University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Promising practices for building leadership capital in educational organizations

(USC Thesis Other)

Promising practices for building leadership capital in educational organizations

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Promising Practices for Building Leadership Capital in Educational Organizations

by

Roy-Kevin Edward Johnson

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

December 2020

Copyright 2020 Roy-Kevin Edward Johnson

ii

Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the many individuals who made this dissertation possible.
To my extended Trojan family in the weekend cohort, thank you for the shared laughs, a few
tears along the way, and a lifelong of friendships. To my thematic group members: Kristine,
Brenda, Dan, and Lauren, your tireless support and timely encouragement have been nothing less
than remarkable. To my dissertation committee chairperson, Dr. Kathy Stowe, who not only
provided expert guidance at every step of the way but also encouraged me to always “fight on!”
To my committee members, Dr. Michael Escalante and Dr. Courtney Malloy, for sharing their
wisdom in educational leadership practices while also understanding how to make research come
alive in a relevant manner for the benefit of K12 students everywhere.
Thank you to my mentors, Dr. Jan Billings and Dr. Marc Ecker, educators who have
made remarkable impacts in K12 educational leadership and with whom I have had the good
fortune to be a benefactor of their wisdom. Thank you to John Besta, Lana Nichol, and the entire
El Rancho staff, who gave me my first educational leadership opportunity and taught me so
much of what shaped me into who I am today and who I aspire to be as a leader.
Thank you to my family members, both at work and home, who all paid the price by
supporting me throughout the Ed.D. program; your accommodations, understanding, and
patience did not go unnoticed. To my husband Ryan, you so selflessly encouraged me with
countless hours of support, both intellectually and emotionally, and never lost track of the end-
goal for our family. I am an incredibly blessed man to get to share my life with such a brilliant
educator and an all-around amazing human.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... ii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii

List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................... ix

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... x

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction of the Problem ........................................................................................................ 1
Background of the Problem ......................................................................................................... 2
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................ 3
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 5
Research Questions ..................................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 6
Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions ............................................................................. 7
Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of the Study ........................................................................................................... 8

Chapter 2: Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 10
Historical Context ..................................................................................................................... 10
Accountability and 21st Century Leadership ........................................................................ 11
Educational Leadership’s Impact on Student Performance ................................................... 11
The Responsibility of School Districts .................................................................................. 12
The History of Principals as Site Leaders ............................................................................. 13
Development of Site-Level Leaders .......................................................................................... 14
Identification of Potential Site Leaders ................................................................................. 14
Practices Utilized to Prepare Leaders .................................................................................... 15
Internship Models .................................................................................................................. 16
Cohort Models ....................................................................................................................... 16

iv

District Professional Development Models ........................................................................... 17
Mentoring Models ................................................................................................................. 18
Initial tapping and early mentoring. ................................................................................... 18
Mentoring of pre-credentialed administrators. .................................................................. 19
Mentoring of new administrators. ...................................................................................... 19
Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Practices ............................................................... 20
Challenges to Building Leadership Capacity at Sites ............................................................ 21
Barriers of Systematic Approaches to Succession ................................................................ 21
Lack of Practices and Transferability .................................................................................... 22
Theoretical Framework: Transformational Leadership Theory ................................................ 22
Challenge the Process ............................................................................................................ 23
Model the Way ...................................................................................................................... 23
Inspire a Shared Vision .......................................................................................................... 24
Enable Others to Act .............................................................................................................. 24
Encourage the Heart .............................................................................................................. 25
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 26

Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................................... 28
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 28
Research Design ........................................................................................................................ 29
Sample and Population .............................................................................................................. 29
Overview of Organization ......................................................................................................... 33
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................. 34
Instrumentation .......................................................................................................................... 36
Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 38
Data Collection Approach ..................................................................................................... 38
Interviews. .......................................................................................................................... 38
Observations. ..................................................................................................................... 39
Document analysis. ............................................................................................................ 39
Data and alignment. ........................................................................................................... 40
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 41
Ethical Consideration ................................................................................................................ 42

v

Chapter 4: Results ......................................................................................................................... 44
Overview of Organization ......................................................................................................... 44
Overview of Program ................................................................................................................ 45
Overview of Participants ........................................................................................................... 46
Data Findings ............................................................................................................................ 48
Research Question 1: Perceived Practices Contributing to Building Leaders ....................... 48
A culture of capacity through cyclical growth and coaching. ........................................... 48
A defined vision and clear values. ................................................................................. 48
Strong cross-organizational relationships. ..................................................................... 50
A guiding ideology of expansive leadership opportunities. ............................................... 52
Selection of mentees. ...................................................................................................... 54
Development of mentees. ............................................................................................... 55
Supported group mentorship and targeted administrative growth. .................................... 56
Group feedback. ............................................................................................................. 57
Interdisciplinary growth. .................................................................................................... 59
Selective professional development. .............................................................................. 60
Sheltered application of duties and experiences. ............................................................... 62
Discussion of Research Question 1 ....................................................................................... 63
Research Question 2: