 1992, p. 4). The result of transformational leadership is
further supported by Sergiovanni (1990) who suggests that student achievement can
be “remarkably improved” by such leadership. Finally, Sagor (1992) found in his
study that schools where teachers and students reported a culture conducive to school
success had a transformational leader as its principal.
In an effort to drive reform, Sagor’s (1992) researchers asked the question;
Why do some schools succeed when others fail? “In recent years, organizational
structure and culture in particular, shared decision-making and teacher empowerment
have been touted as major determinants of effectiveness” (p. 2). In this study,
principals consistently use what Sagor (1992) calls the three building blocks of
transformational leadership. These include: 1) a clear and unified focus;
2) a common cultural perspective 3) a constant push for improvement (pgs. 2-3).
To understand the role leaders play in developing and sustaining these
important features, Sagor (1992) looked at three very different principals who have
one thing in common: they oversee exemplary schools marked by heightened student
and faculty morale, as well as high and improving student performance (p. 3).
Sagor’s (1992) research concluded all three principals shared certain behaviors:
46
1) visit each classroom every day, practice active listening, and view teaching as
an experimental science (p. 10). The research demonstrates how leadership can
influence school culture so that it has a transformative impact on the professionals
who work in the schools and that type of leadership has been shown to make
schooling more effective for students and more professionally rewarding for the
teachers (Sagor, 1992, p. 11).
Today’s principals must work with teachers, collect, analyze and use data to
make decisions, and serve as instructional leaders for student learning (Hale &
Moorman, 2003). “Characterizing instructional leadership as the principal’s central
role has been a valuable first step in increasing student learning” (Fullan, 2002,
p. 17). Along with being an instructional leader, future principals must also be
viewed as visionary leaders. According to Fullan (2002), “the principal of the future
needs to be attuned to the big picture, more sophisticated at conceptual thinking, and
transforming the organization through people and teams” (p.17).
As previously mentioned, principals as visionary leaders demonstrate a
commitment to the conviction that all children will learn at high levels and are able
to inspire others inside and outside the school building to focus on sustained student
academic growth (Hale & Moorman, 2003). Being a visionary, instructional,
transformational leader requires strong principal leaders who may struggle with a
role conflict between managing the school and leading the school. Building school
capacity may empower other teacher leaders and assist principals in becoming the
visionary instructional leaders necessary to implement standards-based reform and
sustain student academic growth.
47
Building School Capacity
In the words of the blue-ribbon Consortium on Renewing Education: If we could do
only one thing to build school capacity, we would develop a cadre of leaders who
understand the challenges of school improvement, relish academic achievement, and
rally all stakeholders to higher standards of learning (Consortium, 1998, p. 35).
Building school capacity requires the vision, commitment, instructional
leadership, and empowerment of teachers by the principal. In a study of effective
urban schools, Mendez-Morse (1992), in National Staff Development Council (2000)
“found that a key factor in the success of schools is the presence of a skilled
principal who creates a sense of shared mission around improving teaching and
learning and delegates authority to educators who have the trust and support they
need to get the job done” (p. 1). Again, this is a change in the leadership role of the
principal. With the implementation of standards-based reform and the level of
accountability in improving student’s academic growth, principal leadership is
imperative. Principals must be instructional leaders who focus on building school
capacity and accountability to support student academic growth. With the additional
accountability expectations of NCLB, which states that all students must score
“proficient or above” on the CST’s in language arts and math, or face serious
sanctions, the need for effective leadership is essential. According to Fullan (2001),
“to get large scale reform, you need to establish and coordinate ongoing
accountability and capacity-building efforts at three levels – the schools, the district,
and the state” (p. 6). Capacity building requires the interaction of government
agencies, districts, and schools in shaping and reshaping strategies (Fullan, 2005).
48
Through effective leadership, educators continue to search for ways to
improve school and student academic growth. Challenges confronting school
improvement include raising standards, refocusing schools around the primary goal
of student achievement, holding schools accountable for student results and
strengthening school leadership (National Staff Development Council, 2000). The
McREL meta-analyses research provides guidance for leaders to focus on
improvement efforts. Specifically, school and teacher practices and student factors
influencing student achievement that include:
School practices:
1) Guaranteed and viable curriculum
2) Challenging goals and effective feedback
3) Parent and community involvement
4) Safe and orderly environment
5) Collegiality and professionalism
Teacher practices:
6) Instructional strategies
7) Classroom management
8) Classroom curriculum design
Student factors:
9) Home environment
10) Learned intelligence/ background knowledge
11) Motivation (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003, p. 6).
49
“Leadership ability and leadership values of the principal determine in large
measure what transpires in a school; what transpires in a school either promotes,
nourishes, or impedes and diminishes student academic success” (Reyes & Wagstaff,
2003, p. 11).
Building school’s capacity influences both the school’s readiness for change
and its ability to sustain it (Stoll, 1999). Sustainability is the likelihood that the
overall system can continuously regenerate itself in an ever-improving direction
(Fullan, 2002). Fullan (2002) describes four components of sustainability:
1) leadership and the (social) environment, 2) learning in context, 3) leaders at many
levels and leadership succession and 4) the development of the teaching profession.
Learning in context is learning in the setting where you work to improve the system
and increase sustainability (Fullan, 2002). Again, the research supports the
importance of leadership and environment to support sustainability within the
system.
With so many demands on leaders today, learning needs to be the focus of
school leadership. Leaders can help their schools adapt to and deal with changing
needs and demands by focusing on and sustaining continuous learning of their
teachers, themselves, their communities, and the school itself (Stoll, 1999).
Although building school capacity may create a conflict in the role of the principal
based on previous past practices, it is through building school capacity that will have
the greatest effect on student achievement (Newmann, King, & Youngs, 2000).
According to Fullan (2002), leadership in a culture of sustained change will be
judged by what you leave behind and may be measured using the level of school
50
capacity a principal is able to create and the level of sustained student growth a
principal is able to influence.
Capacity building is about giving people the training, resources, and
opportunity to pursue complex tasks (implementing standards-based reform) and
then to hold them accountable for improving student success (Fullan, 2003).
Principals are challenged as instructional leaders to provide training and allocate
resources to support student learning. Principals’ leadership role and vision must
provide teachers with the opportunities to improve their knowledge and skill,
become part of a professional learning community, focus on program coherence and
utilize technical resources in order to improve student achievement (Newmann, King
& Youngs, 2000). Building school capacity is a function of the five school level
factors as derived from the work of Newmann et al., (2000). School capacity five
school level factors include: teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions
(professional development), professional community (organizational
development/relationships), program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear
learning goals/sustainability), technical resources (materials, time, resources, and
access to expertise), and principal leadership (building school capacity/responsible
for previous four factors getting better and better) (Newman et al., 2000). The
principal leadership factor is responsible for ensuring the other four factors are
clearly defined and visible in the school setting. Newmann and his colleagues have
developed a model of whole school reform for increasing student achievement as
depicted in Figure 1.
51
Figure 1: Building School Capacity Model
Student Achievement
Instructional Quality
Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment
School Capacity
Teachers’ Knowledge, Skills, Dispositions
Professional Community
Program Coherence
Technical Resources
Principal Leadership
Policies & Programs
on
Professional Development
Source: Newmann, King & Youngs (2000)
Newmann, King & Youngs (2000) describe school capacity consisting of five
factors:
• Teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions
o Refers to the individual capability of teachers and can be enhanced
by hiring teachers with desired traits and/or by providing
professional development.
52
• Professional community
o Refers to principals and teachers working together over time to
examine and reexamine their practices and results. Fullan (2000)
defines “professional learning community in which staff work
collaboratively to set clear goals for student learning, assess how
well students are doing, develop action plans to increase student
achievement, all the while being engaged in inquiry and problem-
solving” (p. 1).
• Program coherence
o Refers to the extent to which the school’s programs for student and
staff learning are coordinated and focused on clear learning goals
and sustained over a period of time.
• Technical resources
o Refers to access to time, materials, ideas, and expertise. Fullan
(2000) includes high quality curriculum, instructional material,
assessment instruments, technology, workspace, etc.
• Principal leadership
o Defined as the most critical factor and the best definition of school
leadership is that which “causes” the previous four factors to get
better and better, i.e. effective leadership enhances individual
development, professional community, program coherence, and
access to resources (Fullan, 2001b).
53
In order for school capacity to work effectively and have the most dramatic impact
on student achievement, the leadership role of the principal to implement all five
factors is crucial. Fullan (2001b) states, “the logic is straightforward – no matter
how promising a new idea may be, it cannot impact student learning if it is
superficially implemented” (p. 2). This implementation logic also holds true when
implementing most any school reform. According to Fullan (2001b), whether
implementing standards-based reform or creating school level capacity,
implementation is determined by whether or not a given idea, practice or program
gets “put in place” which consists of using new materials, engaging in new behaviors
and practices and incorporates new beliefs.
Newmann, King & Youngs (2000) found that principal leadership at the
school level that focused on building school capacity, specifically development of
teachers’ knowledge and skills, professional community, program coherence, and
technical resources were essential in affecting the instructional quality and
improving student achievement. Newmann et al., (2000) describe the development
of teachers’ knowledge and skills as one component of building school capacity.
“Creating and sharing knowledge is central to effective leadership” and a key to
continual growth” (Fullan, 2002, p. 18). Elmore (2000) describes leadership as:
The job of administrative leaders is primarily about enhancing the skills and
knowledge of people in the organization, creating a common culture of
expectations around the use of those skills and knowledge, holding the
various pieces of the organization together in a productive relationship with
each other, and holding individuals accountable for their contributions to the
collective result (p. 15). More succinctly defined, Leadership is the guidance
and direction of instructional improvement (p.13).
54
Newmann & Wehlage, in Fullan (2000) found successful schools had
teachers and administrators who formed a professional learning community, focused
on student work through assessment, and changed their instructional practice to
produce better results. Leaders must also spend time and energy building trust,
openness and positive relationships between staff, students, and the community, and
recognizing and celebrating teachers’ as well as students’ successes (Stoll, 1999).
The patterns of influence on internal school capacity, specifically the teachers within
the school is essential because they will influence both the school’s readiness for
change and its ability to sustain it and keep changing where necessary (Stoll, 1999).
Although teachers have the most impact on student learning, changing teachers’
practice is notoriously difficult. Stoll (1999) lists eight interacting influences
important in determining the teacher’s capacity to engage in and sustain continuous
learning: “life and career experience, beliefs, emotional well-being, knowledge,
skills, motivation to learn, confidence that he or she can make a real difference, sense
of interdependence” (p.3). Skill and knowledge are two of the eight influences
mentioned by Stoll (1999) which are the first components in Newmann, King &
Youngs (2000) capacity building model. Providing teacher training that enhances
skill and knowledge is important for principals to include in their staff development
experiences for teachers. Increasing teacher skill and knowledge has an impact on
increasing student skill and knowledge and ultimately improving student
achievement. Stark (1998) included raising expectations, a focus on improving
teaching, new or enhanced leadership by principals, and external intervention were
also factors in improving student achievement.
55
Leadership has a responsibility to support student learning. Schools are
responsible for preparing pupils for this changing world. “The ultimate goal of
school improvement is to enhance pupils’ progress, achievement and development”
(Stoll, Fink, & Earl, 1996, in National College for School Leadership). In order to
increase student achievement, the principal must build school capacity in
collaboration with the teachers at the site. As we explore increasing student
academic growth, “nothing or no one is more important to school improvement than
a teacher” (Stoll, 1999, p. 3). Fullan (1991) concurs and claims that educational
change/reform depends on what teachers do and think. The research supports the
notion that effective teachers have the most impact on student learning. “Greater
energy for reform is generated in a system of integrated pressure and support in
which capacity and accountability are both increased” (Fullan, 2000, p. 6) both from
the principal and the teacher perspective. In order to improve student academic
growth, building school capacity must become an area of focus for school principals
and be included in all improvement efforts and school reform.
School “capacity building consists of developments that increase the
collective power in the school in terms of new knowledge and competencies,
increased motivation to engage in improvement actions, and additional resources”
(time, money, and access to expertise) (Fullan, 2005, p. 175). Fullan (2000)
continues to state the leadership role of the principal is the most crucial dimension of
building school capacity and the most effective schools are not those which take on
the sheer most number of innovations, but those which selectively take on, integrate
and coordinate innovations into focused programs, while at the same time, acquire
56
technical resources that support individual, collective and program coherence. As
mentioned earlier, the purpose of this study is to explore the leadership role of the
principal in developing school capacity at all levels to sustain student academic
growth.
The leadership role of the principal to enhance school capacity is the
responsibility of those within schools because they know their schools best, and as
Roland Barth (1990) says: “understanding schools is the single most important
precondition for improving them” (Stoll, 1999, p.4). The principal is the catalyst for
implementing reform and building school capacity. Stoll (1999) defines internal
capacity or school capacity as “the power to engage in and sustain continuous
learning of teachers and the school itself for the purpose of enhancing pupil learning”
(p. 4). Stoll lists four imperatives at the core of leadership and for learning:
1) don’t lose sight of your learning vision, 2) engage hearts as well as minds: create
the right emotional learning climate, 3) become learning experts: build an inclusive
learning community, and 4) practice organizational learning (pgs. 6-7). When
building school capacity it is important for principals to remember that leadership is
about taking risks and being fearless to mobilize others, but leaders also need to learn
when to be courageous and when it’s appropriate to be cautious (Fullan 1992).
Unfortunately, with the high stakes accountability placed on educators under NCLB,
leaders are unable to be extremely cautious due the ramifications of not meeting the
required accountability measures.
57
Accountability
Students should be held to high, common standards for academic performance and
that schools and the people who work in them should be held accountable for
ensuring that students—all students—are able to meet these standards
(Elmore, 2000, p. 22).
School accountability dictates that schools and teachers are held responsible
for specific student outcomes, such as standardized test score gains. This shift
toward accountability makes the quality of teachers more important than ever
(Schiff, 2002). “Student achievement in a performance-based school is a shared
responsibility involving the student, family, educators, and the community. The
principal’s leadership is essential to this process” (Baker, 2000, pgs.1-2).
The national standards movement has made dramatic changes in teaching and
learning. This “new performance-based system is profoundly transforming the
principal’s role and responsibilities” (Baker, 2000, p.1). When examining school
reform efforts, challenging standards and assessments alone are not enough to raise
student achievement (Goertz, Flodden & O’Day, 1996). Principal leadership and
his/her ability to build school capacity and accountability are important factors in
raising student achievement. Although accountability is used in current school
reform, the definition of accountability differs in its use for education. Fullan (2005)
suggests “accountability involves targets, inspections, or other forms of monitoring
along with action consequences” (p. 175). Newmann, King & Rigdon (1997) define
accountability as “a process by which school districts and states (or other
constituents such as parents) attempt to ensure that schools and school systems meet
their goals” (p.42). Newmann and colleagues describe a school accountability
58
system consisting of four parts: information about performance, standards for
judging its success, significant consequences, and designation of an agent that does
the judging and distribution of consequences. Despite the variety of accountability
definitions, accountability plans describe who is responsible, for what, and to whom”
(Darling-Hammond & Ascher, 1991). On January 8, 2002, President Bush signed
into law the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001. NCLB is the federal
accountability system that requires states to publish achievement results
disaggregated by racial and ethnic groups. For the first time in the nation’s history,
raising achievement levels among racial and ethnic minorities and closing the
achievement gaps are expectations and goals of this federal policy (No Child Left
Behind Act, 2002, in Ferguson, 2002). Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a
percentage score given to schools for individuals by ethnic group, for students
scoring “proficient or above” in language arts and math. A minimum target is set
each year; currently the target is 24.4% proficient in language arts and 26.5%
proficient in math. The goal of NCLB is to have all students “proficient” in
language arts and math by the year 2014. In addition to student accountability, there
is a school accountability system known as the Academic Performance Index (API).
The API score ranges from 200-1000 and is an overall school score given annually.
The API goal or target for each school in the state of California is 800. NCLB has
caused educators to rethink how they deliver instruction to best meet the needs of all
students. Implementing standards-based reform, aligning curriculum, developing
common assessments, and delivery of instruction have become the main focus in
education for the past 10 years.
59
Regardless of the outside pressure for accountability, Fullan (2000)
believes teachers and principals need to become assessment literate in order to be
successful. Assessment literacy is defined as the teachers, individually and together,
to interpret achievement data on student performance, and teachers’ ability to
develop action plans to alter instruction and other factors to influence student
learning (Hargreaves & Fullan, 1998).
Fullan (2005) claims when turnaround leadership combines accountability
and capacity building strategies, student achievement usually improves. However,
turnaround leadership implies leaders should first build capacity, then address issues
of accountability. “Turnaround leadership concerns the kind of leadership needed
for turning around a persistently low-performing school to one that is performing
acceptably as measured by student achievement according to state tests” (Fullan,
2005, p. 174). Fullan (2005) suggests the approach with the most chance for success
involves reversing the emphasis on accountability and capacity building so that
capacity building is the main driver with high-stakes accountability playing a real,
but smaller, more effective role in the process. When accountability pressures
dominate, even in the presence of good support, the gains can be only short term
(Fullan, 2005). Therefore, building school capacity must take priority. This is a
difficult concept for educators to digest because they are constantly being evaluated
by the external accountability system of API and AYP. Leaders must learn to
balance accountability and building capacity, but demonstrate a clear commitment to
capacity building (Fullan, 2005).
60
Conclusion
If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got
(Anonymous).
The Institute for Educational Leadership (2000), in Hale & Moorman (2003)
states “no one can say for certain how the schools of the new century will differ from
those of the past century—but there can be little doubt that these schools will require
different forms of leadership” (p.2). The literature presented supports the notion that
large-scale reform such as standards-based reform has changed the leadership role of
the principal and requires building school capacity and accountability to sustain
student academic growth. This study will focus on building school level capacity
and use the conceptual framework of Newmann, King & Youngs (2000), specifically
the five factors of school capacity. The five factors of school capacity include;
teachers’ knowledge, skills and dispositions, professional community, program
coherence, technical resources and principal leadership. These factors are important
to enhance the development of school capacity and improve student achievement
(Newmann et al., 2000). Hale et al., (2003) support many researchers who agree
teacher learning leads to improvement in teaching, and learning should focus on
instruction and student outcomes at the school level (Corcoran, 1995; Darling-
Hammond & McLaughlin, 1996; Hargreaves, 1995; Lieberman, 1995; Little, 1993;
Lyle & Cochran-Smith, 1994; Renyi, 1996; Richardson, 1994). According to
Newmann et al., (2000), the collective power of the full staff to improve student
achievement school wide is referred to as school capacity. In the school capacity
framework, principal leadership is the fifth factor and is considered to be the thread
61
that runs through all other dimensions of school capacity. Hence, the focus on the
leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth.
The Institute for Educational Leadership (2000), in Hale & Moorman (2003)
summarizes research that claims schools of the 21
st
century will require an
instructional leader who focuses on strengthening teaching and learning, builds
school capacity, allocates resources, provides professional development, data-driven
decision making, and accountability. “The leadership ability and leadership values of
the principal determine in large measure what transpires in a school; what transpires
in a school either promotes, nourishes, or impedes and diminishes student academic
success” (Reyes & Wagstaff, 2003, in Hale & Moorman, 2003, p. 7). Effective
principal leadership provides additional opportunities for teacher collaboration,
opportunities for learning, and time for reflection (Stoll, 1999). Elmore (1995)
summarizes studies of restructuring and states, structural change without change in
the ways teachers work with pupils brings about little real change. According to
Carol Wilson, USC professor, “school reform is simple; you must hire a quality
teacher for every classroom and a high quality principal for every school” in order to
support student learning and increase student academic growth.
Through examining the leadership role of the principal, this study will
contribute to the research literature on “how” principals build school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth. The research on “what” is needed
for successful principal leadership has been researched but the specific leadership
role, style and characteristics of the principal may have changed with the
62
implementation of standards-based reform. This research study aims to enrich the
leadership literature and provide information on “how” principals accomplish this
overwhelming task of building school capacity and its impact on sustaining student
academic growth.
Chapter Three will describe the research design including; introduction,
methodology approach, research site, participants, sampling, recruitment, data
collection, and data analysis procedures, trustworthiness, limitations of the study,
and ethical considerations of this in-depth qualitative case study.
63
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction
In this chapter, the methodology and research design of this study is
discussed. As previously mentioned in Chapters One and Two, an overview of the
study and literature review was completed to support the purpose of this study which
was to explore the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth. Standards-based reform is a large
scale reform causing a change in the leadership role of the principal, change in
teachers’ teaching, and an increased expectation of student learning. To support the
purpose of this study, the following four sub-questions guided this qualitative study:
A. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the
implementation of standards-based reform?
B. How has the principal empowered teachers in the implementation of
standards-based reform and the decision-making process?
C. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementing
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
D. How does the principal build school capacity to sustain student academic
growth in the following five areas?
a. teachers’ knowledge, skills, and disposition
b. professional community
c. program coherence
d. technical resources
e. principal leadership
64
Methodology
In this study, a qualitative case study approach was used. “A qualitative case
study is an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single instance,
phenomenon” (Merriam, 1998, p. 27). Although standards-based reform is
supported in the research as a key to improving student achievement (Briars &
Resnick, 2000), it should be reiterated that standards-based reform when well
implemented, can take us only part way to successful large-scale reform; it is only
leadership that can take us all the way (Fullan, 2003). In redefining the leadership
role of the principal, the research supports a principal as an instructional leader.
“Instructional leaders shape the environment in which teachers and students succeed
or fail, and instructional leaders must be able to coach, teach, and develop the
teachers in their schools” (National Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 1).
According to Reyes & Wagstaff (2003), in Hale & Moorman (2003), “the leadership
ability and leadership values of the principal determine in large measure what
transpires in a school; what transpires in a school either promotes, nourishes, or
impedes and diminishes student academic success” (p. 7). Principal leadership and
the ability to build school level capacity are important factors in improving student
achievement. The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership role of the
principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth.
Qualitative research “helps us understand and explain the meaning of social
phenomena with as little disruption to the natural setting as possible” (Merriam,
1998, p. 5). A case study usually focuses on fewer areas and seeks to gain in-depth
65
information. Patton (2002) states that “qualitative methods permit inquiry into
selected issues in great depth with careful attention to detail, context, and nuance;
that data collection need not be constrained by predetermined analytical categories
contributes to the potential breadth of qualitative inquiry” (p. 227). After reviewing
qualitative and quantitative research approaches, it was determined that a qualitative
case study was the most appropriate method of study for this research. Qualitative
research implies “that reality is holistic, multidimensional, and ever-changing; it is
not a single, fixed, objective phenomenon waiting to be discovered, observed, and
measured as in quantitative research” (Merriam, 1998, p. 202). Qualitative research
takes place in the natural setting; the researcher develops a level of detail about the
place or individuals and the researcher is highly involved in the actual experiences of
the participants (Creswell, 2003).
Describing the changing leadership role of the principal as a result of
standards-based reform and the principal’s ability to build school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth, a qualitative case study was
determined appropriate for this study. This case study approach provided an in-
depth perspective on the change in the leadership role of the principal with the
implementation of standards-based reform and the principal’s ability to build school
capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth. “Capacity building
is about giving people the training, resources, and opportunity to pursue complex
tasks, and then to hold them accountable” (Fullan, 2003, p. 102). Specifically,
capacity building is the principal’s leadership role in building school capacity in the
66
areas of teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions, professional community,
program coherence, and technical resources.
As previously mentioned in Chapter One, the main research question for this
case study was; “In the implementation of standards-based reform: What is the
leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth?” Through interviews, observations, and document
reviews, a qualitative research methodology assisted in answering the question;
“how” had the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation of
standards-based reform and “how” had the principal built school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth?
Research Site
This study was conducted at McGarvin Intermediate School located in
Westminster, California and part of the Garden Grove Unified School District
(GGUSD). According to the Garden Grove Unified School District website,
GGUSD was established July, 1965. The district encompasses 28 square miles,
serving most of Garden Grove and portions of six surrounding cities - Anaheim,
Cypress, Fountain Valley, Santa Ana, Stanton, and Westminster (GGUSD website,
2006). The GGUSD district is the third largest in Orange County with 48,604
students, ranks 12th in size in California, and is the 88th largest school district in the
U.S. The district employs more than 5,000 staff members and operates 70 schools:
47 elementary, 10 intermediate, (McGarvin Intermediate School is the highest
performing intermediate school in GGUSD), 7 high schools, 2 continuation schools,
2 adult education centers, and 2 special education schools (GGUSD website, 2006).
67
This study focused on McGarvin Intermediate School which consists of
grades 7-8; it is one of 70 schools in the GGUSD and serves students from the cities
of Garden Grove, Fountain Valley, Santa Ana, and Westminster (McGarvin website,
2006). McGarvin consists of approximately 625 students, 24 teachers, one assistant
principal, one counselor, two Title 1 coordinators, and one principal. McGarvin is
on a traditional six period day and teachers do not receive a preparation (prep) period
during the day. The absence of a daily teacher prep period is unique to GGUSD and
not very common in most intermediate schools in California.
According to the School Accountability Report Card (SARC), McGarvin
Intermediate School first opened in 1966. The school has 16 permanent classrooms
and six portable classrooms in use on the campus. The school also has a media
center, multi-purpose room, computer lab, and a counseling-testing center. For the
2006-2007 school year, the total enrollment of McGarvin Intermediate School is
approximately 625 students with a demographic breakdown consisting of
66% Asian, 19.7% Hispanic, 12.7% White, 0.7% Pacific Islander, 0.4% Filipino,
0.4% Indian/Alaskan, and 0.1% Black (McGarvin website, 2006). There is
approximately 58% of the student population who currently participate in the free
and reduced lunch program, and 29% English learner population and yet, McGarvin
has the highest API score of all 10 intermediate schools in GGUSD.
Upon reviewing the California Department of Education website (2006),
there are few intermediate schools that have achieved this goal of 800, let alone
sustained it over three consecutive years. The academic success of McGarvin is
above the required state proficiencies of NCLB as identified by their API and AYP
68
scores. McGarvin’s API scores have steadily increased over the years; 690 in
1999, 736 in 2000, 740 in 2001, 749 in 2002, 798 in 2003, 808 in 2004, 826 in 2005,
and 860 in 2006 for an overall API growth of 170 points over eight years (California
Department of Education website, 2006). This is an incredible accomplishment.
The state requirement is to achieve an API score of 800 or above which is no easy
task.
Another measure of student performance required by NCLB is the Annual
Yearly Progress (AYP) which started in 2002. The AYP is the total percentage of
students who have scored proficient or advance on the California Standards Test
(CST) in language arts and math. Upon review as a school, McGarvin is well above
the required 2006 AYP percentage of 24.4% in language arts and the required 2006
percentage of 26.5% in math. The school wide AYP growth in language arts started
at 40.7% in 2002, 48.7% in 2003, 52.7% in 2004, 61.1% in 2005, and 67.6% in 2006
for a 26.9% growth over the past five years. The school wide AYP growth in math
started at 53.8% in 2002, 65.1% in 2003, 62.1% in 2004, 69.9% in 2005, and 72.8%
in 2006 for a 19% growth over the past five years (California Department of
Education website, 2006). The school wide student AYP growth almost triples that
of the state requirement. In addition, it is important to examine McGarvin’s
subgroup populations. Currently, there are four significant subgroups Asian,
Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantage, and English Learners. Although Whites
and Students with Disabilities are not considered significant subgroups, it is
important to monitor all subgroup progress. In language arts, the percent of Asian
students who scored proficient was 60.3% in 2004, 68.6% in 2005, and 67.6% in
69
2006 for a three year growth of 7.3%. Hispanic students who scored proficient
were 25.7% in 2004, 32.3% in 2005, and 45.4% in 2006 for a three year growth of
13.1%. White students who scored proficient were 48.4% in 2004, 55.8% in 2005,
and 66.7% in 2006 for a three year growth of 18.3%. Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged students who scored proficient were 44.9% in 2004, 54.6% in 2005,
and 59.1% in 2006 for a three year growth of 14.2%. English Learner students who
scored proficient were 39.4% in 2004, 46.1% in 2005, and 62.8% in 2006 for a three
year growth of 23.4%. Although students with disabilities are not considered a
significant subgroup, it is important to track their progress. Students with
Disabilities who scored proficient were 0% in 2004, 6.3% in 2005, and 18.2% in
2006 for a three year growth of 18.2%. In the area of mathematics, the percent of
Asian students who scored proficient was 72.5% in 2004, 79.7% in 2005, and 82.2%
in 2006 for a three year growth of 9.7%. Hispanic students who scored proficient
were 31.9% in 2004, 37.5% in 2005, and 34.9% in 2006 for a three year growth of
3%. White students who scored proficient were 49.4% in 2004, 61.6% in 2005, and
76.7% in 2006 for a three year growth of 27.3%. Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
students who scored proficient were 56.1% in 2004, 67.7% in 2005, and 68.5% in
2006 for a three year growth of 12.4%. English Learner students who scored
proficient were 56.5% in 2004, 63.6% in 2005, and 73.1% in 2006 for a three year
growth of 16.6%. Although students with disabilities are not considered a significant
subgroup, it is important to track their progress. Students with Disabilities who
scored proficient were 9% in 2004, 12.5% in 2005, and 29.4% in 2006 for a three
year growth of 20.4%. McGarvin has experienced steady growth in all areas, with
70
some subgroups progressing more quickly than others, and McGarvin has been
able to sustain that growth over time. So the question still remains, what is
McGarvin doing that other schools are not? As noted earlier, the focus of this study
was on the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student growth.
Participants
One intermediate school and 15 individuals were the participants in this
study. The school was selected using criterion sampling. Criterion sampling is
“picking all cases that met some criteria” (Patton, 2003, p. 243). First, this study
used the following school criteria in identifying potential sites to study: 1) the
selected school was a 7
th
and 8
th
grade intermediate school; 2) the selected school
must have reached the state API goal of 800 and sustained it for at least 2
consecutive years to be considered high achieving; and 3) the selected school must
have been considered high poverty defined as more than 30% of the students
participate in the free and reduced lunch program.
Using the California Department of Education website (2006), the researcher
was only able to identify a few intermediate schools meeting these criteria. Once the
schools were identified, additional criteria were added. Of the selected schools, the
school principal must have been in education for at least 10 years to provide a
comparison to education pre-standards-based reform and must have been the
principal at the identified school for 3-5 years. According to the National
Commission on Education Standards and Testing (1992), in Briars & Resnick
(2000), the research currently suggests that standards-based reform is a key to
71
increasing student achievement. Therefore, the principal must have been in
education for at least 10 years in order to discuss the change and redefining
leadership role of the principal prior to standards-based reform and the new
accountability of NCLB. Building capacity requires time, hence, the 3-5 year criteria
of the principal at the selected site.
At the researcher’s qualifying exam there was concern over the stringent
criteria and concern in so few schools identified, suggestions were given by
committee members and contact names provided. This is known as snowball
sampling. Snowball sampling identifies “cases of interests from people who know
people who know what cases are information-rich” (Creswell, 2003, p. 119). The
researcher contacted principals of identified schools and was elated when Dr. Jones,
principal at McGarvin Intermediate School located in the Garden Grove Unified
School District, after meeting to discuss the particulars of the study, agreed to
participate in this research study.
According to Patton (2002), “qualitative inquiry typically focuses in-depth on
relatively small samples, even single cases, selected purposefully” (p. 230). The
design strategy used was purposeful sampling. “The logic and power of purposeful
sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for study in depth. Information-rich
cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central
importance to the purpose of the inquiry, thus the term purposeful sampling” (Patton,
2002, p. 230). Conducting an in depth study of principal leadership at McGarvin
Intermediate School, a high poverty high achieving school who had successfully
exceeded and sustained the state requirement of 800 as measured by the API scores.
72
McGarvin provided rich information on the leadership role of the principal in
building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
As previously mentioned there were few school sites that met the stringent
criteria of high poverty and high achieving at the intermediate school level.
Therefore, the need to explore in-depth the leadership role of the principal in a
school that has accomplished this goal was critical to enhance and contribute to the
current educational literature.
Sampling
“The key issue in selecting and making decisions about the appropriate unit
of analysis is to decide what it is you want to be able to say something about at the
end of the study” (Patton, 2002, p. 229). The aim of this study was to gain
knowledge and information about “how” the leadership role of the principal had
changed since the implementation of standards-based reform, and “how” the
principal built school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth. The unit of analysis was people focused. Through a self-selection process,
the sample in this study consisted of one principal, nine teachers, three support staff,
and two parents at McGarvin Intermediate School.
This study focused specifically on the five dimensions of building school
capacity: teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional development),
professional community (organizational development/relationships), program
coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning goals/sustainability), technical
resources (materials, time, resources, and access to expertise), and principal
leadership (building school capacity/responsible for previous four factors getting
73
better and better) (Newman, King & Youngs, 2000). Stoll (1999) contends that
building school capacity influences the school’s readiness for change and its ability
to sustain change. Although standards-based reform and building school capacity
may redefine the leadership role of the principal, it is through building school
capacity and accountability that will have the greatest effect on student achievement
(Newmann et al., 2000).
Recruitment
After receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the
researcher met with the principal to discuss a recruiting and interviewing strategy
that would provide rich information with the least amount of disruption. The
principal agreed to have the researcher present at an instructional leaders meeting
held at McGarvin in an effort to recruit participants. A short presentation of the
study was presented by the researcher and informed consent forms outlining the
purpose of the study were left with the instructional leaders to share with other
members in their departments. The principal and the researcher planned and
scheduled return dates for data collection.
Data Collection Procedures
According to Patton (2002), qualitative data includes “observations that yield
detailed, thick description; inquiry in depth; interviews that capture direct quotations
about people’s personal perspectives and experiences; case studies; careful document
review” (p. 40). Another feature of qualitative data collection is “the researcher has
direct contact with and gets close to the people, situation, and phenomenon under
study; the researcher’s personal experiences and insights are an important part of the
74
inquiry and critical to understanding the phenomenon” (Patton, 2002, p. 40). A
semi-structured interview approach was used. In a semi-structured interview,
questions are more flexibly worded and it is considered the “halfway” between
highly structured and unstructured interviews (Merriam, 1998). A semi-structured
interview is considered “a combined strategy that offers the interviewer flexibility in
probing and in determining when it is appropriate to explore certain subjects in
greater depth, or even to pose questions about new areas of inquiry that were not
originally anticipated in the interview instrument’s development” (Patton, 2002,
p. 347). The majority of data collected in this case study occurred in November and
December, 2006, using semi-structured one-on-one or one-on-two interviews with
15 individuals (one principal, nine teachers, three support staff, and two parents) who
were self-selected. Although there were only nine teachers interviewed, there was
representation from all departments.
All interviews were taped, required consent, and were conducted within
30-60 minutes. A formal one-on-one interview and several informal conversations
occurred with the principal. Interviews were held at McGarvin Intermediate School
at times and locations convenient for the researcher and the interviewees. In
addition, all interviews were transcribed. The information gathered was coded and
sorted according to common themes in preparation for data analysis. The interview
questions centered on implementation of standards-based reform, leadership role of
the principal in building school capacity, accountability, and sustained student
academic growth. A different interview protocol was used for each participant using
similar questions (see appendixes A-D). The goal of the interview questions was to
75
gather information on how the leadership role of the principal had built school
capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth in this era of
standards-based reform.
Pertinent written documents were also reviewed in this study such as; school
agenda, school master schedule, McGarvin Culture, school plan, course outlines,
common assessment, McGarvin School Accountability Report Card (SARC), Garden
Grove Unified School District website, McGarvin school website, and the schools
API and AYP data via the California Department of Education website. This
information was used to determine how the information may have been used to
document the implementation of standards-based reform and the leadership role of
the principal in building school capacity and accountability.
In addition to interviews and written document reviews, observation of the
principal in action, teachers teaching, and students interacting on campus occurred.
The researcher also attended one faculty meeting, one instructional leadership
meeting, one staff development day, and a one-two minute classroom walk-through
observation into every classroom. This observation time assisted in examining the
leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth. Gathering data from a variety of sources
strengthened the data through triangulation (Merriam, 1998).
Through document reviews, interviews and observation, the leadership role
of the principal (factor five) in building school capacity in the other four factors;
teachers’ knowledge, skills and disposition, professional community, program
coherence and technical resources were addressed in-depth.
76
Data Analysis Procedures
Data analysis occurred throughout the data collection process in an effort to
gather pertinent information to tell the McGarvin story. Qualitative research often
times is referred to as “telling a story” (Creswell, 1998). A variety of interviews
were conducted over a two-month period, from November to December, 2006. “A
qualitative design is emergent and the researcher usually does not know ahead of
time every person who might be interviewed, all the questions that might be asked,
or where to look next unless data are analyzed as they are being collected” (Merriam,
1998, p.155). Interviews, documents, classroom and campus observations were used
and analyzed along the way which Merriam (1998) contends, “you have undermined
your entire project by waiting until after all the data are collected before beginning
analysis” (p. 161). Therefore, as data were collected in addition to transcribing all
interviews, the researcher developed a coding system (see appendix E) and
developed themes using tables to organize the information to assist in categorizing
the information (see appendix F). “Coding is nothing more than assigning some sort
of short-hand designation to various aspects of your data so that you can easily
retrieve specific pieces of the data” (Merriam, 1998, p. 164). In the data analysis
procedures, after coding, and creating themes, the information was used to address
the main topics relevant to each research question (see appendix G).
At the conclusion of the data analysis phase, which is making sense and
meaning out of the data by consolidating, reducing, and interpreting what people
have said and what the researcher has seen and read, the information must be sorted
into categories, patterns and themes (Merriam, 1998). The last step was to write a
77
coherent interpretation of the data. As a result of data collection and analysis, this
study provided insight into “how” the leadership role of the principal builds school
capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Trustworthiness
Qualitative study has always been questioned for its validity as compared to
quantitative study. In an effort to establish trustworthiness, verification of data was
necessary. Verification is defined as “a process that occurs through data collection,
analysis, and report writing of a study and standards as criteria imposed by the
researcher and others after a study is completed” (Creswell, 1998, p. 194). The
researcher used triangulation and acknowledgement of researcher bias to establish
trustworthiness.
First, triangulation was used and consists of reviewing multiple sources of
data. In this study, the researcher used formal and informal interviews, classroom
observations, campus observations, attendance at staff meetings, and document
review to gather rich data, develop codes, and establish themes. Secondly, clarifying
researcher bias assisted in this study. “The researcher comments on past
experiences, biases, prejudices, and orientations that have likely shaped the
interpretation and approach to the study” (Creswell, 1998, p. 202). The researcher is
currently a middle school principal and was aware of personal biases and
assumptions throughout the study that the researcher may have toward principals and
teachers. Assumptions from the researcher are that competent teachers and
competent principals’ impact student learning. To assist in addressing assumptions,
data tables were constructed and reviewed to ensure conclusions were based on the
78
interviews and not the researchers’ bias or assumptions. However, the researcher
was committed to keeping and open mind throughout this study.
Limitations of the Study
A limitation of this study is that the researcher only studied one principal in
one high poverty high achieving school over a two-month period. Another possible
limitation was the sample size of teachers interviewed. Out of twenty-four teachers,
the researcher interviewed nine who were self-selected and voluntarily chose to
participate in this study. Although there were only nine teachers interviewed, a
representative from each department was interviewed.
Ethical Considerations
High ethical standards were used throughout all phases of this study. The
rules and regulations as specified by the Institutional Review Board at USC were
honored and followed using the highest ethical standards possible. All participants
were informed upfront regarding the purpose of this study and participation in this
study was strictly voluntary. Participants were able to withdraw at any time during
the process. No one chose to withdraw from this study. All information was kept
confidential and a signed consent form was signed before data collection began. The
researcher, who is currently a middle school principal, acknowledged her
assumptions and bias related to standards-based reform, and principal leadership.
The researcher was committed to keeping an open mind throughout this study.
79
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
Even the best principals cannot single-handedly transform a school. To create a
culture that promotes what Elmore calls “distributed leadership,” principals must
assist teachers in becoming leaders in their schools
(National Staff Development Council, 2000, p.8).
Since the implementation of standards-based reform and the requirements of
NCLB, educational leaders continue to search for strategies to support teaching,
learning, and the ability to sustain student academic growth. Although standards are
often considered one path in the roadmap used to increase student achievement,
“standards, even when well implemented, can take us only part way to successful
large-scale reform; it is only leadership that can take us all the way” (Fullan, 2003,
p. 16). Schools of the 21
st
century will require an instructional leader who focuses
on strengthening teaching and learning, builds school capacity, allocates resources,
provides professional development, uses data-driven decision making, and develops
individual accountability (Institute for Educational Leadership, 2000, in Hale &
Moorman, 2003).
Principal leadership is essential in driving reform, creating change in the
organization and school setting. This case study specifically focuses on the
leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain academic growth in an intermediate school (7
th
and 8
th
grades), with high
poverty (58% free or reduced lunch), and high student achievement as defined by a
sustained Academic Performance Index (API) of over 800 for two consecutive years
(860 current API). In addition, all significant subgroups of students have met and
80
significantly surpassed their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals in language
arts and math as measured by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002. The
requirements of NCLB and the implementation of standards-based reform continue
to challenge educational leaders.
Principals and teachers continue to modify and search for best practices in an
effort to build school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Using a case study approach, this study will describe how the leadership role of the
principal influences building school capacity and accountability in an effort to meet
the required demands of increased student achievement. The primary research
question and sub questions will guide the presentation of findings: In the
implementation of standards-based reform: What is the leadership role of the
principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth?
Additional sub questions include:
A. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the
implementation of standards-based reform?
B. How does the principal empower teachers in the implementation of
standards-based reform and the decision-making process?
C. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for
implementation of standards-based reform to improve and sustain
student academic growth?
D. How does the principal build school capacity to sustain student
academic growth in the following five areas?
81
a. teachers’ knowledge, skills, and disposition
b. professional community
c. program coherence
d. technical resources
e. principal leadership
In schools, principals are often looked to as the driver of reform and the
leadership role of the principal is often considered the make or break of school
reform efforts (Fullan, 2003). At McGarvin Intermediate School, the principal is
perceived as displaying leadership skills contributing to successful change in
building school capacity and accountability to support student success. According to
Whitaker (2003), “the difference between more effective principals and their less
effective colleagues is not what they know; It is what they do” (p.1). It is important
to understand the school setting and school culture of McGarvin Intermediate School
who has defied the odds of poverty and through effective principal leadership,
dedicated teachers, staff and parents, has positively influenced the ability of students
to achieve at high levels.
School Setting
McGarvin Intermediate School consists of grades 7-8; it is one of 70 schools
located in the Garden Grove Unified School District (GGUSD) and serves students
from the cities of Garden Grove, Fountain Valley, Santa Ana, and Westminster
(McGarvin website, 2006). McGarvin Intermediate School first opened in 1966. The
school has 16 permanent classrooms and six portable classrooms in use on the
campus. The school also has a media center, multi-purpose room, computer lab, and
82
a counseling-testing center (McGarvin SARC, 2005). McGarvin consists of
approximately 675 students, 24 teachers, one assistant principal, one counselor, and
one principal. There are also two Title 1 coordinators who work a full teaching
assignment and fulfill these responsibilities after hours for a small stipend. In
addition, all teachers at McGarvin teach six periods a day without a prep period.
Teaching six periods a day without a prep period can create some challenges for
teacher planning time and collaboration time. Although teaching straight through is
not considered traditional for a secondary school, McGarvin teachers and staff
maximize instructional time to support student academic success.
For the 2006-2007 school year, the total enrollment of McGarvin
Intermediate School is approximately 675 students with a demographic breakdown
consisting of 66% Asian, 19.7% Hispanic, 12.7% White, 0.7% Pacific Islander,
0.4% Filipino, 0.4% Indian/Alaskan, and 0.1% Black (McGarvin website, 2006).
There is approximately 58% of the student population who currently participate in
the free and reduced lunch program and currently McGarvin has the highest API
score (860) of all 10 intermediate schools in GGUSD.
The academic success of McGarvin is well above the required state
proficiencies of NCLB as identified by their API and AYP scores. The state
requirement is to achieve an API score of 800 or above which is no easy task.
McGarvin’s API scores have steadily increased over the years; 690 in 1999, 736 in
2000, 740 in 2001, 749 in 2002, 798 in 2003, 808 in 2004, 826 in 2005, and 860 in
2006 for an overall API growth of 170 points over eight years. This is an average
API growth of 20 points per year with an impressive three years above 800.
83
(California Department of Education website, 2006). McGarvin’s academic
growth is an incredible accomplishment and few schools have been this successful.
Upon reviewing the California Department of Education website (2006), there are
few intermediate schools with these demographics and socioeconomic factors that
have achieved this goal of 800, let alone sustained it over three consecutive years.
Another measure of student performance required by NCLB is the Annual
Yearly Progress (AYP) which started in 2002. The AYP is the total percentage of
students who have scored proficient or advance on the California Standards Test
(CST) in language arts and math. Upon review, McGarvin is well above the required
2006 AYP percentages of 24.4% in language arts and the required 2006 percentage
of 26.5% in math. The AYP growth in language arts started at 40.7% in 2002,
48.7% in 2003, 52.7% in 2004, 61.1% in 2005, and 67.6% in 2006 for a 26.9%
growth over the past five years (California Department of Education website, 2006).
The AYP growth in math started at 53.8% in 2002, 65.1% in 2003, 62.1% in 2004,
69.9% in 2005, and 72.8% in 2006 for a 19% growth over the past five years
(California Department of Education website, 2006). The student AYP growth
almost triples that of the state requirement. McGarvin has experienced steady
growth in all areas and has been able to sustain that growth over time. So the
questions still remain; Why are some schools succeeding when other schools are
failing? What is McGarvin doing that other schools are not? As noted earlier, the
focus of this study is on the leadership role of the principal in building school
capacity and accountability to sustain student growth. However, describing the
84
school culture at McGarvin will assist in defining the leadership role of the
principal in creating powerful teaching and learning to support student academic
growth.
School Culture
In collaboration with teachers, creating a positive school culture conducive
for learning is often the responsibility of the principal and influenced by the
principal’s background, training, experience, and previous leadership roles. In
addition, high expectations, stability of the teaching staff, effective hiring practices,
and the development of a common vision and culture of success are all part of the
McGarvin school culture and contributing factors to their success.
Principal Background, Training and Experience
The principal at McGarvin Intermediate School is Dr. Jones, who has an
extensive background in education and has developed a positive school culture for
teachers and students to excel. Dr. Jones has been in education for 31 years and is
completing her fourth year as principal at McGarvin. After receiving training and
serving as the Director of 7-12 Curriculum and Instruction at the district level, she
decided to “return to the school site where I would have the opportunity to
implement many of the programs I was responsible for creating” (Dr. Jones, personal
conversation, November 20, 2006). Most teachers interviewed believe that Dr.
Jones’ district office experience, knowledge of curriculum, insight and access to
information have given her additional skills positively contributing to the culture at
McGarvin and her success as their leader. A support staff comments:
85
Because of her background at the district level and experience, she is very
knowledgeable about curriculum and can talk about it. I think teachers feel a
sense of accountability and the staff works harder because they know the
principal knows her stuff (Support Staff, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
“Dr. Jones is a strong, experienced principal who is very knowledgeable about
instruction and has collaboratively built a culture of high expectations conducive to
learning” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
High Expectations
The principal and teachers demonstrate a culture of high expectations and
work ethic for themselves and their students; focus on instruction, develop
collegiality, display a strong commitment for learning; possess internal motivation,
and an undeniable desire to see all students succeed. A support staff summarizes it
well:
At McGarvin we have high expectation for ourselves and our students; the
staff is very student centered and willing to go the extra mile and do whatever
they can to help out the students; everyone, including the principal, has a
good work ethic and everyone works so hard; when they [teachers and
administration] are pushing you there is no resentment because you know
they are working just as hard as you are (Support Staff, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006).
Even though the expectations are rigorous teacher stability at McGarvin is high.
Teacher Stability
The stability of the teaching staff is another factor that influences the culture
at McGarvin. Teacher turnover is low and most of the teachers have spent their
entire careers at McGarvin. One teacher noted, “because everyone has been around
for a while, everyone knows who has what niche and what their specialty and
passions are; so if you need assistance you just have to ask” (Teacher, personal
86
conversation, December 1, 2006). Another teacher comments, “everyone works
well together and we are very unique in that. I think we have built a school culture
of collaboration because any teacher will help you out, all you have to do is ask”
(Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Teacher stability has created a
culture of trust and sense of collaboration where teachers are willing to assist,
support, and share information with each other to support student learning.
Hiring Practices
Hiring the right person for the right position is essential for effective
leadership and valued at McGarvin. “It goes back to Good to Great by Jim Collins,
you have to have the right people on the bus doing the jobs you know you can trust”
(Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). When hiring a new staff
member, the principal shares the previously mentioned 14 points of the McGarvin
culture with the potential candidate and asks, “can you do and be all of these things
because if you cannot, you will stick out like a sore thumb and this is not the place
for you” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). A potential new
hire must possess characteristics of the McGarvin culture, exhibit enthusiasm for
learning, and display a strong passion for student success. Once hired, Dr. Jones is
committed to openly and honestly monitoring and evaluating teacher performance to
retain the most highly qualified teaching staff to support the common vision and
culture of “success for all” at McGarvin.
Common Vision and Culture
Through principal leadership, high expectation, teacher stability, and
effective hiring practices, McGarvin has established a common vision and culture of
87
success for all; failure is not an option. All students are expected to perform at
high levels and the teachers are committed to ensuring that all students succeed.
McGarvin has established a school culture that breeds success and “success breeds
success” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
In addition, the school culture and teacher environment at McGarvin are built
on high expectations and collaboration to support the common vision of success for
all; failure is not an option. One purpose of a vision is to support a culture of
focused instruction and improved student achievement. Teachers consistently
commented on the principal’s willingness to support the needs of the teachers as long
as it will benefit students and further the vision and culture of success for all; failure
is not an option.
Although McGarvin is part of a large district, the feeling on campus is one of
positive relationships, personalization, professionalism, and collaboration.
McGarvin’s student success is an outstanding accomplishment and warrants a more
in-depth look to assist other educators who may be in search of ways effective
principal leadership is used to create a culture in building school capacity and
accountability to sustain student academic growth. So, in this era of standards-based
reform and high accountability, how does a principal in a high poverty intermediate
school build capacity to achieve and sustain such high student academic growth?
The following data will show what McGarvin Intermediate School is collaboratively
doing to accomplish and sustain such impressive student academic growth and how
the leadership role of the principal specifically contributes to this success.
88
Findings Related to Research Questions
The main research question used in this case study specifically focused on the
leadership role of the principal in building school capacity (teacher skill and
knowledge, professional community, program coherence, technical resources) and
accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Main Research Question: In the implementation of standards-based reform: What is
the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth?
Supporting the main research question were four sub questions addressing;
the changing leadership role of the principal, teacher empowerment and decision-
making, accountability, and capacity building. Prior to discussing accountability and
capacity building, it is important to discuss the changing leadership role of the
principal since the implementation of standards-based reform.
Sub Question One: How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the
implementation of standards-based reform?
The leadership role of the principal has changed with the implementation of
standards-based reform by requiring the principal to collaboratively create a common
vision, have a strong focus on instruction, and is driven to lead rather than manage.
In addition to all of the traditional responsibilities of a principal such as; maintenance
of the school facility, day to day operations, and budget decisions, standards-based
reform has required the leadership role of the principal to work more collaboratively
with staff to develop goals and outcomes to increase student achievement. A
common vision also creates focus and increases buy-in from all stakeholders.
89
Common Vision
The common vision at McGarvin is centered on student success and driven
by high expectations for teachers, students, and parents. Dr. Jones comments, “my
personal vision for this school is a 900 API. This is what I think we can do and how
we get there is where the staff gets involved” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006). During an interview, the principal shared a story about a
“vision” activity she tried with the staff. Dr. Jones reflects:
I tried to have them do a vision activity this year. It did not work very well
and I will tell you the reason why. I gave the instructional leaders the old one
[vision] they had before I came. We talked about it and I told them to take it
back to their department and I just got the same old vision with a few words
changed. It said something like, all students will be fine citizens, have fine
jobs etc… Instead, we developed the McGarvin Culture which is the big
picture that guides us and says a lot about our vision (Dr. Jones, personal
conversation, November 20, 2006).
Instead, the vision was captured in the 14 points of the McGarvin School Culture.
These include:
• Teachers have high expectations for themselves and all students
• Teachers work hard
• Teachers are enthusiastic
• Teachers are flexible and willing to change
• Teachers refine their curricular activities
• Teachers are collegial
• Teachers are creative
• Teachers focus on teaching and student achievement
• There is open communication at the school
90
• There is a low turnover rate of staff
• There is a well-rounded activity base for students
• There is a low percentage of behavior problems at the school
• Students are respectful
• Student participation is high
The culture emphasizes what teachers, school, and students are expected to do in
order to support student success. “This culture was collaboratively developed and
now we spend our time refining it to focus on instruction and support student
achievement” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). One teacher
states, “teachers at McGarvin are relentless in their drive to improve student
achievement” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006) and accomplish
success through strong principal leadership and focused instruction.
Focus on Instruction
Today, the principal leadership role requires more focus on instruction
through clearly defined classroom expectations and frequent classroom visitations.
Supporting the focus on instruction and acknowledging the amount of standards
teachers must cover, one teacher comments, “Dr. Jones is very standards-based and
expects us [teachers] to maximize instructional time in our classroom by teaching
bell-to-bell” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). During classroom
visitations, the researcher noted teachers utilize bell-to-bell instruction, post daily
agendas, present standards-based instruction, display standards-based bulletin
boards, and students are engaged in the daily lesson. The notion of focused
91
instruction was described best by a teacher who said, “Everything we do must be
related to a standard and if it is not, Dr. Jones will know it” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). Focused instruction requires principals to become
stronger curricular leaders.
Teachers perceive a focus on instruction as a strength of Dr. Jones due to her
background, training, and experience. One teacher commented, “Dr. Jones is a
strong instructional leader who has an extensive background in education both at the
site and district level” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). As
previously mentioned, these experiences have assisted Dr. Jones in being considered
more of an instructional leader who spends the majority of her time leading, rather
than a more traditional principal leadership role of managing.
Leading vs. Managing
Due to national and state accountability for student achievement, principals
are almost forced to become more of an instructional leader and less of a manager.
However, when Dr. Jones was asked how the leadership role of the principal has
changed over the past 10 years with the implementation of standards-based reform
she commented, “I don’t know that it has changed that much for me. I think I would
say, I have thought about what my role was a lot more than I did before” (Dr. Jones,
personal conversation, November 20, 2006). Dr. Jones believes her leadership role
as a principal is to lead more than manage and contributes finding the balance to her
experience. When asked how she balances leading with managing she states:
In time you learn what the management pieces are and the really young
principals have not had enough experiences to know what those pieces are so
they spend a lot of time on them [managing]. But once you have been around
92
for a little while you know what those [management] pieces are so I know
what needs to be done. I will assign it to someone and then I will follow up
to see it gets done. I know what the management things are but I don’t
personally do them. I delegate as much as I can to the AP, plant supervisor,
or secretaries, so I can spend most of my time leading and planning
(Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
In an effort to lead more than manage Dr. Jones assigns tasks to other individuals.
Principals need to know the roles and strengths of all employees in the organization
in order to delegate managerial responsibilities and spend more time leading. One
support staff interviewed shared:
The most important role of the administrator [principal] is to set the tone in a
positive way and let everyone know regardless of what job we do that the job
and the person are important. She [Dr. Jones] makes each person feel
important no matter what position you hold [and] no matter how big or small.
Your contribution is very important and we are all equals. She brings
everyone together. Dr. Jones communicates each person’s role and shows
them their value to the organization while treating everyone equal and with
mutual respect (Support Staff, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
At McGarvin, Dr. Jones expresses the collective role and responsibility staff has in
improving student achievement. Dr. Jones believes all persons in the organization
have a role to support student learning and it is her responsibility and leadership role
to support staff in providing a high quality education for all students. This is
accomplished through delegation of managerial responsibilities while Dr. Jones
maintains high visibility on campus, visits classrooms on a daily basis, supports
teachers, and empowers teachers in their quest to raise student achievement.
According to Dr. Jones, “I lead, I don’t manage” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006). Principals today must spend the majority of time leading in an
effort to build school capacity to sustain student academic growth.
93
Interestingly, when teachers were asked how the leadership role of the
principal has changed over the past 10 years with the implementation of standards-
based reform, most teachers compared the leadership style and leadership
characteristics of their previous principals to Dr. Jones’ and did not specifically
identify the changing leadership role of the principal. However, the leadership style
and characteristics of principal leadership mentioned and appreciated by teachers,
staff, and parents specifically regarding Dr. Jones included:
High expectation, consistent, determined, standards-based, visionary,
knowledgeable, supportive, highly visible, takes the teachers point of view,
sees the whole picture, forward moving, empowers teachers, approachable,
persistent, accessible, resourceful, creative, goal oriented, follows through,
collaborative, motivator, encourager, effective communicator, student
centered, focused, strong leader, teacher, fair, receptive, open, honest, direct,
detailed, straight shooter, buffers teachers, listens, and most importantly
someone you can trust (Teachers, Support Staff, & Parents, personal
conversations, December 1, 2006).
The leadership role, characteristics, and style of today’s principal have
undergone some distinct changes since the implementation of standards-based
reform. Teachers report, “Dr. Jones promotes a common vision, has an established
McGarvin culture, is viewed as a solid instructional leader with a “laser like” focus
on instruction, and spends the majority of her time leading” (Teachers, personal
conversations, December 1, 2006). This instructional leadership is critical to
building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Sub Question Two: How has the principal empowered teachers in the
implementation of standards-based reform and the decision-making process?
94
The principal has empowered teachers through collaborative decision
making, establishing mutual trust, transparent in sharing knowledge, including the
use of data, and knowing the principal’s bottom line.
Collaborative Decision-Making
Collaborative decision-making is common practice at McGarvin and
empowers teachers. Teachers feel empowered because the principal includes them
in every decision. Decisions as large as the implementation of standards-based
reform to decisions around lunch time supervision all include teacher input. Dr.
Jones believes the more she can empower and collaboratively promote teachers as
leaders; the more her students will benefit and achieve success. “At McGarvin, it is
important we [teachers] are part of any decision, reform or change because we are
the ones that must implement it [decisions] in the classroom if it is going to impact
student learning” (Teachers, personal conversations, December 1, 2006). During an
instructional leaders meeting held on November 16, 2006, staff was reminded about
collaboration and continual improvement. The agenda consisted of a quote by Nolan
Bushnell, “Everyone who’s taken a shower has had an idea. It’s the person who gets
out of the shower, dries off, and does something about it who makes a difference.”
This quote supports the openness of communication, risk taking, and encourages
department leaders to collaborate by taking the information back to their departments
to get input. After information is gathered and discussed with all departments it goes
to the whole faculty at a meeting and is voted on using a consensus model. Everyone
has to agree to “live with the decision” and Dr. Jones will facilitate the discussion
until all can live with it. Dr. Jones believes this is time well spent because if all
95
decisions are brought to the staff and they have input, it is easier for her to hold
them accountable for implementation because they agreed on it. The commitment
from the principal is that every decision and program implemented will be discussed,
monitored, and annually reviewed for its effectiveness. One teacher commented:
Nothing is done last minute or top down unless it is top down beyond her
[Dr. Jones]. Any site level decision she will ask teachers and the leadership
team, the department chairs or key people. Everything is grass roots and we
are given choices. Decisions are done by committees (formal and informal)
but not bureaucratic. Input is always solicited, discussion occurs at all levels,
choices given, and a vote taken. So you feel involved and included in the
decision making of the school (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
Another teacher commented, “although we make decisions together and feel we have
input, she [Dr. Jones] also allows us to be different and trusts that we will do a good
job at implementation” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
For example, teaching standards is not optional at McGarvin, but how teachers teach
those standards is left up to the individual teacher. “I try to let them be creative; I
think that is why they are teachers because they have that creative sense” (Dr. Jones,
personal conversation, November 20, 2006). Although decisions are made
collaboratively, teachers feel they can still be individuals and creative due to the
mutual trust shared by teachers and principal.
Mutual Trust
Mutual trust is shared between the teachers and the principal. Teacher
empowerment in decision-making has increased trust among teachers and enhanced
teachers’ willingness to collaboratively make decisions to support student learning.
Dr. Jones shares, “I trust their judgment and they learn that I trust them. I trust they
96
will do what they say they are going to do because that is part of the McGarvin
culture” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). When mutual trust
is shared between teachers and the principal, decision-making, building school
capacity and accountability is enhanced. Dr. Jones comments, “You have to trust
your people and be transparent in sharing information” (Dr. Jones, personal
conversation, November 20, 2006). Dr. Jones empowers teachers in the decision-
making process through established mutual trust.
Transparent in Sharing Information
Teachers feel more empowered and decision-making is more effective when
information is openly shared. Dr. Jones has extensive experience, background, and
training both at the site and district level. Her willingness to openly share this
knowledge with staff and her commitment in keeping the staff informed assists in
building school capacity. Teachers feel this direct leadership style and openness
empowers them as leaders especially in the decision-making process. “Decisions are
inclusive and systematic; nothing is top down; it is not bureaucratic; teachers are
involved at all levels; choices given; decisions made and then monitored for
effectiveness” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). McGarvin has
created a culture of shared decision-making through open communication and use of
data.
Use of Data
In addition to building trust, and sharing information, using data to make
decisions is common practice at McGarvin. Data is constantly being collected to
make decisions and drive instruction. For example, consider common assessments.
97
Common assessments are given every nine-weeks in all core areas and used to
provide teachers with information on student mastery of content standards. Teachers
use the data to drive their instruction and fill in gaps and/or re-teach content
standards if needed. Dr. Jones consistently uses data and research with her teachers
to support and facilitate a brainstorming discussion with a number of individuals and
her administrative team before making a decision. Dr. Jones is transparent in sharing
information with her staff and also is very open in letting you know her “bottom
line” when making decisions.
Knowing the Bottom Line
When empowering teachers to make decisions, the principal also informs
teachers of her “bottom line.” Dr. Jones’ “bottom line” is defined as “what I
[Dr. Jones] can “live with” or openly support based on all of the information
available at the time” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). “She
[Dr. Jones] disseminates information to teachers and gets buy-in; she shares her
knowledge and always lets you know her bottom line; she brings the staff along and
uses data to help us make decisions” (Support Staff, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
There are no hidden agendas and open communication is part of the McGarvin
culture. Teachers, staff, and parents at McGarvin are considered an integral part of
the decision-making process. Dr. Jones shares her bottom line and is very effective
at empowering teachers and involving teachers in the decision-making process.
Another factor contributing to effective decision-making and teacher
empowerment is knowing the principal’s “bottom line.” For Dr. Jones, teaching
98
standards-based lessons is not optional at McGarvin School and all of the teachers
agree and understand this is her bottom line. However, how standards are taught and
refined to provide the greatest potential for student academic growth is an ongoing
process allowing for teacher creativity. Dr. Jones is very open about where she
stands on certain issues and as mentioned earlier, she has the knowledge of her
experience at the district office and openly shares her ideas and opinions with her
staff.
Due to her district office experience Dr. Jones is willing to question district
mandates in an effort to protect her teachers from unnecessary changes or additional
work. For example:
When the district tells us we have to implement a program, Dr. Jones is very
vocal and questions them [district] if she does not believe it will help our
students. She [Dr. Jones] protects us from the district who wants everyone to
be the same. If we are already doing something similar and are successful
why do we have to change? Instead of conforming, we just tweak what we
are already doing, or rewrite what we are doing or call what we are doing
something else that is more closely aligned with what they [district] want
(Teachers, personal conversations, December 1, 2006).
On December 1, 2006 during a faculty meeting there was a lengthy
discussion about a district mandate (writing focus) that the staff believed was not
going to benefit the students at McGarvin. The district mandate was viewed as an
effort to get the whole district on the same page using a specific program and
described by one staff member as:
Since no one from the district has been out here to see what we are doing and
how we are currently addressing this issue, successfully I might add, we did
not support the mandate and agreed as a staff to continue doing what we had
already been doing; writing across the curriculum and Dr. Jones agreed to
bring it up at the next principal’s meeting to ask for clarification (Teacher,
staff meeting, December 1, 2006).
99
During this meeting, the strength of the teachers and trust they have in Dr. Jones
when it comes to empowering teachers in the decision-making process and the
importance of buy-in was clearly evident. In addition, Dr. Jones has established a
reputation as a straight shooter and excellent “buffer.” One teacher commented:
Dr. Jones is on our side and that is important to us. She buffers us
tremendously from the district who sometimes comes up with some looney
ideas and suggestions. Dr. Jones openly discusses the district position on
issues and is effective at buffering us and repackaging what we are already
doing and sends it back to them with few modifications to meet their request
(Teachers, personal conversations, December 1, 2006).
At McGarvin, teachers feel empowered and have a true collaborative
decision-making process based on mutual trust, openness, and knowing the bottom
line. This is guided by the leadership of the principal and her commitment to
transparency in sharing information. Dr. Jones believes it is important to take time
to gather staff input, get buy-in, and use consensus when making decisions. In
addition, empowering teachers in the decision-making process builds school capacity
and accountability. Dr. Jones believes when all teachers have given input and agree
to support a decision, it is easier to hold them accountable which is important to
building school capacity.
Sub Question Three: How does the principal hold individuals accountable for
implementation of standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic
growth?
The principal holds individuals accountable by clearly defined expectations,
frequent monitoring of classroom instruction, common assessments, direct leadership
100
style and accountability in an effort to build school capacity and sustain student
academic growth.
Clearly Defined Expectations
Clearly defined expectations assist in holding individuals accountable for
their actions. All persons interviewed commented on knowing exactly what the
expectations are for staff, students, parents, and teachers. Teachers also describe the
high expectations Dr. Jones has for herself stating:
She [Dr. Jones] has high expectations for herself and her staff and expects
everyone to give 110% at all times. It does not matter what position you hold,
everyone has a clearly defined role at McGarvin and all feel part of the team.
We want to do the best for kids and are driven to do the best job we can
(Teachers, personal conversations, December 1, 2006).
When holding individuals accountable, teachers report that Dr. Jones’ high
expectations have made them better teachers and teachers report that the principal
works as hard as they do. “Dr. Jones works very hard so everyone else does too.
Since she has come, I am a much better teacher because I had to meet those
expectations and put in more effort and time than I already did. She makes you
better because she expects more” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1,
2006). All expectations revolve around the common vision of success for all;
support the efforts in building school capacity and failure is not an option.
Due to the explicit expectations defined for all stakeholders; there is an
understanding that if you are not meeting those agreed upon expectations, Dr. Jones
will directly address the issue with you and offer support. A support staff comments,
“You always know what is expected and you always know where you stand. She
101
will let you know if you are not making it and will always offer support to assist
you in meeting the expectation” (Support Staff, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
Monitoring Classrooms
The principal also holds teachers accountable through monitoring classroom
instruction. There are agreed upon expectations on what a classroom lesson should
look like and how students should behave. Dr. Jones visits classrooms on a daily
basis and expects teachers to teach standards-based lessons, students to be engaged,
and teachers to assess for mastery of content standards. “I probably go into
anywhere from 4-8 classrooms a day. Sometimes I will just drop by for a quick visit,
other times I will go in as a follow up with a teacher I have asked to do something or
re-check on something I did not see or like during my last visit” (Dr. Jones, personal
conversation, November 20, 2006). One teacher comments:
She expects a lot and because she has really high expectations, there is
definitely accountability. You cannot get away with anything because she is
extremely bright and has an extensive background in curriculum. You never
know when she is going to walk in and when she does, in 2-3 minutes she
will know if I am doing what I am supposed to be doing (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006).
Teachers report that if Dr. Jones does not see what is expected on a visit, she will
return later. If upon her next visit she does not see what is expected again, you will
be held accountable to answer to the principal. The principal maintains high
visibility. One parent said, “she [Dr. Jones] is everywhere” (Parent, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). High visibility equates to high accountability.
102
Common Assessments
Common assessments are critical to improving instruction and assist teachers
in holding each other accountable for student learning. Through the implementation
of standards-based instruction and the expectation that all students will score at least
“proficient” on the language arts and math CST tests, assessment has become
crucial. In an attempt to focus on what students know and are able to do, and
demonstrate mastery of specific content standards, the GGUSD district has
developed course pacing guides, district common assessments, and teacher
assessments to gather data and re-teach information if necessary. Information
collected and data compiled is used consistently at McGarvin. For example, at
department meetings, time is provided for teachers to review student assessment
data, share information with colleagues, develop strategies to engage students, and
re-teach information if necessary.
Another example of using data was observed during the December 1, 2006
staff in-service day. Using real student data, teachers were taught how to generate
teacher reports using Data Director (a data warehouse system), to evaluate how
individual students and classes of students performed on a specific common
assessment. Teachers report department dialogue is enhanced with the use of data
and common assessments. There is a common language and expectation that
teachers share the results with each other and share promising practices that worked.
Through these discussions, teachers and administration also discuss interventions
that might be needed to hold students accountable for their own learning and support
student success.
103
Direct Leadership Style
Direct leadership increases accountability. Dr. Jones is known for her direct
leadership style. The direct leadership style described by a parent interviewed
included, “she [Dr. Jones] does not mince words. She does not beat around the bush.
She tells you how it is. She is a straight shooter and gets straight to the point so there
is not much room for misunderstandings” (Parent, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
The principal has the reputation and leadership style of being very direct
while at the same time being very supportive. One teacher comments, “we [teachers]
have support and great kids and I need to make sure I am doing everything possible
to do a good job for them” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). If
you are not meeting the expectation, you will be given direct specific feedback and
provided the necessary support to meet the expectation whether it is a formal or
informal observation. During a teacher interview, one teacher recalls:
When I was evaluated for the first time she [Dr. Jones] told me that the lesson
was not satisfactory and I was not meeting expectations. There was nothing
sugar coated about it. She was upfront and said we need to work on “xyz”
and I will support you in any way I can. Then, I will come back in April for
another evaluation to look for it again. She came back in April and it was
better. That [direct leadership] is what I admire about her [Dr. Jones]. She
shoots from the hip, you know where you stand, she is straight forward and
tells you how it is and gives you support to improve (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006).
Teachers believe clearly defined expectations, frequent classroom observations,
common assessments, and the direct leadership style of the principal support high
teacher accountability.
104
Accountability
At McGarvin, accountability is perceived as “support, not as an I gotcha”
(Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Teachers share their
willingness to be held accountable for sustained student academic growth stating the
following reasons:
We [teachers] are persistent, determined, and committed to raising the
achievement of all students at McGarvin. Teachers here are intrinsically
motivated to do a good job. All these people are still genuinely excited about
their subject matter which is renewed by the students. Accountability for me
is more like I need to live up to my situation and my colleagues. Students
know they cannot slip through the cracks. They know they are being
watched. Adults care and at McGarvin there is high accountability for
student success (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
There is an incredible internal teacher drive at McGarvin to succeed. Teachers
describe themselves as intrinsically motivated and self-monitoring. “When we agree
on something we all do it; all the teachers are self-reflective and are always
searching for creative ways to support students” (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
Teachers hold each other accountable. During an interview, a teacher relayed
a story about a new teacher who had joined the McGarvin staff after working at
another school who said:
I have to struggle to keep up with you guys [teachers]. I have never worked
this hard in my entire career. You guys are motivators to me. I look around
and I used to be the best teacher at my other school and I knew it. I come
here and I feel like the worst. I am trying to come up to your level so I can be
just as good as everyone else. That is how it is here. No one wants to be the
bad teacher because you will stick out (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
105
Teachers’ internal drive, motivation, and high expectations for themselves and
students contribute to a strong work ethic and personal accountability for student
success. Another teacher comments, “the students are great, so it is not difficult to
work hard and get better at what you do” (Teacher, personal conversation, December
1, 2006). Teachers have a strong work ethic and are held accountable to improve
student success.
Dr. Jones believes when you hold individuals accountable for high quality
teaching, it will have a positive effect on student learning. Building school capacity
increases when teachers are empowered, involved in the decision-making process,
and held accountable for student learning. Ultimately, when building school
capacity, it is principal leadership that can have the greatest impact on sustaining
student academic growth.
Sub Question Four: What has the principal done to build school capacity to sustain
student academic growth in these five areas: teachers’ knowledge, skills, and
dispositions; professional community; program coherence; technical resources; and
principal leadership?
In the previous sections, information was provided to address and answer the
four sub questions specifically: perceived changed leadership role of the principal,
empowering teachers in collaborative decision-making, and holding individuals
accountable for student success. Dr. Jones has developed a reputation of a strong
instructional leader with a common vision of success for all. The principal has
established high expectations for all stakeholders, and uses a direct leadership style
to hold all individuals accountable for student success. Despite the ethnic and
106
socioeconomic diverse student population at McGarvin, the principal displays the
leadership role, style, and characteristics of a principal who has built school capacity
to sustain student academic growth.
Although there may be some overlap, the following section will focus
specifically on the principal’s ability to coordinate and influence the development of
teachers’ skill and knowledge, professional communities, program coherence, and
technical resources.
Teachers’ Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
The principal has established high expectations for teachers and is committed
to providing the necessary support to enhance teachers’ knowledge, skill, and
disposition. Dr. Jones continues to build school capacity by providing educational
research based instruction, professional development, and mentoring in an effort to
build school capacity.
Research
Dr. Jones believes one of the most important roles of a principal is to remain
current on educational research and says:
If I could tell other principals what I thought was important, I would say be
up on the research. I always try to talk about research at every staff meeting
or give teachers something to talk about. This lets them know that there is
more out there and new things out there because you do not want a school
that stagnates or has a teacher who has been doing the same thing for years. I
subscribe to many different journals, magazines, and read books and if I think
something applies to my school I will share it. Sometimes I use it [research]
as a snap shot or cliff notes to reinforce what they [teachers] are already
doing (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
Dr. Jones regularly shares research-based strategy information with teachers and
expects teachers to apply these research-based methods to their teaching. At an
107
instructional leaders meeting held on November 15, 2006, teachers were given
three research articles; What do we know about places that get results? Freshman
Transition Programs: Long-Term and Comprehensive, and Taking the Work out of
Homework. These articles were part of a brief discussion section on the agenda and
the expectations for the department leaders were to take the information back to their
departments for further discussion. Research articles are a standing agenda item and
Dr. Jones believes strongly in using research-based strategies to increase teachers’
skill and knowledge.
Professional Development
Another factor supporting teachers’ skill and knowledge is professional
development. The principal uses data and research to determine the specific needs of
teachers. On-site professional development is determined based on what is needed
not what is the current trend. According to teachers, professional development is
provided on site whenever possible or at the district level. One teacher comments,
“we have a number of schools in the district who are doing great things and have
innovative programs so we don’t have to hire and outside consultant. Just look
closely to those who are being successful” (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006). The district provides a monthly calendar of professional
development opportunities in which teachers may attend or the principal believes
would be beneficial to improve student achievement at McGarvin. The professional
development model at McGarvin is based most closely with a Trainer of Trainer’s
model. “I am really lucky that our district has a great staff development program for
our teachers so there is almost always something I can direct my teachers to attend.
108
However, if that doesn’t meet our needs, I will provide the professional
development myself like I did for Cornell notes and the writing program” (Dr. Jones,
personal conversation, November 20, 2006). Dr. Jones asks specific teachers to
attend a conference or participate on a district committee when the information
presented aligns with current practices or needs at McGarvin. All professional
development must have a focus of improving student learning and the expectation is
that those attending will share the information with other faculty members.
Mentoring
In an effort to increase teachers’ skill and knowledge, administrators and
teachers provide on-site professional development, assistance, and mentoring for
new teachers. “Teachers who have been here take the new ones [teachers] under their
wing” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). A support staff states,
“when new teachers come in we meet and go over how things are done at McGarvin
and answer any questions” (Support Staff, personal conversation, December 1,
2006). Due to low staff turnover, there is not a significant number of new staff each
year, however, there is a strong commitment from current staff and the principal to
provide any professional development needed for new or struggling staff members to
be successful. Dr. Jones “is good about bringing people along and empowering us to
be leaders. She is a great trainer and willing to help you become a better leader. She
trains her people” (Support Staff, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Other
staff members are also a resource for teachers. One teacher reflected, “if you need
help from someone, or you know someone who is having difficulties, you offer your
assistance. Even though everyone is busy it is part of the professionalism and the
109
type of people who are here” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1,
2006). There is a true sense of collaboration and a strong willingness to support all
teachers and staff in developing their knowledge and skill so all students succeed.
Professional community: relationships, distributed or shared leadership
The principal and teachers share leadership responsibilities and are
committed to developing a professional community centered on relationships,
teachers as leaders, recognitions, time, and interventions to build school capacity and
sustained student growth. Through the collaborative efforts of teachers and staff, a
student centered culture of success, high expectation, teacher dedication, hard work,
and commitment are the collective responsibility of all stakeholders and have been
established at McGarvin. One teacher noted how this professional community felt to
her: “We have a principal, students, teachers, parents, and staff working and moving
together in the same direction to help all students succeed. Student success is a
direct reflection on us and we [teachers] take this job very seriously” (Teacher,
personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Although content is important, building
relationships is an integral part of the McGarvin culture.
Relationships
Developing positive relationships is part of developing a professional
community. While on campus, the researcher observed positive relationships based
on mutual respect occurring between teachers, staff, students, parents, and
administration. Dr. Jones reported in an interview, she is approachable and creates a
pleasant environment and positive relationships with her staff stating:
110
I am highly visible and I try never to look upset when someone
approaches me or pops into my office. I try to always smile when I am
approached before school, during break time, lunch time, or right after
school. I leave my door open and people ask if I have a minute and I say
absolutely even if I am really busy. I am very conscious of those things and
my actions (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
Effective communication, support, and high accountability also assist in the
development of positive relationships and a functional professional community.
Creating positive relationships with staff assists in developing a professional
community where students succeed and where teachers are encouraged, trained, and
empowered to be leaders.
Teachers as Leaders
Teachers are leaders at McGarvin and all teachers are encouraged and
empowered to take on a leadership role. Distributed or shared leadership is a
philosophy and part of the McGarvin culture. A teacher reports, “everyone does
their share and therefore it does not fall on any one person” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). At McGarvin, teacher leadership is distributed
and not the responsibility of one person such as the department head. There are
instructional leaders, department chairs, and data team leaders to share the leadership
responsibilities at McGarvin. Shared leadership helps build school capacity and
sustain student growth. If there is only one person leading or responsible for a
specific program and that person leaves the organization, the program will halt and
students will not continue to benefit. “It is the expectation that all teachers agree to
take a leadership role and everyone is committed to working together so all of our
students can achieve at high levels” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
111
November 20, 2006). According to Dr. Jones, once teachers have accepted
leadership roles and students have achieved proficiency, it is only fair to give them
proper recognition.
Recognitions
Teacher and student recognition is another factor supporting a professional
community and also assists in building school capacity. A variety of student and
staff recognition exists at McGarvin. Teachers are recognized in written form or
verbally acknowledged. Dr. Jones makes a concerted effort to highlight teachers
during her “Spotlight in Education” section of her faculty meetings. The principal
publicly acknowledges what teachers are doing in their classrooms and encourages
other teachers to visit those classrooms. Dr. Jones states:
The first thing on the agenda at the staff meeting is what I [Dr. Jones] call,
Spotlight in Education. I talk about what I see in different classrooms. For
example, I will say, I was in teacher x’s room and she has the best standards-
based bulletin boards that I have ever seen. Teacher y has the best writing
posted. Or teacher z, on his side wall has something I have never seen from
anyone else. He has a student rubric for doing assignments so students can
self-evaluate their task. This is not to put others down, but you need to go
into these rooms and see this great stuff (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006).
Teachers appreciate and perceive public acknowledgement as validation for their
hard work and the principal hopes it motivates and challenges others in the
professional community.
Recognition and celebrations are also used to motivate students. Students are
celebrated many times throughout the year. Every time a student scores proficient
on a district benchmark test, which is given every nine weeks, they receive a ribbon
and are publicly acknowledged. In fact, teachers report they are seeking other
112
creative ways to recognize students because the numbers have grown so much
they do not have enough time during an assembly. What a great dilemma to have to
solve.
Time
Accepting additional leadership roles often requires additional time on
campus for teachers. The amount of additional hours teachers put in at McGarvin is
astounding. While on campus conducting interviews or observations, students were
released at their regular dismissal time (2:30 p.m.), however, it was noted that
teachers and administrators were still at school long into the evening and were
present well before students arrived, planning lessons, collaborating, or providing
interventions for students to achieve and sustain academic growth.
Interventions
Teachers were observed assisting students through a variety of intervention
classes, meeting with parents, collaborating with one another, and planning engaging
lessons for students; all on their own time and without hesitation. It is part of the
McGarvin culture that teachers put in additional time and volunteer for after school
intervention classes. However, it should be noted that the principal and other
administrators work in tandem with the teachers to ensure that the students are
attending intervention classes and they follow through on those students who are not
in attendance. The shared leadership supports a professional community by creating
a collaborative culture where administration and teachers are working together and
students are held accountable for their learning. This collaborative effort also allows
the teacher to teach those in attendance while the administration follows through on
113
those not in attendance. “Improving student achievement for all students is our
goal and we are willing to do what it takes to accomplish this” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). McGarvin has developed a positive professional
community through shared leadership, high expectations, accountability,
interventions, and coordinated school programs for student success.
Program coherence: coordinated school programs, clear learning goals,
sustainability
The principal is responsible for creating program coherence to enhance
building school capacity. Program coherence consists of coordinating all school
programs, collegial collaboration, targeted interventions, and co-curricular elective
programs for students.
Coordination of Programs
In reviewing written documentation, the researcher noted that the Single
School Plan was short, focused and to the point. The McGarvin School Compact
had concise pledges located in the student agenda stating what the school/teachers,
parents, and student responsibilities were to ensure student success. High
expectations and the goal that all students will succeed is a belief at McGarvin. All
programs are interlinked and coordinated to enhance program coherence and support
student achievement. During an interview, Dr. Jones shared a strategy she uses to
support program coherence by sharing goals and expectations with students. When
new students attend McGarvin, “I [Dr. Jones] say to the kids that we have this
structure set up that you cannot fail so you just need to be a school boy and school
114
girl. It is okay at this school to be a school boy and school girl. I will do
everything possible to help you succeed” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006). Dr. Jones believes this gives students permission to focus on
learning and meet the high academic and behavioral expectations at McGarvin.
Collegial Collaboration
Through the coordination of school programs, the principal and teachers at
McGarvin have collaboratively developed a culture of high expectations, collegiality,
clear learning goals for all students, a variety of student interventions, shared
leadership, effective decision-making practices, a positive academic learning
environment, strong shared leadership, teamwork, and individual and collective
accountability to sustain student academic growth. Throughout the teacher
interviews, teachers continually commented on all the above descriptors working
together in a combined effort to support student academic growth. The McGarvin
School Culture, consisting of 14 points previously mentioned, were also considered
important contributing factors in the building of school capacity through program
coherence to sustain student growth. “Our [McGarvin’s] high expectations, constant
focus on standards and our kids” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20,
2006) are contributing factors to our success. One teacher provides a great summary
about McGarvin’s success stating:
It’s synergy. We have an administration that is strong by its vision. We have
a staff that meets that expectation. We are respected both ways. We have a
student body that meets the expectations and all of those things work
together. I cannot identify one that is more important than the others, but I
know if one component fell out the whole thing would flop. It would
collapse (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
115
In addition to high expectations and accountability for students, teachers, staff,
and parents, the focus and commitment to providing interventions for students who
are not reaching proficiency has been another major factor in student success at
McGarvin.
Targeted Intervention Programs
Contributing to student success is the variety of intervention and elective
programs offered. Interventions are taught by experienced teachers before, during
and after school, providing opportunities for remediation to support the goal of
sustained student growth. Interventions include but are not limited to; tutoring, math
lab, homework club, and reading. However, it is the expectation these interventions
are “different” from what students already receive during the regular school day. Dr.
Jones comments on the before and after school intervention programs stating:
I do not want it [interventions] to look like school so don’t do more handbook
stuff, etc... Do something creative with these kids. Intervention classes are
where we do novels and activities, discussions, maps, math logic games. I
tell my teachers to teach the standards but do not make it look like school
(Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
In addition, the principal has committed to providing the additional resources and
materials to create the differentiation in intervention activities. Dr. Jones expects
and teachers agree to teach an intervention class some time during the year.
Intervention classes are not optional for students at McGarvin. Dr. Jones and her
administrative staff meet with parents and students to review their academic progress
or lack thereof. A joint agreement or contract is established and the student is placed
into one of many intervention classes. Due to the number of effective intervention
classes and the non-optional requirement (prior joint agreement), it is the belief of
116
many, that students at McGarvin are achieving well above the NCLB
requirement, as evidenced by the number of students scoring proficient or advance
on the CST tests in language arts (67.6%) and math (72.8%). “We have a very
targeted intervention program for our students” (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006). “If your child is under performing, intervention classes are
offered early so there is time for improvement” (Parent, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006). The McGarvin staff is involved in monitoring and adjusting
intervention programs to increase their effectiveness to support and sustain student
academic growth. In addition to interventions, many teachers believe the
comprehensive elective program has also contributed to student success.
Co-Curricular Elective Programs
Another factor supported by Dr. Jones and appreciated by teachers, students,
and parents is the co-curricular or elective program. At a time in education when
electives are being cut so students can have additional classes in language arts and
math, McGarvin has created additional electives for students. The leadership of the
principal and the commitment to provide a well-rounded education for all students is
expanding, when in most schools electives are disappearing. Electives include art,
music, drama, Associated Student Body (ASB), creative writing, young living,
speech, debate, keyboarding, journalism, computers, digital media, photography,
choir, and discovery science. One teacher comments:
When she [Dr. Jones] came here she saw that the elective teachers were
really invested in their programs so she has supported us unbelievably.
Programs that were already strong took off even more. She is very
supportive in a lot of ways. She is interested in what we do and is supportive
in ways of finding funding. She always includes electives in all aspects of
117
the school. She considers us [electives] part of the academic world and
sees the importance of our programs. She brings visitors to us [electives] and
not just to the academic classes (Teacher, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
Dr. Jones believes, “we have the highest attendance rate in the district and I think it
is because we have a lot of electives that they [students] like and so they want to
come to school” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). High
expectations, placement of students in appropriate intervention classes, and
comprehensive elective programs are all contributing factors to program coherence
but may require additional resources to sustain student growth.
Technical resources: materials, time, allocation of resources
Resources are needed to support programs. Resource allocation is done fairly
and equitably at McGarvin and teachers report they have the necessary materials,
equipment and resources to provide a rich learning environment for student success.
“Supplies and resources have never been an issue. If you need something all you
have to do is ask and she will get it for you. I have never had to go without”
(Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
Resource Allocation
Resources are equally distributed throughout the school and only need to be
justified to support student learning in order to be allocated. However, “She
[Dr. Jones] controls the budgets. If a teacher gives her a request and a reason why
they need it to accomplish their goal, she will most likely get it for them” (Parent,
personal conversation, December 1, 2006). The principal describes a “free flowing
process using a variety of sources such as; grants, PTA, SSC, and general funds as
118
resources used to fund programs or materials. I am real aware of what the money
is used for and I am also very creative in how to write up so it will be funded”
(Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006). Teachers report “all they
have to do is demonstrate how it will impact students and Dr. Jones makes it happen.
As long as it is good for kids she will find the money” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). Two examples to support this concept were
described by teachers. The first example was a class set of laptop computers for a
social science classroom. A social science teacher wanted access to the internet to
research historical events to enhance the curriculum. After listening to the
justification from the teacher, the principal worked creatively using a variety of
sources to fund this project. The second example involved technology as well. A
special education teacher wanted access to computers to better meet the needs of his
special education students but his room was too small to support them. However, in
an adjacent storage room there was ample space. Dr. Jones determined the contents
in that room could be redistributed and created a small computer lab, not only for
that teacher but other teachers on campus would have access also. “She [Dr. Jones]
thinks outside the box and tries to make sure there is enough [resources] to go
around. It is based on need and how best to support our students. She [Dr. Jones] is
persistent, determined, and follows through. When she says it will get done, she
makes sure it gets done” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
Dr. Jones has had a variety of experiences at the site and district level which
contribute to her ability to access resources to support teachers. Through her own
admission, “I know where to go and who to go to in order to get things done and
119
funded around here” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November 20, 2006).
Principals can assist in supporting the technical resources for teachers through strong
knowledge of budgets and a commitment to building school capacity to support and
sustain student growth.
Principal Leadership Roles
The leadership role of the principal is responsible for building school
capacity. In the Building School Capacity Model, principal leadership is the fifth
factor and considered to be the main thread that runs through all other four
dimensions; teachers’ knowledge, skills and disposition, professional community,
program coherence, and technical resources (Newmann, King & Youngs, 2000). A
variety of leadership roles, leadership styles, and leadership characteristics are
associated with Dr. Jones’ success and her ability to build school capacity.
Although the changing leadership role of the principal has been previously
addressed, this section provides additional descriptions of findings in the principal
leadership role in; building school capacity and monitoring classroom instruction;
principal leadership style in; instructional leadership and visionary leadership; and
principal characteristic in: high expectations, high visibility, and “buffers” teachers.
Building School Capacity
The principal is committed to providing the development of teachers’
knowledge, skills, professional development, professional community, program
coherence, and resources teachers need to provide the most engaging lessons for
student success and build school capacity. Standard-based reform has required
teachers to do things differently and a different leadership role of the principal. At
120
McGarvin, building school capacity is a collaborative effort between the
principal and teachers and requires the principal to monitor classroom instruction.
Monitoring Classroom Instruction
In order for the principal to build school capacity an important leadership role
of the principal is to monitor classroom instruction. Dr. Jones is in classrooms every
day to support teachers and monitor instruction. One teacher reports this consistency
in classroom visitations “makes me work harder because I never know when she is
going to visit but I know it is often” (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1,
2006). Teachers also report, if she did not see what she was expecting, she does not
immediately chastise the teacher. Rather, she works individually with the teacher to
see how she can support them to meet the expectation. For example, Dr. Jones,
during a visitation, noticed a teacher was having difficulty calming students down
and students were losing instructional time. Dr. Jones took over the class and
modeled/demonstrated exactly what she expects from the teacher and the students.
This type of leadership role is a change from past leadership roles of
principals prior to the implementation of standards-based reform. Pre-standards, the
leadership role of principals were more of a manager. There are so many standards
for students to master, instructional time cannot be wasted and the role of the
principal focuses more on instruction.
Principal Leadership Styles
Instructional Leadership Style
In the era of standards-based reform, the leadership style of the principal has
been defined as more of an instructional leader and less a manager. Principals must
121
exhibit strong instructional leadership qualities and the ability to empower
teachers. According to many teachers interviewed, teachers believe Dr. Jones
demonstrates a strong sense of instructional leadership due to her extensive
knowledge and background in curriculum and instruction. “Because of her
knowledge of curriculum, Dr. Jones knows and expects the execution of standards in
the classroom and can see that in a few minute visitation. Whereas, former
principals just checked to see that it was written on the board” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). Many teachers report Dr. Jones’ varied site and
district experience as contributing factors to becoming effective, credible and
respected as the instructional leader at McGarvin.
Visionary Leadership Style
Another characteristic of findings was a visionary leadership style exhibited
by Dr. Jones. One teacher comments, “visionary leadership is forward moving,
empowers teachers, and collaboratively develops a plan to achieve goals, then
provides the support and training needed to achieve these goals” (Teacher, personal
conversation, December 1, 2006). The principal is perceived as a visionary leader
who uses current research strategies to support student academic growth.
Principal Leadership Characteristics
The principal at McGarvin has very strong leadership characteristics.
Teachers, parents, and support staff interviewed describe Dr. Jones’ leadership
characteristics to include but not limited to:
High expectations, visionary, strong work ethic, pays attention to detail,
effectively communicates, empowers teachers, brings the staff along,
maintains high visibility, is consistent, fair, dedicated, direct, supportive,
122
student centered, approachable, knows her students, and has a strong
desire to see all staff and students succeed (Teachers, Support Staff, &
Parents, personal conversations, December 1, 2006).
High Expectations
Many teachers report that Dr. Jones, in collaboration with teachers, has
established high expectations for learning which include standards-based instruction,
bell-to-bell instruction, and active student engagement. She expects an agenda on
the board and engaging standards-based lessons which were observed by the
researcher during classroom observations. Teachers report they know what is
expected and Dr. Jones is fair in her observations. If during her visit, which may last
a couple of minutes up to 15 minutes; she does not see what she expects and all have
agreed upon, she will give you specific feedback (written or verbal) and return to
ensure that the adjustments have been made. One support staff commented:
Dr. Jones pushes everyone to do better. She works so hard so when she is
pushing you there is not resentment because you know everyone is working
just as hard. Staff also works harder because the principal knows her stuff.
She teaches you how to do things. She doesn’t just tell you how to do it. She
empowers people to be leaders…she is a great trainer and will never let you
fall in front of people. She is a role model who is willing to go above and
beyond to see you succeed (Support Staff, personal conversation,
December 1, 2006).
This type of direct leadership is appreciated by most teachers and is effective in
building school capacity.
High Visibility
High visibility is a characteristic described by teachers, parents and staff. Dr.
Jones is highly visible, accessible, supportive, makes frequent classroom visitations
and “She is everywhere and at everything,” commented one teacher (Teacher,
123
personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Another teacher commented, “I don’t
think principals can hide in their offices anymore which is the way it used to
be…laugh…laugh…(Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006). Teachers
report that Dr. Jones maintains high visibility and makes daily classroom visitations.
Buffers Teachers
Dr. Jones has developed the reputation as a buffer. Due to her district
experience, she has some knowledge and understanding that most principals do not
possess so she is able to “buffer” teachers. Teachers report that Dr. Jones has a clear
vision and expectation of student success and buffers teachers from district demands
that do not improve student achievement. Mandates handed down to the sites from
the district office are scrutinized by Dr. Jones and the staff. Time is spent discussing
and modifying current practices to fulfill district requests. “I see my role to take all
the obstacles out of their way so they [teachers] can go ahead and try what they want
to try to improve student achievement” (Dr. Jones, personal conversation, November
20, 2006). Buffering teachers simply means protecting teachers’ time and in no way
indicates an “us vs. them” attitude. Buffering teachers from unnecessary activities
that do not support student learning is a skill unique to Dr. Jones and appreciated by
staff.
According to Dr. Jones, there are three things a principal has to do well when
building school capacity in a standards-based era:
1) have a vision and communicate it; 2) you have to know what your bottom
lines are and communicate those to everybody; and 3) you must be on the
sidelines encouraging, motivating, supporting everyone to step up to the plate
to do better. Try new things. Be a risk taker. Just keep saying we can do this,
124
together we can do this. I will help you. Let’s try this or that and keep
that activity going all the time (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006).
Dr. Jones believes, “my leadership role is simplified because my teachers are
collegial, creative, enthusiastic, hard working, willing to change, focused, openly
collaborative, effectively communicate, share knowledge and information, and are
committed to doing what is best for all students (Dr. Jones, personal conversation,
November 20, 2006). One uncommon aspect of her leadership style is her
background and experience working at the district level. This knowledge may be a
significant and unique contributing factor to building school capacity at McGarvin.
Principal leadership is the fifth component in building school capacity and is
essential for the other four capacity factors to be effective. The leadership role of the
principal is crucial in order for school capacity to work effectively and have the most
dramatic impact on student achievement. One teacher provided a great summary by
stating:
The staff is a hard working staff and we have hard working students but we
have someone who provides a place for that to be directed and at the same
time she’s got the energy to direct. If she did not have this staff…she could
not pull off what she does but if we did not have her we could not pull off
what we pull off. So it [Dr. Jones] is a good match and we have a good
partnership (Teacher, personal conversation, December 1, 2006).
Conclusions
Conclusions were drawn from the research findings used to answer the
following four research questions:
1) How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation of
standards-based reform?
125
From the principal’s perspective, she does not believe her leadership role
has changed as a result of standards-based reform. However, Dr. Jones
acknowledges that she thinks about her leadership role more now since the
implementation of standards-based reform. This may be related to her extensive
background and training in curriculum and instruction and her district-level
experience developing standards-based programs for site level implementation.
Dr. Jones also values the use of research-based strategies such as Doug Reeves and
Robert Marzano to support teachers in teaching, and students in learning.
Teachers describe the leadership role of the principal as a very direct
leadership style, with high expectations, which holds individuals accountable, and a
principal who has a strong instructional leadership background. Teachers also
describe knowing where they stand in relationship to meeting the expectations of the
common vision, focus on instruction, and instructional leadership contributions.
Most of the teachers interviewed had only been teachers so they described more of
the leadership style and characteristics rather than the role of the principal.
2) How does the principal empower teachers in the implementation of standards-
based reform and the decision-making process?
The principal empowers teachers through the implementation of standards-
based reform through collaborative decision-making, development of mutual trust,
transparency in sharing knowledge, and sharing her “bottom line” on what she can
live with when making decisions. The researcher has never experienced a situation
where she felt like the outsider because she was an administrator during a staff
meeting when teachers and the principal had an open dialogue regarding a district
126
mandate they were questioning. Usually in education, you have an Us (teachers)
vs. Them (administrator/district office). This exchange of information felt more like
a We (teachers and principal) vs. Them (district office). Information was openly
shared by the principal with teachers prior to making the decision not to support the
request. At McGarvin, there is open and direct communication and mutual trust that
has been established to support standards-based reform and a collaborative decision-
making process. This district openness is supportive of the direct leadership style of
the principal.
3) How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementation of
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
The principal holds individuals accountable for implementation of standards-
based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth by clearly defined
expectations, frequent monitoring of classroom instruction, common assessments,
and a direct leadership style. Holding individuals accountable is definitely a strength
of Dr. Jones and so is high visibility and frequent monitoring of classroom
instruction. Teachers describe being prepared for her to walk in at anytime. The
expectation is that you will be teaching a standards-based lesson and students will be
engaged. Instructional time is valued and there is an expectation that you teach bell-
to-bell. If you are not meeting these expectations, Dr. Jones will have a conversation
with you and offer you support on how you might achieve the desired expectation.
Due to her high visibility and frequent classroom visitations, teachers report a sense
of accountability to support and implement the agreed upon expectations for student
127
learning. Holding individuals accountable requires a consistent direct leadership
style from the principal.
4) How does the principal build school capacity to sustain student academic growth?
The principal builds school capacity by focusing on high expectations,
holding individuals accountable, improving teachers’ skill and knowledge,
developing a professional community, coordinating programs through program
coherence, and providing the technical resources for students and teachers to
succeed. These are responsibilities described in this case study to support the
principal as a visionary, instructional, transformational leader who uses a direct
leadership style to build school capacity and accountability to sustain student
academic growth.
128
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
If principals are to be successful in leading schools that provide the best possible
education for all children, learning and school improvement need to form the core of
their responsibilities (Murphy, 2002, p. 25).
In this era of standards-based reform, this study examined the leadership role
of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student
academic growth. The sample in this study consisted of fifteen school persons; one
principal; nine teachers (one from each department); three support staff; and two
parents. Through individual interviews, classroom observations, campus
observations, and a document review, information was gathered and analyzed to
suggest the leadership role of the principal had a positive affect on student
achievement at McGarvin Intermediate School. Using Newmann, King & Youngs
(2000) Building School Capacity Model as a guide to improve student achievement,
the findings from this study provide insight into “how” the principal has created a
collaborative culture, empowered teachers, and created an intense focus on student
success.
In this chapter, the researcher reiterates the major findings of this study,
provides a discussion on the findings and the relationship to the reviewed literature
provided in Chapter Two. Specifically, the researcher focused on “how” the
leadership role of the principal has built school capacity and accountability to sustain
student academic growth at McGarvin Intermediate School. To conclude this
chapter, the researcher offers some practical implications followed by
recommendations for future research.
129
Major Findings
This study revealed three major findings regarding the leadership role of the
principal in building school capacity and accountability which include:
1. The principal has used a combination of leadership styles and has
created a unique leadership style through her background, training,
and experience at the district level and her directness in monitoring
and evaluating teacher and student performance. The researcher
describes this unique direct leadership as holding individuals
accountable for meeting clearly defined expectations, focusing on
standards-based instruction, and providing specific support for those
individuals not meeting expectations or standards.
2. The principal empowers teachers through transparent communication,
positive relationships, and collaborative decision-making. In this
study, teachers report the principal openly discusses information,
shares her “bottom line” on where she stands on issues, and “buffers”
teachers from unnecessary tasks that distract from the goal of student
success. Further, the principal maintains a laser-like focus on
instruction and does not let anything or anyone take her school or
teachers away from the vision of success for all.
3. The principal has successfully built school capacity using the
Building School Capacity Model described by Newmann, King &
Youngs (2000) to sustain student academic growth and hold
individuals accountable for improved student achievement.
130
Specifically, the findings suggest the principal has established
program coherence at McGarvin, through the coordination of school
programs, collegial collaboration, targeted intervention programs, and
promoting co-curricular/elective programs to support student success.
Discussion
Over the years, there have been a number of research studies examining the
important principal leadership factors necessary for principals to be successful
leaders. However, since the implementation of standards-based reform and
accountability pressures to meet the state and federal academic requirements,
research has shifted from “what” is needed for principals to be successful to
examining “how” the leadership role and current practices of the principal impact
student learning. In addition, past literature showed that students from low
socioeconomic environments had lower achievement than those of their peers in high
socioeconomic environments. The implication was that the lower achievement was
due to their environment and not to what occurred in school. This belief may have
been a contributing factor to teachers and administrators setting low expectations for
certain students. Currently, with the implementation of standards-based reform and
state and federal measures of accountability the expectation is “all students will be
academically proficient by the year 2014” (NCLB, 2002). Success is measured by
specific content standards students should know and be able to do at each grade level
in language arts and math. Standards-based reform has shifted the focus away from
environmental factors and focused on school and classroom factors. Specifically, the
principal’s leadership role and the teachers’ leadership role in promoting success for
131
all. Principals and teachers are held accountable for improving all student
achievement regardless of a student’s background. “Improving student achievement
is a complex task that requires a long-term commitment on the part of school staff”
(McREL, 2005, p. 3). So, why are some schools succeeding and others failing?
(Sagor, 1992). This question continues to drive current research and the findings
from this study provide insight into “how” the leadership role of one principal has
successfully built school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth in a high poverty high achieving school.
In this section, the findings are discussed in relation to the reviewed
literature. “No one would deny that children are the future, and few would argue
with the idea that the way to secure the future is to educate children well. However,
educating all children well is a challenge for an increasing number of schools”
(McREL, 2005, p. 39). In general, the findings from this study are supported by the
reviewed literature. In addition, the information obtained from this study describes
“how” the principal leadership at McGarvin Intermediate School has successfully
built school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth in a high
poverty high achieving school.
Reasons for McGarvin’s Success
The researcher concluded and the findings support that the leadership role of
the principal had a positive impact on teaching, learning, and student success at
McGarvin. The principal, teachers, and students continue to defy the odds of
environmental factors and exhibit a relentless drive to increase student achievement.
Despite the low socioeconomic status of their students as defined by
132
58% participation in the free and reduced lunch program, and a 29% English
language learner population, students continue to achieve at high levels. Keller
(1998) concludes, schools that have raised student achievement in spite of students’
socioeconomic background almost invariably do so with the guidance of an effective
leader. “Effective leadership means more than simply knowing what to do—it’s
knowing when, how, and why to do it” (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003, p. 2).
So, the focus of this discussion is on “how” the principal has influenced student
achievement and contributed to McGarvin’s success.
First, the principal uses research to change beliefs. The findings suggest the
principal’s use of research has dispelled teacher’s assumptions and beliefs that
children from low socioeconomic backgrounds and second language learners cannot
achieve at high levels and created an intense internal teacher drive to ensure that all
students do achieve at high levels. Through education and direct conversations, the
principal has educated staff and created a culture of success for all; failure is not an
option. Teachers at McGarvin believe that all students can learn and are committed
to ensuring all students do learn at high levels. During an interview with the
principal, the principal explained how she perpetuates this belief by conducting a
student assembly and parent night during the first month of school to share the belief
that all students can and will learn at McGarvin. Dr. Jones clearly, openly, and
directly states what is expected from teachers, students and parents in order for all
students to be successful. At that time, she shares expectations and goals. For
example, this year she believes and promotes that McGarvin can reach an API of 900
through hard work and dedication. She also reassured students and parents that she
133
has the “best teachers in the district” who are committed to ensuring their
children succeed but emphasized that we all have a shared responsibility in achieving
this goal of student success. Dr. Jones has created the belief in teachers, students,
and parents that all students can and will learn at McGarvin.
Second, the principal is a visionary leader. All stakeholders interviewed,
described the principal as a visionary leader who has collaboratively created a
culture and vision of high expectations for teaching and learning. Visionary
leadership is supported in the literature by Bolman & Deal (2003) who believe all
good leaders must possess vision, strength, and commitment. The researcher
concluded, the principal has collaboratively created a vision, a strong belief and
commitment that all students can and will learn at high levels as portrayed in the
14 points of the McGarvin Culture; 1) teachers have high expectations for
themselves and all students, 2) teachers work hard, 3) teachers are enthusiastic,
4) teachers are flexible and willing to change, 5) teachers refine their curricular
activities, 6) teachers are collegial, 7) teachers are creative, 8) teachers focus on
teaching and student achievement, 9) there is open communication at the school,
10) there is a low turnover rate of staff, 11) there is a well-rounded activity base for
students, 12) there is a low percentage of behavior problems at the school,
13) students are respectful, 14) student participation is high. The principal and
teachers report that the McGarvin Culture is part of the vision for the school and is
used when hiring teachers to see if potential teachers have what it takes to “fit in” at
McGarvin. During interviews, a support staff shared with the researcher, Dr. Jones
showed the potential teacher the culture handout and asked, “can you be all these
134
things? Because if not, this is not the place for you.” High expectations and the
commitment to hire the most dedicated and qualified teachers are part of the vision at
McGarvin. This belief in visionary leadership is also supported by the research of
Hale & Moorman (2003), who describe a visionary leader as a leader who has
demonstrated a commitment to the conviction that all children will learn at high
levels and is able to inspire others inside and outside the school building with this
vision. Dr. Jones believes it is her responsibility to hire, monitor and evaluate
teachers and is very direct with any teachers who do not live up to the vision or
expectations. We know from research that teachers are the most important school
related factor that affects student achievement (Schiff, 2002). After establishing the
belief, vision, commitment, and dedication to ensure that all students succeed at high
levels, an instructional focus and promoting standards-based instruction becomes
essential.
Third, the principal and teachers have a laser-like focus on instruction.
McGarvin is standards-aligned, utilizes assessments, and provides interventions.
This study showed a culture of a principal, teachers and students driven to success
using standards to guide instruction. “The national standards movement has made
dramatic changes in teaching and learning (Barker, 2000, p. 1). Research concludes
standards-based instruction must become the focus of teaching and learning if
student performance is to improve. What students should know and be able to do at
each grade level is what drives instruction. The findings in this study further
revealed McGarvin has successfully implemented and accomplished standards-based
instruction through a collaborative effort and a relentless drive to improve student
135
achievement. Teachers report that every lesson must be standards aligned and
because Dr. Jones is always in classrooms and has extensive knowledge, background
and training in curriculum, she knows if your lesson is not standards-based. The
principal in collaboration with teachers has established a culture of high academic
standards driven by high expectations. It is the belief at McGarvin that high
academic standards are the collective responsibility of teachers, students, and
principal. During classroom observations, the researcher observed teachers who
were driven to provide students with standards-based lessons that were engaging,
used a variety of assessments to ensure that students mastered the information, and
standards-based bulletin boards were also noticed in classrooms demonstrating the
intense focus on instruction.
Fourth, is the use of assessments to guide and focus instruction. The findings
revealed student assessments are used to drive instruction. Teachers reported
students are expected to master the information presented through the use of
individual teacher assessments, common assessments, and the variety of academic
intervention classes offered at McGarvin. How the principal ensures there is a focus
on instruction is by providing time during a staff meeting or time during a staff
development day for teachers to review data. The researcher observed teachers
examining data during a staff development day observation, supporting the
commitment to use data. This observation and findings support the use of data to
drive instruction and interventions to assist with mastery of standards. Data
collected is useless unless the principal provides structured time to review data to
136
improve instruction. When students are not achieving the high academic
standards, they are required to attend intervention classes which are not optional at
McGarvin.
Lastly, failure is not an option at McGarvin. Intervention classes are not
traditionally “more of the same” but rather, teachers are expected to use a different
strategy to convey the concept the student is struggling to master. During interviews,
teachers reported they take student failure personally and are committed to providing
a different delivery method through interventions to ensure students learn. This
supports the findings of teachers’ internal drive and commitment to ensure that all
students succeed. So, how does the principal provide a focus on instruction? The
principal monitors the implementation of standards-based education through regular
classroom observations and continuous innovations in providing intervention classes.
The findings further suggest and Dr. Jones confirmed that she delegates her
managerial responsibilities to others in order to focus on instruction. The literature
supports the focus on instruction stating, “today’s principal must be prepared to
focus time, attention, and effort on changing what students are taught, how they are
taught, and what they are learning” (Bottoms & O’Neill, 2001, p. 6). At McGarvin,
setting high academic standards, providing interventions, and focusing on instruction
are common practices leading to student success as evidenced by the high API and
AYP scores.
Another important leadership role of the principal is to encourage
collaborative decision-making and empower teachers. Principals can no longer do
this job in isolation. The literature states “shared leadership is critical for school
137
leaders because it provides a way for principals to focus on essential
responsibilities, and it is a way to develop leadership in others” (Waters & Kingston,
2005, p. 36). Principals must relinquish power and empower teachers. The findings
suggest teachers are involved in every decision at McGarvin and votes are constantly
being conducted. The teachers reported they feel appreciated when involved in the
decision-making process because ultimately the teachers are the ones who need to
implement or support the change. Teachers also report feeling empowered and feel
that their voices are heard. The principal believes if the teachers are involved in the
decision- making process; it is easier to hold them accountable because they had
input and agreed to support the decision. In addition, both teachers and the principal
discussed knowing the “bottom line” on issues prior to making a decision which
reassures teachers there are no hidden agendas.
Transparent communication between the principal and staff in making
decisions is not only empowering but also builds trust. The researcher observed
professional teacher/principal relationships based on mutual trust and respect. The
principal’s background, training, and experience at the district level have given her
credibility among staff. Teachers also reported that Dr. Jones “buffers” teachers
from unnecessary district mandates because of her experience and ability to interpret
the district’s position. The researcher observed a “strong will” from the teachers and
principal against anything or anyone who tried to distract them from their intense
focus, passion, and drive to improve student achievement. The researcher concluded
the principal’s transparent communication with staff is both inclusive and
empowering.
138
Principal leadership is the most important factor in the five characteristic
model of building school capacity and determines if the other four factors (teachers’
skill and knowledge, professional community, program coherence, and technical
resources) are developed. The requirements of NCLB have also influenced the
change in the leadership role of the principal and are supported in the literature.
“The new performance-based system is profoundly transforming the principal’s role
and responsibilities” (Barker, 2000, p. 1). However, according to Lashway (2003),
“since the beginnings of the principalship in American education, educators have
struggled to define a distinctive role for the position” (p.2). Further, standards-based
reform has caused a change in the leadership role, style, and responsibilities of
today’s principal; from manager to instructional leader, from traditional to
transformational leader, from bureaucratic to shared leader, and from passive to
direct leader. The change in leadership role is supported in the literature by Bottoms
& O’Neill (2001) who state, the formidable challenge demands a new breed and
style of school leaders with skills, knowledge, and leadership characteristics far
greater than those expected of “school managers” in the past. The researcher
believes the leadership role of the principal at McGarvin is a combination of styles;
instructional, transformational, shared, and direct with a very deliberate focus on
student success.
First, the principal displays an instructional leadership style to improve
student achievement. “Leadership is the guidance and direction of instructional
improvement” (Elmore, 2000, p. 13) specifically principal leadership. Dr. Jones
displays a strong instructional leadership style. The literature refers to an
139
instructional leader who cultivates a community of instructional practices and
creates a safe and collaborative environment for teachers to engage with one another
(Supovitz & Poglinco, 2001). Teachers have created a professional community at
McGarvin where information is freely shared and teacher collaboration is utilized.
Teachers believe the principals’ past experiences contribute to her strong
instructional leadership style. Prior to arriving at McGarvin four years ago, the
principal held the Director of 7-12 Curriculum and Instruction for Garden Grove
Unified School District for the past seven years, and prior to that was a site principal
at another school. The researcher reports it was Dr. Jones’ choice to return to the site
where she would have an opportunity to “put into action” all of the programs she had
created. “Instructional leaders shape the environment in which teachers and students
succeed or fail” (National Staff Development Council, 2000, p. 1). Teachers at
McGarvin acknowledge and appreciate the instructional leadership strength
displayed by the principal.
Second, the principal displays a transformational leadership style to improve
student achievement. The literature states “transformational leadership involves an
exceptional form of influence that moves followers [teachers] to accomplish more
than what is usually expected of them” (Northouse, 2004, p.169). As previously
mentioned, the principal at McGarvin uses a variety of strategies to involve,
empower, and influence teachers and staff to go above and beyond what is expected.
Dr. Jones is very strategic in how she promotes teachers and how far she pushes or
challenges teachers to reach beyond their comfort zone. The findings suggest the
principal leads by example, maintains high work standards, and exhibits an
140
incredible work ethic. Supported in the literature, Dr. Jones displays the Four “I”
factors of transformational leadership:
1. Idealized Influence: leaders acts as strong role models; followers identify and
want to emulate them; leaders have high moral and ethical standards; leaders
are respected by followers who trust them; leaders provide a vision and sense
of mission.
2. Inspirational Motivation: leaders communicate high expectations; leaders
inspire and motivate followers toward the vision; leaders create a team spirit.
3. Intellectual Simulation: leaders stimulate creativity and innovation; leaders
challenge their own beliefs and values; leaders support followers in new
approaches; leaders engage in problem solving.
4. Individualized Consideration: leaders provide a supportive climate in which
they listen carefully to the individual needs of the followers; leaders act as
coaches and advisers (Northouse, 2004, pgs. 174-177).
Transformational leadership also describes a leader who is “attentive to the needs
and motives of followers [teachers] and tries to help followers [teachers] reach their
fullest potential” (p. 170). The researcher recognized Dr. Jones’ knowledge of each
teacher’s strengths and areas needing refinement during conversations about teacher
performance. Dr. Jones shared with the researcher that because she is in classrooms
daily for varying amounts of time, she is able to celebrate successes and offer
support in areas needing refinement. Sagor (1992) found that schools where teachers
and students reported a culture conducive for school success, those schools had a
transformation leader as its principal. Dr. Jones displays many of the characteristics
141
associated with transformation leadership which may be one of many
contributing factors to McGarvin’s success.
Third, the principal displays a shared leadership style to improve student
achievement. Shared leadership is about empowering and developing teachers as
leaders. The literature defines “a teacher leader as one who has a positive influence
on the school as well as in the classroom (Barth, 2001a, p. 88, in Collinson, 2004,
p. 363). The findings revealed shared leadership as common practice at McGarvin as
was previously discussed in the section on collaborative decision-making and
empowering teachers. In addition, delegation is a strategy used by the principal to
share leadership. The principal reported delegation requires the principal to know
the strengths, establish clearly defined expectations for all employees, and trust staff
to complete the task. Dr. Jones was described by staff as sharing leadership by
delegating tasks to specific individuals. Instead of viewing this as “more work or
another thing to do,” staff embraced the challenge and felt empowered that the
principal believed or trusted them enough to lead others. School leadership and
classroom leadership are shared at McGarvin with an intense focus on teaching and
learning.
Lastly, the principal displays a unique direct leadership style to improve
student achievement. This unique direct leadership style emerged from this study.
The researcher describes this direct leadership style as a principal who has
collaboratively developed a clear vision of success for all; established high
expectations for teachers, staff, students, and parents; and relentlessly holds all
individuals accountable for exceeding expectations and improving teaching and
142
learning. “School leaders cannot overlook the link between teacher quality and
student achievement” (Schiff, 2002, p. 2). Teachers, support staff, and parents
commented on always knowing where you stand and always knowing what is
expected. If you are not meeting those standards or expectations, the principal will
directly address her concerns with you. Teachers reported there is no guessing
where you stand as a teacher in relationship to what is expected. Dr. Jones was
described as being very direct, yet fair, consistent, and supportive. Although the
literature states in Fullan (1993), “you can’t mandate what matters, and change
requires skills, commitment, motivation, beliefs, and insights, and discretionary
judgment on the spot” (p. 23). However, the researcher believes the principal at
McGarvin does mandate what matters but the principal involves the staff in “how” to
implement what matters. What matters at McGarvin is that every student succeeds.
Although the principal demonstrates a very direct leadership style at times, Dr. Jones
also has the reputation of providing teachers support, encouragement, motivation,
and recognition as appropriate.
The researcher concluded the combination of principal leadership styles and
the diverse background, training, experience, plus years of service as an
administrator at the site and district level provided the principal at McGarvin with
the leadership skills, knowledge, and confidence to collaboratively establish high
expectations and hold teachers and students accountable for student academic
success. In addition to the principal leadership styles and principal experiences
previously discussed, this study also examined building school capacity. The
143
findings suggest the leadership role of the principal and program coherence, two
components of building school capacity, were contributing factors to student success.
Building school capacity requires the leadership role of the principal.
Through effective principal leadership, building school capacity requires a
collaborative effort of all individuals working together to support the main goal of
increasing and sustaining student academic growth. “The collective power of the full
staff to improve student achievement school wide is referred to as school capacity”
(Newmann, King & Youngs, 2000). The literature continues to define “capacity
building as giving people the training, resources and opportunity to pursue complex
tasks and then to hold them accountable for improving student success (Fullan,
2003). The findings confirm the principal at McGarvin has collaboratively built
school capacity to sustain student academic growth as evidenced by API and AYP
scores.
As previously discussed, building school capacity increases student
achievement and consists of five factors with the principal leadership role considered
the most important in the development of the other factors. Program coherence is
another important factor of school capacity and defined in the literature as “the
extent to which the school’s programs for student and staff learning are coordinated,
focused on clear learning goals, and sustained over a period of time” (Newmann,
King & Youngs, 2000, p. 5). This study showed that program coherence is often the
responsibility of the principal in collaboration with teachers to align programs. The
researcher observed a collective effort at McGarvin to support and sustain student
academic growth through a common vision of clearly defined high expectations,
144
standards-based instruction, common assessments, use of data to place students
into appropriate classes and re-teach, high level of accountability for all stakeholders,
comprehensive intervention programs, and the relentless passion, drive, and
conviction to ensure that all students succeed. The literature suggests the principals
as instructional leaders can assist with program coherence when principals are
“focused on strengthening teaching and learning, professional development, data-
driven decision-making, and accountability” (Stoll, 1999, p. 7-8). The researcher
observed a clear alignment of teaching, learning, and accountability to support
student success exemplified by the McGarvin principal.
Accountability is another leadership role of the principal important to
sustaining student growth. The literature defines accountability as “students should
be held to high common standards for academic performance and that schools and
the people who work in them should be held accountable for ensuring that students,
all students, are able to meet these standards” (Elmore, 2000, p. 22). The state and
federal requirements of NCLB as measured by API and AYP are used to measure a
school and students’ success and holds individuals accountable. The researcher
concluded through interviews and observations that teachers, students, parents, and
staff are held accountable by the principal at McGarvin Intermediate School. The
literature suggests and Fullan (2005) believes leaders must learn to balance
accountability and building capacity to be a successful leader. However, leaders
should first build capacity, then address accountability to maximize student
achievement.
145
The principal leadership style of Dr. Jones is supported in the literature by
the eleven McREL leadership responsibilities associated with increasing student
achievement. These include seven principal and four shared responsibilities.
The principal responsibilities include:
1. Change Agent: is willing to and actively challenges the status quo.
2. Flexibility: adapts his or her leadership behavior to the needs of the current
situation and is comfortable with dissent.
3. Ideals/Beliefs: communicates and operates from strong ideals and beliefs
about schooling.
4. Intellectual Stimulation: ensures that faculty and staff are aware of the most
current theories and practices and makes the discussion of these a regular
aspect of the school’s culture.
5. Knowledge of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: is directly involved
in the design and implementation of curriculum, instruction, and assessment
practices.
6. Monitor/Evaluate: monitors the effectiveness of school practices and their
impact on student learning.
7. Optimize: inspires and leads new and challenging innovations (Waters &
Kingston, 2005, p. 38).
The shared responsibilities include:
1. Communication: establishes strong lines of communication with teachers
and among students.
2. Culture: fosters shared beliefs and a sense of community and cooperation.
146
3. Input: involves teachers in the design and implementation of important
decisions and policies.
4. Order: establishes a set of standard operating procedures and routines
(Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 38).
In this qualitative study, the researcher examined a high poverty high achieving
school using the main research question: In this era of standards-based reform: What
is the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability
to sustain student academic growth? The findings concluded Dr. Jones has
accomplished success in implementing standards-based reform, demonstrated strong
principal leadership using a combination of leadership styles, has built school
capacity using the Newmann, King, & Youngs (2000) model, uses a unique direct
leadership style to hold individuals accountable, and has successfully sustained
student academic growth in surpassing API and AYP requirements.
Practical Implications
Findings from this study revealed many practical implications for site
principal and principal training programs on how the leadership role of the principal
builds school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth.
“Despite the strides that have been made in the educational leadership research,
widespread concern exists about the current and future states of educational
leadership; in particular, the principalship” (Waters & Kingston, 2005, p. 14).
Principal leadership is complex yet essential in supporting teachers and improving
student achievement.
147
This study can be replicated in other public school environments to determine
common leadership variables found in high poverty high achieving schools. In fact
the educational system is challenged to critically evaluate current practices in
leadership, teaching and learning in an effort to meet the demands of high
accountability and pressure for all students to succeed.
1. Hiring the right person for the job is the first practical implication to
consider. A competent, passionate, committed, dedicated, and strong willed
principal who openly supports the development of teacher skill and
knowledge, creates a school culture and belief that all students can and will
learn at high levels, and provides the necessary resources for teachers to
perform the duties of their jobs are practical implications a superintendent
may want to consider when hiring a principal. Leadership is more than just
filling a position or mandating what needs to be done. What are the core
values and beliefs of principals and teachers? Exploring what is at the core
of a person influences their leadership skills and abilities. Finding the “right
match” for principals and teachers are practical implications that should not
be taken likely. Not just a principal or a teacher, but the right principal
leader and the right teacher leader are important factors contributing to
student success.
2. Creating a “buffer zone” between the district office and the school site to
promote student success. Principals should consider not categorically
accepting district mandates and the district office might consider what they
ask sites to do. Mandates need to be reviewed in light of site established
148
focus areas and challenged or adapted if necessary, due to lack of
alignment. Principals may want to consider educating themselves on what is
“essential” in fulfilling district requests opposed to what is considered
“important” similar to what teachers have done with standards for students.
Agreeing on “power or essential” standards of leadership between the district
and the site may increase student success. District office staff may want to
re-think their role as providing “support” to sites and “buffering” sites from
unnecessary “mandates” that may or may not align with student success.
Just as principals protect teachers’ time, is it possible for districts to “protect”
principals’ time?
3. Alignment and focus strengthen the common vision of success for all and
may limit distractions. Principals should consider collaboratively
establishing high expectations for teachers, students, and parents to support
the vision of success for all and should not waiver despite the many daily
distractions. A relentless drive from all stakeholders to remain focused on
what matters most, “student success” should be the aim.
4. Standards-based reform is the end result or outcome of what students should
know and be able to do at each grade level. How students get there requires
creativity, flexibility, belief, support and effective principal and teacher
leaders. Principals should consider refraining from being too specific,
directive or prescriptive in “how” to accomplish student success but should
not waver on the goal and belief that all students will succeed.
149
5. Improving instructional leadership for principals may be considered
another practical implication for student success. Principals should consider
making an effort to establish themselves as the instructional leader through
extensive skill and knowledge in curriculum and instruction. Strong
instructional principal leaders most often have instant credibility among
teachers because “they know they know” and these principals provide the
resources teachers need to impact student achievement. Valuable
instructional time is not wasted on principals having to “prove themselves”
to teachers. Principals may want to seek out research-based on-going
professional development opportunities in the areas of curriculum and
instruction to support teaching and learning.
6. Establishing positive, transparent communication between principals and
teachers may strengthen relationships and improve trust. Research on
principal/teacher and teacher/student relationships may have more of an
impact on student achievement than previously thought. Principals and
teachers who exhibit strength in content, pedagogy, and relationships have
shown a positive correlation to improved student achievement. Clearly
knowing and communicating “where you are going” and sharing the
responsibility in “how” you are going to get there promotes a culture of
shared leadership and collective responsibility. Leadership and learning is
hard work. However, when principals and teachers openly and effectively
communicate and present a united front, students do benefit. Developing
positive relationships creates momentum, empowering teachers distributes
150
leadership, involving teachers in the decision-making process creates
buy-in and builds trust in your professional community which all have a
positive impact on student success and should be considered in principal
leadership.
7. Providing regular teacher and student recognitions and celebrations to
highlight successes. Principal leadership might consider making a
conscience effort to assure regular, individual, and group recognition and
celebration activities for teachers and students who meet or exceed standards.
District office leaders may want to also consider recognizing principal
leadership as well. There is comfort in knowing your strength and areas
needing refinement as a leader, teacher, or student. There is even more
validation when individuals are recognized for their accomplishments.
Recognitions are empowering and motivating. Celebrations often times
perpetuate effective practices and are positive ways to hold individuals
accountable for “doing things right.”
8. Examine current principal preparation, training programs, and current
evaluation system. Superintendents may consider an extensive evaluation in
comparing their current principal training programs with the current McREL
research on successful principal responsibilities to improve student success.
Time is valuable and should not be wasted. Research continues to be
developed that focuses on strategies and techniques for principals and
teachers to exhibit in an effort to maximize student achievement. Principal
and teacher training programs may need to adjust “how” they prepare
151
principal and teacher leaders to be effective in the 21
st
century just as
standards-based education has required a change in leadership roles of
principals and teachers.
Future Recommendations
Findings from this study suggest future research recommendations on how
the leadership role of the principal builds school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth. This study focused on one principal in one high
poverty high achieving school. It is clear there is still much more to learn about what
other successful principals do. In order to gain additional insight into the complexity
of principal leadership and in an effort to isolate possible contributing factors to
success, the researcher suggests further case studies be conducted in similar settings
where principals have had a positive impact on student achievement.
1. More study of principal leadership in other schools of high poverty high
achieving is needed to determine what type of leadership style does the
principal and teachers exhibit and how is it nurtured and developed? Trying
to isolate specific principal leadership factors such as, being “direct,”
passionate, and relentlessly focused on instruction as observed in this study to
determine if those skills can be taught or are they learned behaviors.
2. Creating total curricular alignment and expectations from the state, district,
site and classrooms may enhance programs and develop leaders who have the
ultimate goal of improving student success.
3. Exploring the background, training, and experience of current site principals
to determine to what extent the principal has had district level experience and
152
instructional leadership is worthy of further study. This study has shown
that the district office experience and strength in curriculum of one principal
may have contributed to a unique direct leadership style, ability to question
district mandates, and increased credibility among teachers. Often times,
leaders just comply with district requests because principals lack the
knowledge or skill to effectively negotiate or challenge these requests.
Knowledge is power.
4. Further study may explore how the district is perceived by the principal and
staff. Does the district office provide support to the school site or hinder their
efforts to improve student success? Understanding the big picture and
maintaining the goal of improved student success, may allow the principal to
deflect unnecessary requests that take teachers and principals away from
focusing on student learning.
5. More study may be needed in examining the sustainability of student
academic growth after the existing principal leaves and the school is under
new leadership. True capacity building and accountability would suggest that
if student academic growth continued under the new leadership, the school
was not dependent on the principal as the sole leader and might suggest the
leadership role of the principal had developed school capacity to sustain
student academic growth.
6. Further future research may consider reviewing the hiring practices of
principals from the superintendents’ perspective and this current structure of
district office support to site principals. What are specific leadership
153
qualities superintendents look for when hiring a principal? Is there a
“home grown” philosophy or an effective in-house training program for
future administrators?
7. Superintendents may want to also consider clearly defining the roles and
responsibilities of district office staff and the responsibility and expectation
to develop and strengthen relationships between district staff and site
leadership. Again, clearly defining a focus and purpose of total alignment
where “everyone” and “everything” we do is working toward the goal of
increasing student achievement among ALL students.
8. Lastly, standards-based reform and accountability have created a unique type
of principal and teacher leadership that may challenge the status quo and
require changes in past practices. Therefore, future research would not be
complete if leaders did not consider the purpose and place of teacher unions
in education. Often times, the relationship between the principals, teachers,
and district are influenced by the teachers’ union. When setting goals and
expectations for student success, including the teacher’s union in the process
may be time well spent. Supporting and encouraging leaders for “doing what
is best for students” may require teacher contracts and unions to be modified
or discontinued in an effort to promote innovation and “thinking outside the
box” instead of protecting mediocrity in teaching and learning.
Conclusions
Although there are many factors that determine student success, effective
principal and teacher leadership is complex and there is no “one size fits all” to
154
improving student achievement. Information was difficult to analyze because the
leadership role of the principal is so much a part of who she is; passionate, driven,
committed, knowledgeable and wise. However, this study and the research support
are clear that principal leadership and empowering teachers directly impacts student
achievement. Building school capacity and accountability are other factors of
principal leadership that impact teaching and learning. School leaders are challenged
to conquer the demands of NCLB through competent instructional principals, who
have the ability to empower teachers, who in turn motivate students to achieve
success, while embracing a culture of high expectations and high accountability. As
Carol Wilson, a University of Southern California professor would say, “school
reform is simple; if you want to improve student achievement, you must hire a highly
competent principal for every school and a highly competent teacher for every
classroom.” Maybe educational leaders should start here and then challenge the
competencies and motives of leaders at the district and state level.
155
REFERENCES
Abelmann, C., & Elmore, R. (1999). When accountability knocks, will anyone
answer? CPRE Research Report Series No. RR-42. Consortium for Policy
Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. ED 428 463, 1-59.
Ahearn, E. M. (Ed.). (2000). Educational accountability: A synthesis of the literature
and review of a balanced model of accountability. Alexandra, Virginia:
Project FORUM: National Association of State Directors of Special
Education.
Barker, B. (2000). Accountability and authority: What principals need in a
performance-based system. Northwest Education Magazine, 5(3).
Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving Schools from within: Teachers, parents, and
principals can make the difference. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Beck, L., & Murphy, J. (1993). Understanding the principalship: Metaphorical
themes 1920's-1990's. New York, New York: Teachers College Press.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New
York, New York: Harper & Row.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: artistry, choice, and
leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Bottoms, G., & O'Neill, K. (Eds.). (2001). Preparing a new breed of school
principals: It's time for action. Atlanta, Georgia: Southern Regional
Education Board.
Briars, D. J., & Resnick, L. B. (2000). Standards, assessments-and what else? The
essential elements of standards-based school improvement. University of
Pittsburgh: The Regents of the University of California.
Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools. New York, New York: Russell
Sage.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
California Department of Education. (2006). Academic Performance Index Data and
Adequate Yearly Progress Data. Retrieved August 30, 2006, from
http://www.cde.ca.gov
Chan, T. C., & Pool, H. (2002). Principals' priorities versus their realities: Reducing
the Gap. ED 465 230.
156
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York, New York: HarperCollins.
Collinson, V. (2004). Teacher Ed & Practice 17 (4) 363-385: Article: Teachers
Caught in Acts of Leading, Teaching & Learning.
Consortium on Renewing Education (1998). 20/20 vision: A strategy for doubling
America's academic achievement by the year 2020. Nashville, Tennessee:
Vanderbilt University.
Cooley, V., & Shen, J. (2003). School accountability and professional job
responsibilities: A perspective from Secondary Principals. NASSP Bulletin,
87(634), 10-25.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among
five traditions. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice.
Alexandria, VA.: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools
that work. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Datnow, A., & Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1 & 2), 183-204.
Dean, C. B. (2005). The McREL approach to improving schooling and its outcomes:
Final report. Contract # ED-01-CO-0006. Regional Educational Laboratory.
Department of Education (2002). No Child Left Behind Act of 2002.
Du Four, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational Leadership, 59(8),
12-15.
Elmore, R. (1995). Structural reform and educational practice. Educational
Researcher, 24(9), 22-26.
Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. The Albert
Shanker Institute, 1-40.
157
Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff
development and instructional improvement. In Teaching as a learning
professional: handbook of policy and practice, ed. L. Darling-Hammond and
G. Sykes, 263-291. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Ferguson, R. (2005). Five challenges to effective teacher professional development.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL).
Ferguson, R. F. (2002). What doesn't meet the eye: Understanding and addressing
racial disparities in high-achieving suburban schools. Wiener Center for
Social Policy: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
Fink, E., & Resnik, L. B. (2001). Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi
Delta Kappan, 598-606.
Fuhrman, S. H. (1999). The new accountability. CPRE Brief No. RB-27. Consortium
for Policy Research in Education. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of
Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education.
Fuhrman, S., & Massell, D. (1992). Issues and strategies in systemic reform. New
Brunswick, New Jersey: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell.
Fullan, M. (1992). What's worth fighting for in headship. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Fullan, M. (2000). The role of the head in school improvement. England Background
Paper: National College of School Leadership.
Fullan, M. (2001a). The new meaning of educational change (3
rd
Edition). New
York, New York: Teachers College Press; Toronto: Irwin Publishing Ltd.
Fullan, M. (2001b). Implementing change at the building level. Paper prepared for
W. Owings and L. Kaplan (eds.) Critical and emerging issues in educational
leadership (p. 1-8).
Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership,16-21.
Fullan, M. (2002a). Principal as leaders in a culture of change. Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education: University of Toronto. Paper prepared for Educational
Leadership.
Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin Press.
158
Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability: System thinkers in action.
Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Fullan, M. (2005a). Turnaround leadership. The Educational Forum, 69, 174-181.
Fullan, M., Rolheiser, C., Mascal, B., & Edge, K. (2001). Accomplishing large scale
reform: A tri-level proposition. Journal of Educational Change, 1-25.
Garden Grove Unified School District. (2006). Garden Grove Unified School
District. Retrieved August 30, 2006, from https://www.ggusd.k12.ca.us
Glasman, N. S., & Heck, R. H. (1992). The changing leadership role of the principal:
Implications for principal assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1),
5-24.
Goertz, M. E., Floden, R. E., & O'Day, J. (1996). The bumpy road to education
reform. CPRE: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Brief No. RB-
20. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Graduate School
of Education.
Goodwin, R. H., Cunningham, M. L., & Childress, R. (2003). The changing role of
the secondary principal. NASSP Bulletin, 87(634), 26-42.
Hale, E. L., & Moorman, H. N. (2003). Preparing school principals: A national
perspective on policy and program innovations. Institute for Educational
Leadership, Washington, DC and Illinois Education Research Council,
Edwardsville, IL.
Institute for Educational Leadership (2000). Leadership for student learning:
Reinventing the principalship. Washington, DC: Author.
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (1996). Standards for school
leaders. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Keller, B. (1998). Principal matters. Education Week.
Lake, R. J., Hill, P. T., O'Toole, L., & Celio, M. B. (1999). Making standards work:
A case study of Washington State. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation.
Lake, R. J., Hill, P. T., O'Toole, L., & Celio, M. B. (1999). Making standards work:
Active voices, focused learning. Retrieved March 6, 2006, from
http://www.crpe.org
159
Lashway, L. (1999). Holding schools accountable for achievement. ERIC Digest,
No. 130, ED 434 381, 1-7.
Lashway, L. (2003). Role of the school leader: Trends and issues. ERIC
Clearinghouse, ED 479 933, 1-14.
Linn, R. L. (1999). Standards-based accountability: Ten suggestions. A policy brief
adapted from Technical Report #490, National Center for Research on
Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). Retrieved January 17,
2006, from http://www.cse.ucla.edu
Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Betebenner, D. W. (2002). Accountability systems:
Implications of requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Educational Researcher, 31(6), 3-16.
Liontos, L. B. (1992). Transformational leadership. ERIC Clearinghouse on
Educational Management. Eugene OR. ED347636.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendal, J. S. (1996). The fall and rise of standards-based reform.
Alexandria, Virginia: NASBE Publications.
Marzano, R. J., Kendall, J., & Gaddy, B. (1999). Essential knowledge: The debate
over what American students should know. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent
Research for Education and Learning.
McGarvin Intermediate School/SARC. (2005). School Accountability Report Card.
Retrieved August 30, 2006, from http://www.ggusd.k12.ca.us/SARC/sarc.asp
McGarvin Intermediate School. (2006). Garden Grove Unified School District.
Retrieved August 30, 2006, from http://www.ggusd.k12.ca.us/McGarvin
McREL (2003). Sustaining school improvement: Professional learning community.
Available online: http://www.mcrel.org
Mendez-Morse, S. (1992). Leadership characteristics that facilitate change. Austin,
Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education
(Rev. ed.). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Milken, L. (1999). A matter of quality: A strategy for assuring the high caliber of
America’s teachers. Santa Monica, CA: MFF. Executive summary
available online: http://www.mff.org/tap/tap.taf?page=execsum
160
Mintrop, H. (2003). Schools on probation: How accountability works and doesn't
work. New York, New York: Teachers College Press.
Mortimore, P. (Ed.). (1999). Understanding Pedagogy and its impact on learning.
London: Paul Chapman.
Murphy, J. (2002). How the ISLLC standards are reshaping the principalship.
Principal, 82(1). Reston, Virginia
National Association of Secondary School Principals (2001). Priorities and barriers
in high school leadership: A survey of principals. Reston, VA: Author.
National Association of State Boards of Education (1988). Rethinking curriculum.
Alexandria, Virginia: Author.
National Commission on Education Standards and Testing (1992). Raising standards
for American education. Washington, DC: Author.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education.
National Education Goals Panel (1991). The national education goals report:
Building a nation of learners. Washington, DC: Author.
National Staff Development Council (2000). Learning to lead, leading to learn.
Oxford, Ohio: National Staff Development Council.
Newmann, F. M., King, B. M., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that
addresses school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American
Journal of Education, 108(4), 259-299.
Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Rigdon, M. (1997). Accountability and school
performance: Implications from restructuring schools. Harvard Educational
Review, 67(1), 41-74.
Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership theory and practice. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Osterman, K. F., Crow, G. M., & Rosen, J. L. (1997). New urban principals: Role
conceptions at the entry level. Urban Education, 32(3), 373-93. EJ 553 202.
Paris, K. (Ed.). (1994). A leadership model for planning and implementing change
for school-to-work transition (pp.22-25). Madison, Wisconsin: University of
Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Education and Work.
161
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Ravitch, D. (1995). National standards in American education: A citizen's guide.
Washington, DC: Brooking Institute.
Resnick, L. B., & Hall, M. W. (1998). Learning organizations for sustainable
education reform. Daedalus, 137(4), 89-118.
Reyes, P., & Wagstaff, L. (2003). How can educational leaders improve the
education of students from diverse backgrounds. Division A Task Force to
Develop a Research Agenda on Educational Leadership.
Ricciardi, D., & Petrosko, J. (2001). A role paradox for new administrators:
Challenges of daily practice and demands for reform. Planning and
Changing, 32(1 & 2), 24-45.
Sagor, R. S. (1992). Three principals who made a difference. Educational
Leadership, 49, 5 (February 1992): 13-18. EJ 439 277.
Schiff, T. (2002). Principals’ readiness for reform: A comprehensive approach.
Principal Leadership, National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Schmoker, M. (2006). Results Now: How we can achieve unprecedented
improvements in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Schmoker, M., & Marzano, R. J. (1999). Realizing the promise of standards-based
education. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 17-21.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005). The virtues of leadership. The Educational Forum, 69,
112-123.
Sizer, T. R. (2004). The red pencil. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University
Press.
Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. London: Taylor & Francis
Ltd.
Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. (1991). Putting the pieces together: Systemic school
reform. CPRE Consortium for Policy Research in Education Policy Brief No.
RB-06. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Graduate
School of Education.
162
Stark, M. (1998). No slow fixes either: How failing schools in England are
getting restored to health. In No quick fixes: Perspectives on schools in
difficulty. In L. Stoll & K. Myers, (Eds.), (pp. 34-44). London: Falmer Press.
Stoll, L. (1999). Enhancing internal capacity: Leadership for learning. National
College for School Leadership,1-10. Department of Education, University of
Bath.
Stoll, L. (1999). Realizing our potential: Understanding and developing capacity for
lasting improvement. School Improvement, 10(4), 503-535.
Stoll, L., & Fink, D. (1996). Changing our schools: Linking school effectiveness and
school improvement. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Tucker, S. (1996). Benchmarking a guide for educators. Thousand Oaks, California:
Corwin Press, Inc.
Waters, T., Marzano, R., & 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.
Waters, T., & Grubb, S. (2004). Leading Schools: Distinguishing the essential from
the important. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
Waters, T., & Kingston, S. (2005). Standards we need. Leadership, 35(1), 14-39.
Whitaker, T. (2003). What great principals do differently: fifteen things that matter
most. Larchmont, New York. Eye On Education, Inc.
163
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PRINCIPAL
In the Implementation of Standards-Based Reform: What is the Leadership Role of
the Principal in Building School Capacity and Accountability to Sustain Student
Academic Growth?
1. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation
of standards-based reform?
a. How long have you been in education?
b. What positions have you held?
c. How would you define the leadership role of the principal today, as
compared to 10 years ago?
d. What is or has been the most challenging aspect of implementing
standards-based reform?
e. How do you spend most of your time on a daily basis?
i. What percent of your day is spent managing?
ii. What percent of your day is spent leading?
iii. How do you balance managing and leadership?
f. In a day/week, how much time is spent on instructional issues, and
how much time is spent on managerial issues?
g. How much time do you spend in the classroom?
h. What is the biggest challenge you face as a leader?
2. How has the principal involved teachers in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
a. How have you facilitated the development, articulation and
implementation of a school wide vision of learning?
b. What role have teachers played in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
c. How do you promote and/or develop teacher leaders?
d. What role does the Instructional Leadership Team play in improving
and sustaining student academic growth?
e. How do you assess student learning?
f. What do you attribute your success to achieving and maintaining an
API score of 800 and above?
g. How do you build trust and develop relationships with your teachers?
3. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementation of
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
a. How do you establish standards-based classrooms?
b. Are there clearly defined student achievement goals for students and
staff to be achieved?
164
i. If yes, how were they developed and by whom?
c. What method is in place for monitoring individual student/teacher
performance and providing feedback?
4. What has the principal done to build school capacity to sustain student
academic growth in these four areas:
a. Teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional
development)
i. How do you as a principal support/provide professional
development for your teachers?
ii. What do you look for when hiring a teacher?
iii. How would you describe your teacher evaluation system in
terms of providing constructive feedback to teachers in the
area of knowledge and skills?
b. Professional community (organizational development/relationships)
i. How do you as the principal create positive relationships with
your staff and is there a plan to address the teacher/student
relationship?
ii. How do you distribute leadership at your school?
iii. What to you consider as the most important role of the
principal?
c. Program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning
goals/sustainability)
i. How did you get the staff and your community to understand
and accept that educational reform may require significant
adjustments in teacher instructional strategies and principal
leadership?
ii. How is professional development determined and what
sources are used?
iii. Is there a specific process used to establish clear learning
goals?
1. How do you provide feedback or coaching on the
process of these established goals?
d. Technical resources (materials, time, resources, and access to
expertise)
i. How do you allocate resources at your site to support and
sustain student learning?
ii. Do you provide release time for teachers to plan and review
student progress?
iii. How are materials allocated at your site?
165
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR TEACHERS
In the Implementation of Standards-Based Reform: What is the Leadership Role of
the Principal in Building School Capacity and Accountability to Sustain Student
Academic Growth?
1. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation
of standards-based reform?
a. How long have you been in education?
b. What is your current teaching assignment?
c. How would you define the leadership role of the principal today, as
compared to 10 years ago (assuming you have been in education at
least 10 years)?
d. What is or has been the most challenging aspect of implementing
standards-based reform?
e. What is the biggest challenge you face as a teacher in implementing
standards-based reform?
f. What leadership role should the principal play in the implementation
of standards-based reform?
2. How has the principal involved teachers in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
a. How have you participated in the development, articulation and
implementation of a school wide vision of learning?
b. What role have teachers played in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
c. What role does the Instructional Leadership Team play in improving
and sustaining student academic growth?
d. How do you assess student learning?
e. What do you attribute your success to achieving and maintaining an
API score of 800 and above?
f. How do you build trust and develop relationships with your students?
3. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementation of
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
a. How have you establish a standards-based classroom?
b. Are there clearly defined student achievement goals for students and
staff to be achieved?
i. If yes, how were they developed and by whom?
c. What method is in place for monitoring individual student
performance and how do you provide feedback?
166
4. What has the principal done to build school capacity to sustain student
academic growth in these four areas:
a. Teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional
development)
i. How do you access professional development opportunities as
a teacher?
ii. How would you describe your teacher evaluation system in
terms of providing constructive feedback to teachers in the
area of knowledge and skills?
b. Professional community (organizational development/relationships)
i. How do you as the teacher create positive relationships with
your students?
ii. From a teacher’s perspective, how is leadership distributed at
your school?
iii. What do you consider as the most important role of the
principal?
c. Program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning
goals/sustainability)
i. How is professional development determined and what
sources are used?
ii. Is there a specific process used to establish clear learning
goals?
1. How do you provide feedback to students on the
process of these established goals?
2. How is feedback provided to teachers on the
achievement of learning goals?
iii. Do you have pacing guides, course syllabi and student goals
for each department?
1. If yes, how are they used to drive instruction?
d. Technical resources (materials, time, resources, and access to
expertise)
i. How are resources allocated at your site to support and sustain
student learning?
ii. Is there scheduled release time for teachers to plan and review
student progress?
iii. How are materials allocated at your site?
167
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR SUPPORT STAFF
In the Implementation of Standards-Based Reform: What is the Leadership Role of
the Principal in Building School Capacity and Accountability to Sustain Student
Academic Growth?
1. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation
of standards-based reform?
a. State for the record:
i. How long you have been in education?
ii. What is your current teaching assignment?
b. How would you define the leadership role of the principal today, as
compared to 10 years ago (assuming you have been in education at
least 10 years)?
c. What is or has been the most challenging aspect of implementing
standards-based reform?
d. What is the biggest challenge you face as a teacher in implementing
standards-based reform?
e. What leadership role has the principal played in the implementation
of standards-based reform?
2. How has the principal involved teachers in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
a. How have you participated in the development, articulation and
implementation of a school wide vision of learning?
b. What role have teachers played in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
c. What role does the Instructional Leadership Team play in improving
and sustaining student academic growth?
d. How do you assess student learning?
e. What do you attribute your success to achieving and maintaining an
API score of 800 and above?
f. How do you build trust and develop relationships with your students?
3. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementation of
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
a. How have you establish a standards-based classroom?
b. Are there clearly defined student achievement goals for students and
staff to be achieved?
iii. If yes, how were they developed and by whom?
c. What method is in place for monitoring individual student
performance and how do you provide feedback?
168
4. What has the principal done to build school capacity to sustain student
academic growth in these four areas:
a. Teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional
development)
i. How do you access professional development opportunities as
a teacher?
ii. How would you describe your teacher evaluation system in
terms of providing constructive feedback to teachers in the
area of knowledge and skills?
b. Professional community (organizational development/relationships)
i. How do you as the teacher create positive relationships with
your students?
ii. From a teacher’s perspective, how is leadership distributed at
your school?
iii. What do you consider as the most important role of the
principal?
c. Program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning
goals/sustainability)
i. How is professional development determined and what
sources are used?
ii. Is there a specific process used to establish clear learning
goals?
1. How do you provide feedback to students on the
process of these established goals?
2. How is feedback provided to teachers on the
achievement of learning goals?
iii. Do you have pacing guides, course syllabi and student goals
for each department?
3. If yes, how are they used to drive instruction?
d. Technical resources (materials, time, resources, and access to
expertise)
i. How are resources allocated at your site to support and sustain
student learning?
ii. Is there scheduled release time for teachers to plan and review
student progress?
iii. How are materials allocated at your site?
169
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PARENTS
In the Implementation of Standards-Based Reform: What is the Leadership Role of
the Principal in Building School Capacity and Accountability to Sustain Student
Academic Growth?
1. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation
of standards-based reform?
a. How long have you been a parent at the school?
b. From the parent’s perspective, how would you define the leadership
role of the principal today, as compared to 10 years ago?
c. What is the biggest challenge you face as a parent since the
implementation of standards-based reform?
d. From a parents perspective, what leadership role has the principal
played in the implementation of standards-based reform?
e. How would you define the leadership role of the principal;
instructional leader or manager?
2. How has the principal involved parents in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
a. How have you participated in the development, articulation and
implementation of a school wide vision of learning?
b. What role have parents played in the implementation of standards-
based reform?
c. What role if any, does the PTSA play in improving and sustaining
student academic growth?
d. From the parent perspective, what do you attribute your success to
achieving and maintaining an API score of 800 and above?
3. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementation of
standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth?
a. From a parent’s perspective, are there clearly defined student
achievement goals for students and staff to be achieved?
b. From a parent’s perspective, what method is in place for
monitoring/communicating individual student performance?
4. From a parent’s perspective, what has the principal done to build school
capacity to sustain student academic growth in these four areas:
a. Building teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional
development)
b. Providing a professional community (organizational
development/relationships)
170
c. Program coherence (coordinate school programs/clear learning
goals/sustainability)
iv. Do parents receive pacing guides, course syllabi and student
goals for each content area?
d. Technical resources (materials, time, resources, and access to
expertise)
5. From the parent’s perspective, how are resources allocated at your site to
support and sustain student learning?
171
APPENDIX E: DATA ANALYSIS CODES
In the implementation of standards-based reform: What is the leadership role of the
principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic
growth?
Principal’s role
Buffer teachers
Creates the culture
Establishes high expectations
Hires the right people
Holds everyone accountability
Implements standards based reform
Instructional leader
Knowledge of curriculum
Limited managing
Monitors and evaluates
Supports/trains/empowers teachers
Up to date on research
Visionary leader/set and execute the vision
Leadership style/characteristics
Collaborative
Communicates effectively/knows bottom line
Consistency
Determination
Direct leadership style
Frequent classroom visits
High work ethic
Maintains high visibility/approachability
Accountability
All held accountability (provides support/not I gotcha)
Clear expectations
Consistency
Follow through
High visibility/classroom observations
Intervention (students do not slip through the cracks)
Re-evaluation of programs
Students accountable
Culture/Program Coherence
Accountability
Allocation of resources
Collegiality
172
Collegiality (everyone willing to help/support)
Competent/great teachers
Consistency
Data driven
Focused
Gathers Input
Goal oriented
High expectations
Highly motivated teachers
Hiring practices
Interventions
Involved staff
Magnet school for all students
Maximize instructional time
Mentor new teachers
Mutual respect
Positive academic learning environment
Reevaluation of programs
Relationships
Risk free environment
Stable staff
Standards based
Strong leadership team
Sustain achievement through culture
Teamwork
Whole child
Professional Development
Admin/teachers support new teachers
Data is used to determine professional development (PD)
District provides in-house
District provides monthly calendar of PD
Few outside conferences
PD based on staff needs
PD supported with research
Some partnerships/Orange County Animation
Interventions (sustain growth)
All math teachers teach high and low students
Before and after school programs
Constant reevaluation/monitoring of programs
Continuous improvement valued
Double language arts in 7
th
grade
High accountability
Homework club
173
Math lab
Placement of students/targeted interventions
Tutoring
Use of data
Decision making
Brainstorm
Choices given
Clear expectations
Collaborative
Discussion with all stakeholders
Empower staff
Focus on students
Hold individuals accountable
Input
Monitor/revisit changes
Not bureaucratic
Nothing is top down
Open
Systematic approach
Trust among teacher/admin
Two way communication
Use data
Vote-whole staff/consensus
Willing to take a stand/know bottom line
Assessment
Assess/re-teach
CST’s
Data Director
District benchmarks
High expectations
Multiple measures
Pacing guides
Promotion accountability/7 points
Reports, labs, projects
Set goals
Similar grading practices
Standards-based instruction
Students know their proficiency levels
Teacher assessments
Test generators
Visionary
Collaborative
174
Connectedness
Constantly refining
Culture aligns with vision (handout)
Develop road map together
Focused
Involve staff
Leadership style
Mutual respect
Open communication
Set goals
Share knowledge
Teachers are collegial
Willing to change
Student Recognition
Assemblies to reward/motivate students
Attendance awards
Benchmark awards
Fundraiser recognition
GPA awards
Homeroom events
Look who’s helping coupons
Raffles
Ribbons
Teacher praise
Teachers as leaders
Accountability
Collaborative
Committed to student success
Connected
Leadership is school wide
Motivate each other
Mutual trust/respect
Personalize instruction
Principal buffer’s so teachers lead
Self reflective
Shared/distributed leadership
Spotlight on Education
Student centered
Teacher/principal relationship
Teachers make a difference
Teachers motivated by students
175
Resources
Built around kids
Equally distributed
Free flowing process
Fundraiser
Grants
Just have to ask and justify request
Parent Teacher Organization (PTO)
Release days/Action walks
Resourceful
School Site Council (SSC)
176
APPENDIX F: DATA ANALYSIS TABLES
Position Gender/
Years/
Subject
Principal’s
Role
Leadership
style/chara
cteristics
Accountability Culture/
Program
Coherence
Teacher
1
(intervie
wed two
teachers
at once)
Female,
6
th
year
in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
Math,
Female,
5
th
year
in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
English
and
electives.
principal
expects a
lot, has
high
expectation
s holds
individuals
accountable
, extremely
bright
leader, she
expects
more and
will follow
up, give
ideas and
supports
your
efforts,
teachers
give 120%-
200%,
students
know their
teachers
care,
principal
buffers us,
district
wants
everyone to
be the
same, Mc
Garvin is
different
and it is
working,
principal is
very vocal,
we are all
SB,
visionary,
knowledgea
ble,
instructional
, very
supportive,
very
involved,
knows what
you are
doing,
visible on
campus,
direct, pops
in
classrooms,
extreme
accountability,
all held
accountable,
care for
students,
students cannot
slip through the
cracks, students
know they are
being watched,
high
accountability
for student
success, clarity,
vision,
consistency,
follow through,
collaboratio
n, everyone
brings
something
to this
school,
release
days,
compile
data,
placement
of students,
great
teachers,
kids on
task,
teachers
teaching
SB, bell to
bell
instruction,
whole child
concept,
student
recognition
, positive
peer
pressure,
driven,
value
education,
supportive
of teachers,
students
who want
to achieve,
supportive
parents,
parents and
teachers
177
Teacher
1 Cont.
here for the
kids, all
work hard,
have high
expectation
s, positive
school
culture,
high
accountabil
ity for all,
high
expectation
s,
consistency
, follow
through,
motivation,
high
student
recognition
, we are
able to put
all the
pieces
together...p
rincipal,
teachers,
students,
staff and
parents, it
is a great
school,
Teacher
2
Male, 9
th
year in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
math and
ASB
supporting
teachers,
providing
support if
someone
needs help,
backbone
for
teachers,
guidance,
make
decisions
with
faculty,
SB,
visionary,
knowledgea
ble,
instructional
, very
supportive,
very
involved,
knows what
you are
doing,
visible on
campus,
maximize
instructiona
l time,
teach bell
to bell,
principal
stayed the
course,
standards
based,
bulletin
boards,
posted
standards,
178
Teacher
2 Cont.
letting
teachers be
different,
trust
teachers
will do a
good job,
effective
communica
tor,
compliment
s, motivate
teachers,
direct, pops
in
classrooms,
over
achieving
staff,
driven,
motivated,
want to do
well/be the
best,
combinatio
n of
principal,
students,
and staff
moving in
the same
direction,
everything
is kid
centered,
do what is
bet for
kids,
principal
tells us
what she
thinks and
where she
stands on
issues,
involved
staff, good
leaders
who want
to do well,
we all want
success for
all and are
willing to
work hard
to
accomplish
it,
Teacher
3
Female,
16 years
take the
teachers
everyone is
willing to
amazing
teachers,
179
Teacher
3 Cont.
in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
longest
tenure
viewpoint,
see the
whole
picture,
understand
what is
going on in
the
classroom
(high
visibility),
instructional
leader,
visionary,
forward
moving,
empowers
teachers,
teachers feel
they have
input,
accountabili
ty for all,
high
expectations
for all,
high
expectation,
accountabili
ty,
consistency,
teacher
determinati
on,
principal
supporting
teachers,
accessibility
,
availability,
visibility,
listens,
help/support
each other (type
of people at Mc
Garvin), part of
professionalism,
teachers here for
the kids,
amazing
families,
great
support, old
teachers
assist
young
teachers,
Teacher
4
Female,
7
th
year
extremely
involved
open to
suggestions,
culture is
important,
180
Teacher
4 Cont.
in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
math and
science,
Female,
2
nd
year
in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
science
with
improving
student
achievemen
t
principal
on teachers
side,
principal as
a buffer,
repackages
what we
are already
doing,
experiences
,
background
and
training
important
for
principals,
has ideas,
looks at
what is best
for ALL
students not
one groups,
aware of
what is
good for
teachers,
focuses on
everyone
being
successful,
high
expectation
s,
willingness
to be
consistent,
buffer, not
a lockstep
principal,
staff is
strong, Mc
Garvin
culture
handout, all
teachers
have same
attitude,
view
teaching as
a
profession,
here for
kids,
achievemen
t is what
the
profession
represents,
teaching is
a
profession
not a job,
teach with
diligence,
over
achievers,
driven to
do the best
job
possible,
get
motivation
from each
other, high
181
Teacher
4 Cont.
expectation
s,
professiona
lism, put
kids first,
engage and
hook the
hard to
motivate
children,
high sense
of
accountabil
ity,
everyone
works
together,
Teacher
5
Male, 5th
year in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
Arts
supported
us
unbelievabl
e, very
supportive
in a lot of
ways,
interested
in what we
do,
supportive
in ways of
finding
funding,
includes
and values
electives,
electives
part of
academic
world, sees
importance
of our
program,
teachers here
are intrinsically
motivated to do
a good job,
teachers are
excited about
their subject
matter, students
are great so it is
not difficult to
work hard and
get better at
what you do,
accountability to
me is more like
I need to live up
to my situation,
we have
support, I am
supported,
working hard to
raise the bar,
principal sets
the tone,
teachers
embrace it, kids
benefit,
not a lot of
turnover,
people like
it here,
stable,
teachers
here are
intrinsically
motivated
to do a
good job,
teachers are
excited
about their
subject
matter,
students are
great so it
is not
difficult to
work hard
and get
better at
what you
do,
accountabil
ity to me is
182
Teacher
5 Cont.
everyone
supports
everyone,
embrace test
scores, have a
lot of innovative
things,
interventions
above and
beyond the
school day,
more like I
need to live
up to my
situation,
we have
support, I
am
supported,
working
hard to
raise the
bar,
principal
sets the
tone,
teachers
embrace it,
kids
benefit,
everyone
supports
everyone,
embrace
test scores,
have a lot
of
innovative
things,
interventio
ns above
and beyond
the school
day, a lot
of elements
play into
our
success, we
are a
magnet for
every
subject
area, all
areas are
magnets
183
Teacher
5 Cont.
and not
specializing
in one area
we have
become
special is
all areas,
Teacher
6
Male, 6th
year in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
special
ed
similar,
throw out
ideas,
brainstorm,
collaboratio
n, cross
curricular
areas share
what they
are doing,
setting the
standards,
achieving
the
standards,
school plan
assists with
this,
developing
a plan to
achieve
goals,
support and
training
provided as
needed,
because the
principal
shows
interest
makes you
want to put
more into it
and do your
best job,
principal
tells you
visionary,
big picture,
persistence,
determinati
on, sets the
goals and
follows
through,
high
accountabili
ty, knows
what we are
doing
through
visitations,
how can she
support
teachers,
always
trying to
figure out
how she can
help,
collaboratio
n between
departments
,
if you say it you
must do it,
supports
teachers
creativity and
funds projects,
allocates
resources fairly,
based on need,
principal knows
the order of
operations,
principal has
experience, uses
resources,
persistence and
determined to
provide the best,
when you are
doing well you
know it, when
your not you
know it too and
are given
support,
constant
reevaluatio
n, use of
data to
make
decisions,
drive
instruction,
expectation
s,
consistency
, follow
through,
strong
leadership,
parent ed
nights,
creativity,
resourceful
ness, make
due with
what we
have, being
visionary it
goes back
to
leadership
and having
a vision,
everyone
has a niche,
passion and
specialty,
everyone is
positive,
approachab
le, teachers
184
Teacher
6 Cont.
straight up,
nothing is
sugar
coated,
upfront
discussions
, shoots
from the
hip know
where you
stand,
straight
forward,
she tells
you how it
is and gives
you
support,
help others,
Teacher
7
Male, 7th
year in
educatio
n, all at
Mc
Garvin,
Social
Science
must have a
vision and
be able to
execute that
vision,
principal is
very
effective at
that,
principal
knows what
is going on,
she is in
rooms
regularly,
she asks
questions,
critiques
and lets you
know what
is expected,
knows
where we
are going,
has a vision,
clear
broad outline of
what I should
see in your
room, if she
does not see it
she lets you
know and come
back to look for
it again,
consistency and
not a gotcha
great
school,
between
the kids
and the
school,
staff, and
the
administrati
on I can’t
think of a
better place
to work,
synergy,
strong
administrati
on vision,
staff that
meets
expectation
s, mutual
respect,
students
meet
expectation
s, all things
185
Teacher
7 Cont.
expectation, work
together,
cannot
identify
one things,
support/offi
ce staff
important,
custodial
staff,
expectation
s for
everybody,
everybody
works well
together,
we are very
unique, we
have a
build in
school
culture of
high
expectation
s for all,
change of
leadership
changed
the culture,
you can no
longer
close your
door and
teach, she
observes
and has the
conversatio
ns and
follow
through to
improve
teaching
and
learning for
186
Teacher
7 Cont.
all, hard
working
staff and
students,
principal
guides and
supports us
while
providing
energy, if
she did not
have this
staff she
could not
pull off
what she
does, but if
we did not
have her
we could
not pull off
what we
pull off, so
it is a good
match and
partnership,
Principal
1
Female,
31 years
in
educatio
n, (4
th
year at
Mc
Garvin)
Positions
held:
Teacher,
AP,
principal,
director
of K-12,
back to
principal
vision,
know your
bottom
line,
encourage
everyone,
motivator,
supporter,
take
obstacles
out of
teachers
way,
hardly
manage,
mostly
lead,
managing
vision,
know your
bottom line,
encourage
everyone,
motivator,
supporter,
take
obstacles
out of
teachers
way,
set guidelines,
follow through,
action walks
(staff develop
the tool/sheets
stay with the
teacher),
standards based
bulletin boards,
walks have a
purpose and
teachers
highlight their
best strategy,
sustaining
it is
through the
culture,
established
high
teacher and
student
expectation
s and no
one is
willing to
lower them,
everyone
holds each
other
accountable
established
187
Principal
1 Cont.
is checking
to see if
things got
done, I
know what
the
manageme
nt things
are but I
don’t
personally
do them,
delegate as
much as I
can, spend
most time
leading and
planning,
follow up,
follow
through,
good to
great,
having the
right
people on
the bus
doing the
jobs you
know you
can trust,
trust your
people,
hiring the
right
people,
leadership
team, data
team, staff
make
decision, be
creative,
discussion
occurs first
an internal
structure so
you cannot
fail, hiring,
enthusiasm
and love of
kids, must
have
enthusiasm
even more
than
knowledge/
must have
depth, must
have
characterist
ics of the
Mc Garvin
culture,
188
Principal
1 Cont.
then it is
presented,
then it is
voted on,
use
consensus
meaning
can you
live with it,
visionary
leadership
style, set
goals and
involve
staff on
deciding
how to get
there, set
the culture
which
aligns with
our vision,
(see Mc
Garvin
culture
handout),
establish
big picture,
spend time
refining,
teachers are
collegial,
creative,
enthusiastic
, hard
working,
willing to
change,
focused,
openly
communica
te,
collaborativ
e, share
189
Principal
1 Cont.
experience
knowledge
and
information
, you can’t
back
off…you
have to be
right in
there with
them and
not be
afraid of
them not
liking you
but you
must be
sensitive,
all know
my bottom
line,
principals
need to
keep up on
research,
Marzano’s
top 6
strategies,
consistency
availability,
high
visibility,
high
expectation
s
knowing
what is
right, be
progressive
, electives
are
important
and help
with
190
Principal
1 Cont.
attendance,
Parent 1
4
th
consecuti
ve year
as a
parent,
one child
at the
school
complete
little
package,
she has such
control yet
she is gentle
when she
needs to be,
very
involved,
good at
getting
parents
involved,
more focus
on
education/st
andards
hands on
but does not
micro
manage,
sets the
parameters
for her
students,
teachers,
staff and
even
parents, sets
the
guideline
for you to
follow or
she will tell
you, not
shy, good
handle on
things,
knows what
needs to be
done, takes
combinatio
n of being
focus and
having the
goal, not
letting
them get
off the
goal, good
trickle
down
system, it
comes
down to the
principal
and
teacher,
keeping the
focus, all
teachers
working
together,
teachers
who are
always
there for
the
students, :
it is team,
teachers do
a good job
at working
together
from the
very top to
the very
bottom,
glad to be a
part of it,
191
Parent 1
Cont.
charge,
trusts those
people to do
what they
are suppose
to do,
checks on
them,
respect from
her peers,
people see
what she
can do, she
truly cares
about what
she is doing,
she rules
with a soft
hand not an
iron hand,
good
communicat
or, gets
parents
involved,
puts
standards/da
ta out there
for parents
to see, she
teaches
us/parents,
has
incentives
for students,
use Tele
parent to
communicat
e,
Parent 2
2
nd
year
as a
parent,
two
children
principal
attends all
programs,
available,
gives
way she
handles the
SSC,
information
given,
student
achievemen
t goals,
expectation
s, goals,
192
Parent 2
Cont.
currently
at the
school,
has a
child at
the
school
before
this
principal
advise,
great,
willing to
help,
answers
calls, never
been too
busy to talk
to parents,
knows her
students,
starts with
the
principal,
interventio
ns that
place and
support
students
early,
understandi
ng and
supportive
of all
students,
communicat
ion,
allocation of
resources,
she focuses
on what the
students
need not
necessarily
what the
teachers
want,
student
centered,
develop
action steps
needed to
support
teachers and
students,
focused on
all students,
awareness
of testing
and
benchmark/
assessments
, focuses on
students not
scores,
leadership
starts with
the
principal,
principal
has made
Mc Garvin
a strong
reputation
and
philosophy
for learning,
high
visibility,
vision,
pacing
guides,
communica
tion, course
description
s, find on
the internet,
call, high
expectation
s,
accountabil
ity follow
through
from the
principal
on down,
interventio
ns, PTO to
inform us,
updates
frequently,
constantly
looking at
what is
working,
she is one
of the best,
they are
awesome,
193
Parent 2
Cont.
ensures the
safety,
consistency,
focus on all
children,
not about
just scores,
visibility,
availability,
communicat
ion,
expectation,
approachabi
lity, she is
fair,
receptive,
develops
action,
timelines
and who is
responsible
for it,
Support
Staff 1
Female,
3
rd
year
in the
district,
1
st
year
at Mc
Garvin,
AP
depends on
the
principal,
principal’s
experiences
and career
and
education,
highly
visible in
classrooms,
curriculum
experience,
sense of
accountabil
ity staff
works
harder
because the
principal
knows her
stuff,
good work
ethics, they
work so
hard
themselves
when they
are pushing
you there is
no
resentment,
everything
goes
through the
principal to
keep them
informed,
good
principals
pay
attention to
the details,
gets staff
classroom
is very risk
free,
parents
respect us,
teachers
follow
through,
students are
engaged in
the activity,
teachers
work bell
to bell,
students do
not want to
miss school
because
they will
miss
something,
everything
194
Support
Staff 1
Cont.
communica
tes and
disseminate
s
information
to teachers,
no
surprises,
brings the
staff along,
shares her
knowledge,
sharing of
knowledge
is great,
effectively
communica
te,
common
themes,
high
expectation
s,
directness,
all things
working
well,
accountabil
ity open
and honest,
a little
more
focused
now and
direct, all
things are
in the best
interest of
kids,
mutual
support
from
principal,
teacher,
buy in,
holds
herself to
high
expectations
, know
where you
stand, open
and honest
communicat
ion, open
door policy,
assess,
established
work ethic,
accessibility
,
expectations
, openness,
frankness,
good at
defining
purpose,
willing to
do whatever
they can to
help
students,
she teaches
you how to
do things,
she doesn’t
just tell you
how to do
it, uses data
to make
decisions, if
you are not
pulling your
part , Jane
will let you
know, she
brings you
along,
goes
through the
principal,
PTSA SSC,
involved in
the
decision
making,
gets input
from all the
teachers,
everyone is
represented
,
prioritizes,
resources
allocated,
transparent
with
budgets, all
groups are
represented
and it is
collaborativ
e and
focuses on
all kids,
195
Support
Staff 1
Cont.
staff,
students
and
parents,
straight
shooter,
brings
people
along,
empowers
people to be
leaders,
great
trainer,
trains her
people,
visionary
leaders,
empowers,
supports,
big picture
thinker, will
never let
you fall in
front of
people, very
visible,
Support
Staff 2
Male,
20
th
year
in the
district,
5
th
year
at Mc
Garvin,
PM
expectation
s of
increasing
the scores,
more
demanding,
public
expects
more,
expectation
s of their
staff to
bring up
the scores,
finding
ways to
improve in
the areas
we are
lacking,
visionary,
the most
important
role of the
administrato
r is to set
the tone in a
positive
way and let
everyone
know
regardless
of what job
we do it is
important,
consistency,
high
expectations
,
communicat
ion, clear
focus, high
we try to
exceed our
expectation
s, have an
excellent
staff,
committed
teachers,
positive
attitudes,
try to
connect
with kids,
try to
mentor
them,
everyone is
helpful and
focused on
success, we
are ONE
196
Support
Staff 2
Cont.
instructiona
l
leadership,
style, all
for the
benefit for
the
students,
high
expectation
s of herself
and staff,
pressure to
bring up
scores to
meet
standards,
accountabili
ty, excellent
administrato
r,
experience,
brings
everyone
together,
makes each
person feel
important,
direct,
straight
forward,
does not
beat around
the bush,
has
expectations
, holds
people
accountable,
assist the
needs of the
staff, a good
administrato
r brings the
team
together,
communicat
es each
persons role
and value to
the
organization
no matter
how big or
small, treats
people
equally,
mutual
respect,
builds
excellent
team,
everyone
wants to
work hard
for our
kids, high
expectation
s,
consistency
, the drive
to give
your best,
she is a
straight
shooter,
know what
you need to
do and you
need to do
it, she will
help you
get there,
Mc Garvin
is doing
some great
things for
kids and
that is our
number 1
goal,
197
Support
Staff 2
Cont.
rapport with
people,
open
communicat
ion, positive
role model
for all, acts
professional
ly, high
expectations
for her staff,
direct, clear,
holds you
accountable,
be
supportive,
her
expectations
, she is
straight to
the point,
not much
room for
misundersta
nding,
willingness
to go
beyond,
Support
Staff 3
she is a
very strong
principal,
you always
know what
is expected,
standards
focus,
know
where you
stand and
never have
to guess,
things are
never last
minute,
trust,
listens, does
not mince
words,
supportive,
encourages
teachers,
has them
believing
they are the
best
teachers,
questions
the district,
teachers
know she is
the expectation
is clear, if you
are not reaching
it you will be
questioned and
given support if
needed,
Female,
15
th
year
in
educatio
n, 3
rd
year at
Mc
Garvin,
teacher
and
counselo
r
consistency
, students
know what
is expected,
this is an
academic
learning
environmen
t, balance
of fun and
focus,
stressing
the
importance
of the test,
constant re-
198
Support
Staff 3
Cont.
communica
tion is
constant
and often,
instructiona
l leader
spends
most time
on
instruction,
open
relationship
with
teachers,
openness,
always in
classrooms,
knows
what is
going on,
supportive
of what
teachers are
doing,
leads more
than
manages,
high
expectation
s, strong
leadership,
consistency
, direct
teacher
openness,
openness is
the key,
you can
express
yourself
and you
will be
listened to,
nothing is
behind them
100%, very
strong
person,
familiar
with the
district,
strong
leadership
style,
everyone
knows what
is expected,
you are held
accountable
for doing
what is
expected,
will
question/ad
dress people
who are not
doing what
is expected,
pushes
everyone to
do better,
strong
personality,
well
rounded
experience,
broad
training, not
the all
powerful
leader, she
is here for
the staff,
build the
team where
all work
together,
evaluation
of
programs,
homework
club,
tutoring,
our
teachers, I
have never
experience
d a staff
that is so
willing to
do anything
to help
students
succeed,
leadership,
internal
drive,
commitmen
t to kids, all
teachers
have the
drive,
hiring the
right
people,
come in
early and
stay late,
student
achievemen
t goals,
expectation
s, goals,
vision,
pacing
guides,
communica
tion, course
description
s, find on
the internet,
199
Support
Staff 3
Cont.
shoved
under the
carpet, she
is a
problem
solver,
always
willing to
help, see
Mc Garvin
culture
handout,
hiring the
right
people is
key,
call, high
expectation
s,
accountabil
ity, follow
through
from the
principal
on down,
interventio
ns, PTO to
inform us,
updates
frequently,
constantly
looking at
what is
working,
she is one
of the best,
they are
awesome,
good,
teachers
mentor
students,
very open
and caring
environmen
t, teachers
connect
with
students,
teachers
care about
personal,
social,
emotional
and
academic,
we build on
their self-
esteem,
kids know
200
Support
Staff 3
Cont
the teachers
are here to
help, admin
holds
students
accountable
, we care
and they
know it,
201
Position Gender/
Years/
Subject
Professional
Development
Interventions
(sustain
growth)
Decision
Making
Assessment
Teacher
1
(intervie
wed two
teachers
at once)
Female, 6
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Math,
Female, 5
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
English and
electives.
after school
programs,
math lab,
tutoring, Data
Director,
interventions,
groupings are
deliberate,
homework
club,
classroom/ach
ievement
expectations,
specialized
programs,
decision
making
is open,
departme
nt
leaders,
ILT
involved,
look at
data,
principal
uses data
in
making
decisions
Teacher
2
Male, 9
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
math and
ASB
district
provides, Data
Director, uses
data to assist
instruction,
always
looking for
ways to
improve,
interventions,
scores, after
school
programs,
math lab,
challenging
all students,
meeting a
certain goal,
keeping up
with the
pacing
guide,
everything
is related to
standards,
use test
generators,
district
benchmarks
, individual
teacher
assessment,
collaboratio
n, similar in
grading
practices,
re-teach,
Teacher
3
Female, 16
years in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Apple club,
Orange
County
Animation,
202
Teacher
3 Cont.
longest
tenure
Teacher
4
Female, 7
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
math and
science,
Female, 2
nd
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
science
district overall
is good, poor
for science,
maybe
improved not
it is tested,
currently
science is not
valued,
homework
club, before
and after
school
interventions,
inquiry, labs,
not a fan of
tests, must get
kids excited
about
learning,
capture their
curiosity,
pacing guides
force us to
keep moving,
departme
nt chair,
leadershi
p team,
input
from
teachers,
whole
staff
makes
decisions
, always
monitori
ng
programs
and
decisions
, revisit
and make
changes,
district
benchmarks
, pacing
guides, we
need to
teach what
is going to
be tested,
benchmarks
, quiz on
Friday, re-
teach on
Monday,
lab reports,
research
projects,
Teacher
5
Male, 5th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Arts
we have a
number of
schools in the
district who
are doing
great things so
you don’t
have to hire
consultants,
just look
closely to
those who are
being
successful,
a lot of
teacher
involvem
ent,
especiall
y in big
decisions
, we have
a good
system
right
now,
brainstor
m first,
Teacher
6
Male, 6th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
special ed
if the data
says we are
weak we are
provided
professional
development
in that are
(SAIDE,
teachers put in
extra time,
who teachers
are here,
homework
club,
everyone is
here for the
benchmarks
, special ed
takes the
same ones,
grades,
students
know the
goal of
203
Teacher
6 Cont.
Cornell
notes), uses a
lot of data to
drive
instruction
and drive
programs,
district does a
good job,
provide
teaching
strategies,
principal is
supportive,
supports PD
with research,
kids, if the
kids are not
doing well it
is a reflection
on us,
constant
monitoring of
programs,
tutoring, see
how we can
help the most,
“proficient,”
Data
Director,
more
student
recognition
is provided
(ribbons),
students
aware of
their levels,
writing
elective,
Teacher
7
Male, 7th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Social
Science
district
provide
monthly
calendar,
CDE, in
house, release
days
provided,
very targeted
intervention
program, data
driven, district
decision to
only have soc
sci one
semester in 7
th
grade,
nothing
is top
down,
teacher
involvem
ent,
leadershi
p team,
departme
nt chairs,
key
people,
choices
given,
done by
committe
e, not
bureaucr
atic,
input via
email,
feel
involved
in the
decision
of the
school, it
is never a
multiple
ways,
regular unit
tests,
projects,
able to re-
take tests,
everyone
will be
proficient,
benchmarks
, CST’s,
chapter
tests, pacing
guides and
goals
provided by
district,
teachers
involved in
the process,
look at the
benchmark
scores are
re-teach if
necessary,
always
review test
204
Teacher
7 Cont.
memo in
your box,
two way
street of
communi
cation,
whole
staff
involved,
we talk it
out, we
are
informed
, given
options,
chance to
buy in,
very
collabora
tive,
communi
ty, clear
expectati
ons of
what is
expected
and what
should be
happenin
g at the
school,
scores,
CST’s,
district
benchmarks
, use of
Data
Director,
teachers
review data,
determine
what
standards
kids did not
master and
then re-
teach,
teachers/staf
f are
reflective,
rubrics,
Principal
1
Female, 31
years in
education,
(4
th
year at
Mc Garvin)
Positions
held:
Teacher,
AP,
principal,
director of
K-12, back
to principal
district
provides great
staff
development
for teachers,
based on staff
needs,
principal
brings in
specific staff
development
(Cornell
notes, writing
homework
club, tutoring,
math lab,
double
language arts,
before and
after school
classes, we
know our
kids, spend a
lot of time on
placement and
programs,
trust your
people,
hiring the
right
people,
leadershi
p team,
data
team,
staff
make
decision,
be
always
review test
scores,
CST’s,
district
benchmarks
, use of
Data
Director,
teachers
review data,
determine
what
205
Principal
1 Cont.
program), interventions
are different
that what then
get in school,
not more of
the same
instead
different,
consequences
for not
showing,
everybody
loves success,
talk about
successes and
people will
get behind
you, student
placement is
huge, give
kids extra
time to get the
concept,
success
breeds
success,
placement is
everything, all
math teachers
have high and
low kids,
creative,
discussio
n occurs
first then
it is
presented
, then it
is voted
on, use
consensu
s
meaning
can you
live with
it,
accordio
n style,
discuss
with all
stakehold
ers and
then staff
makes
the
decision,
standards
kids did not
master and
then re-
teach,
teachers/staf
f are
reflective,
rubrics,
sustaining it
is through
the culture,
established
high teacher
and student
expectations
and no one
is willing to
lower them,
everyone
holds each
other
accountable,
established
an internal
structure so
you cannot
fail, do not
have
department
common
assessments
, teachers
are
encouraged
to pull from
the test
generators,
district has
four
benchmarks
in the core
areas,
attribute
206
Principal
1 Cont.
success to
focus on
standards
and kids,
do not have
department
common
assessments
, teachers
are
encouraged
to pull from
the test
generators,
district has
four
benchmarks
in the core
areas,
attribute
success to
focus on
standards
and kids,
Parent 1
4
th
consecutive
year as a
parent, one
child at the
school
Parent 2
2
nd
year as
a parent,
two
children
currently at
the school,
has a child
at the
school
before this
principal
everythin
g goes
through
the
principal,
PTSA
SSC,
involved
in the
decision
making,
gets
input
from all
207
Parent 2
Cont.
the
teachers,
everyone
is
represent
ed,
prioritize
s,
resources
allocated,
transpare
nt with
budgets,
all
groups
are
represent
ed and it
is
collabora
tive and
focuses
on all
kids,
Support
Staff 1
Female, 3
rd
year in the
district, 1
st
year at Mc
Garvin, AP
works with
new teachers,
staff
meetings,
staff
meetings,
evaluations,
gets into the
classroom,
pulls data,
shared,
gathers
input,
principal
willing to
take a
stand and
make a
decision,
empower
ed staff,
engagement
,
conversatio
ns, pacing
guides
assessments
, standards
aligned
lessons,
common
language
vocabulary,
Support
Staff 2
Male, 20
th
year in the
district, 5
th
year at Mc
Garvin, PM
always
consults
the
teachers,
Support
Staff 3
Female,
15
th
year in
education,
peer mentor
program, after
school
gets
everyone
involved,
grades,
benchmarks
, CST’s, we
208
Support
Staff 3
Cont.
3
rd
year at
Mc Garvin,
teacher and
counselor
tutoring, math
lab, not
optional, kids
must go, we
are consistent
and students
know what is
expected,
parents
support us,
consequences
for not
showing up,
so it is
easier to
hold
people
accounta
ble, she
has a
way of
getting
everyone
on board,
part of
the team,
get input
from all
teachers,
we do
what is
best for
kids, and
the
teachers
know it,
master
schedule
is built
for kids,
always
know
why you
are doing
it, open
process,
honest,
always
taking a
vote,
leadershi
p teams,
dept
chairs,
collabora
tion
between
work
together,
test scores,
all aspects,
multiple
measures,
Data
Director,
grades,
CST’s, look
back to
elementary
school, need
7 points to
promote,
benchmarks
, student
know what
is expected,
209
Support
Staff 3
Cont.
everyone
210
Position Gender/
Years/
Subject
Visionary Student
Recognition
Teacher
s as
leaders
Resources
Teacher
1
(intervie
wed two
teachers
at once)
Female, 6
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Math,
Female, 5
th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
English and
electives.
teachers
are self-
reflective
, good
teachers
have to
struggle
to keep
up, never
worked
this hard
before,
other
teachers
are
motivatin
g, no
teacher
wants to
be weak
because
you will
stick out,
commitm
ent, work
hard,
principal
works
hard so
everyone
else
does,
teachers
are
available
for help,
homewor
k is
online,
we
expect a
211
Teacher
1 Cont.
lot from
our
students
and they
expect a
lot from
their
teachers,
everyone
takes a
leadershi
p role,
everyone
has to do
somethin
g or else
we
cannot
do it,
pressure
to lead,
BUFFER
:
principal
protects
us from
mandates
/district,
Teacher
3
Female, 16
years in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
longest
tenure
grants,
release days
if needed,
district staff
developmen
t good but
poor for
technology,
regular
collaboratio
n among
like
teachers,
Teacher
4
Female, 7
th
year in
education,
revisit
everything
every year,
unsure of
budget, just
have to ask,
212
Teacher
4 Cont.
all at Mc
Garvin,
math and
science,
Female, 2
nd
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
science
many
interventions,
benchmarks,
student
recognitions/a
cknowledgem
ents,
PTA gives
money,
Teacher
5
Male, 5th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin, Arts
Teacher
6
Male, 6th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
special ed
ribbons,
teacher praise,
raffle,
benchmark
awards, GPA
awards,
attendance,
fundraiser,
extra
curricular,
look who’s
helping
coupons,
homeroom
events,
celebrate a lot
of
opportunities,
collabora
tion
among
the
teachers,
teachers
motivate
students
to get the
determin
ation to
be
successfu
l, use
district
and
teacher
data to
drive
instructio
n,
personali
zed, kids
know
their
teachers,
continual
ly
brainstor
tries to
make sure
there is
enough to
go around,
it is based
on need,
collaboratio
n, equally
distributed,
we are very
resourceful,
213
Teacher
6 Cont.
ming
ways to
help
kids,
leadershi
p is
voluntary
but
everyone
gets
involved
because
they
want
what is
best for
kids,
Teacher
7
Male, 7th
year in
education,
all at Mc
Garvin,
Social
Science
teacher
leaders,
departme
nt chairs,
leadershi
p team,
whole
faculty,
departme
nt chair
role is in
transition
, it is
becomin
g more
of an
instructio
nal
leader
position,
no longer
textbook
keeper/di
stributor,
just ask for
it, SSC, if
justified she
will find the
money,
department
chairs buy
supplies,
Principal
1
Female, 31
years in
education,
visionary
leadership
style, set
use a sales
pitch during
assembly to
straight
shooter,
encourag
support
what
teachers and
214
Principal
1 Cont.
(4
th
year at
Mc Garvin)
Positions
held:
Teacher, AP,
principal,
director of
K-12, back
to principal
goals,
involve staff
on deciding
how to get
there, set
the culture
which
aligns with
our vision,
(see Mc
Garvin
culture
handout),
establish big
picture,
spend time
refining,
teachers are
collegial,
creative,
enthusiastic,
hard
working,
willing to
change,
focused,
have open
communicat
ion,
collaborativ
e, share
knowledge
and
information,
can’t back
off…be
right in
there with
them and
not be
afraid of
them not
liking you
but you
motivate
students,
er, at
faculty
meeting I
talk
about
what I
see in the
classroo
m
(Spotligh
t on
Educatio
n),
promote
teachers
at site
and
district
level,
must
value
teachers,
model, I
trust
their
judgment
, I trust
them and
trust they
(teachers
) will do
what
they say,
students
need,
departments
have small
budgets,
fundraisers,
PTSA, I
control the
budgets,
creative
financing,
creative in
the write up,
ASB,
teachers just
need to ask,
215
Principal
1 Cont.
must be
sensitive,
Parent 1
4
th
consecutive
year as a
parent, one
child at the
school
vital, the
teachers
here
make all
the
differenc
e in the
world, it
is the
teacher
and
principal
relations
hip that
can make
or break
a school,
the
principal
instills in
the
teachers
what to
instill in
the kids,
teachers
have
been
trained,
teachers
seen to
care
about
students,
held
accounta
ble to
call you
back/co
mmunica
te with
parents,
PTO, not
sure of the
funding,
216
Parent 1
Cont.
teachers
listen,
they are
right on
at this
school,
Parent 2
2
nd
year as a
parent, two
children
currently at
the school,
has a child at
the school
before this
principal
Support
Staff 1
Female, 3
rd
year in the
district, 1
st
year at Mc
Garvin, AP
teachers
motivate and
reward
students,
student
centered,
willing
to work
hard and
extra,
follow
the
principal,
in awe of
this
school,
how hard
they
work,
everyone
works
hard and
conforms
, new
teachers
meet
with
admin
monthly,
know the
kids,
making
kids feel
resources
and
conversatio
ns built
around kids,
217
Support
Staff 1
Cont.
connecte
d, mutual
respect,
listen to
the
students,
do
everythin
g to
benefit
the
students,
just like
being in
heaven,
Support
Staff 2
Male, 20
th
year in the
district, 5
th
year at Mc
Garvin, PM
Support
Staff 3
Female, 15
th
year in
education,
3
rd
year at
Mc Garvin,
teacher and
counselor
provides the
resources,
principal
controls
that,
teachers
request with
a rational as
to why and
they get it,
free flowing
process,
218
APPENDIX G: RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEMES
Main research question: In the implementation of standards-based reform: What is
the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to
sustain student academic growth?
Sub question A: How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the
implementation of standards-based reform? (roles/style/characteristics/visionary)
Themes:
1. The principal has established high expectations for students, teachers, staff and
parents and all stakeholders are held accountable for student success.
2. The principal is perceived as a visionary leader who “buffers teachers” and
uses current research strategies to support student academic growth.
3. The principal is perceived as an instructional leader who has an extensive
knowledge of curriculum/instruction and a variety of site and district
experience.
4. The principal hires, monitors and evaluates teacher performance using a very
direct yet supportive leadership style.
5. The principal spends the majority of his/her time leading rather than managing
as evidenced by high visibility and frequent classroom observations.
Sub question B: How has the principal involved teachers in the implementation of
standards-based reform? (decision making/teachers as leaders)
Themes:
1. Using data, the principal has established a collaborative/non bureaucratic
approach to all decision making while keeping students interests/achievement
as the focus.
2. Through teacher input, the principal uses an inclusive systematic approach to
empower staff to make decisions and annually monitor their effectiveness.
3. The principal has established the reputation of a “buffer” thereby increasing
trust among teachers and the willingness to collaboratively make decisions to
support student learning.
4. Teachers know the principals “bottom line,” use staff input, and use consensus
to make all decisions which increases teacher accountability.
219
Sub question C: How does the principal hold individuals accountable for
implementation of standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic
growth? (assessment/interventions/ accountability)
Themes:
1. Clearly defined expectations, consistency, follow through, high principal
visibility, frequent classroom observations, honest principal feedback and
effective teacher evaluation practices increase teacher accountability and
student academic success.
2. Through the implementation of standards-based instruction, district course
pacing guides, district benchmarks, teacher assessments and the use of data to
guide/re-teach information individuals are regularly assessed and teachers are
held accountable for sustained student academic growth.
3. Interventions taught by experienced teachers before, during and after school
provide opportunities for sustained student growth.
4. Due to clearly defined expectations, consistency, follow through and the
constant re-evaluation of programs/decisions teachers perceive accountability
as “support, not I gotcha.”
Sub question D: What has the principal done to build school capacity to sustain
student academic growth in these four areas:
Teachers’: knowledge, skills, and dispositions (professional development)
Themes:
1. The principal uses data and research to determine the specific needs of in
house professional development.
2. The district provides a monthly calendar of professional development in which
teachers may attend or the principal believes would be beneficial to improved
student achievement.
3. Administration and teachers provide on site assistance/mentoring and
professional development for new teachers.
Professional community: organization, development/relationships, distributed/shared
leadership (teachers as leaders/student recognition)
Themes:
1. Through the collaborative establishment of a clear vision, teacher dedication,
principal/teacher shared leadership, hard work and commitment to student
success a professional community that is student centered is well established.
220
2. Positive relationships between teachers/staff, students, parents and
administration based on mutual respect, effective communication, support
and high accountability assist in the development of a professional
community.
3. A variety of student and staff recognition is used to motivate the organization.
Program coherence: coordinate school programs, clear learning goals, sustainability
(culture/program coherence)
Themes:
1. The principal and teachers have collaboratively developed a culture of high
expectations, collegiality, coordinated school programs, clear learning goals for all
students, variety of interventions, student centered approach to decision making,
positive academic learning environment, strong shared leadership, teamwork,
individual and collective accountability to sustain student academic growth.
Technical resources: materials, time, allocation of resources (resources)
Themes:
1. Teachers have the necessary materials, equipment and resources to provide a
rich learning environment for student achievement.
2. Resources are equally distributed throughout the school and only need to be
justified to support student learning to be allocated.
3. A free flowing process using a variety of sources (grants, PTO, SSC, general
fund) has been established to support student learning.
Major themes from literature:
Principal is responsible for implementing standards based reform goals: high
academic standards, accountability, focused on all students and embraces change.
Accountability essential for all individuals: information about individual
performance, standards for judging success and interventions.
Principal is responsible for creating the learning environment: culture, input,
resources and visibility to improve student achievement.
Principal must be an instructional leader: knowledge of instruction, monitoring and
evaluation.
Transformational leadership/distributed leadership are promoted by the principal:
intellectual stimulation and optimizer.
Communication and outreach are important roles of the principal.
Affirmation of students and staff in celebrating and recognition of successes are
important factors in promoting and sustaining academic achievement.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore a high poverty high achieving intermediate school focusing on principal leadership in this era of standards-based reform. Due to federal and state mandates, educators are challenged to ensure that all students succeed as defined by scoring "proficient" on California Standards Tests (CST) in language arts and math. So why are some schools succeeding and others failing? The main research question which guided this research was: In the implementation of standards-based reform, what is the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth? To guide the research, the following four sub-questions included: A. How has the leadership role of the principal changed with the implementation of standards-based reform? B. How has the principal empowered teachers in the implementation of standards-based reform and the decision-making process? C. How does the principal hold individuals accountable for implementing standards-based reform to improve and sustain student academic growth? D. How does the principal build school capacity to sustain student academic growth in the following five areas? a. teachers' knowledge, skills, and dispositions
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
K-12 standards-based reform implementation: site-level shared roles of leadership: a case study
PDF
An exploration of leadership capacity building and effective principal practices
PDF
Influences on principals' leadership practice
PDF
Building leadership capacity to support principal succession
PDF
A new era of leadership: preparing leaders for urban schools & the 21st century
PDF
Secondary school counselor-principal relationships: impact on counselor accountability
PDF
Use of accountability indicators to evaluate elementary school principal performance
PDF
Effective leadership practices used by middle school principals in the implementation of instructional change
PDF
Reframing school reform with effective tactics: institutionalizing culturally responsive pedagogy in alignment with policy-based accountability to ensure the achievement of African aAmerican stud...
PDF
The effects of coaching on building and sustaining effective leadership practice of an urban school administrator
PDF
Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals
PDF
Building capacity in urban schools by coaching principal practice toward greater student achievement
PDF
Initiatives implemented by urban high school principals that increase and sustain achievement in algebra for African American students
PDF
Standards based report card: teachers' perception on the development, transition, and implementation
PDF
The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams
PDF
Role of a principal supervisor in fostering principal development to support instructional improvement and a positive school climate
PDF
How principals lead Title I schools to high academic achievement: a case study of transformative leadership
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
Building leadership capacity: Practices for preparing the next generation of Catholic school principals
Asset Metadata
Creator
Rinder, Debra E.
(author)
Core Title
In the implementation of standards-based reform: what is the leadership role of the principal in building school capacity and accountability to sustain student academic growth?
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
07/25/2007
Defense Date
05/07/2007
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
accountability,building school capacity,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,Principal,standards-based reform,sustain academic growth
Language
English
Advisor
Kezar, Adrianna (
committee chair
), Merrick, Joann (
committee member
), Wilson, Carol (
committee member
)
Creator Email
drinder@monrovia.k12.ca.us
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m660
Unique identifier
UC174583
Identifier
etd-Rinder-20070725 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-526648 (legacy record id),usctheses-m660 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Rinder-20070725.pdf
Dmrecord
526648
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Rinder, Debra E.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
accountability
building school capacity
standards-based reform
sustain academic growth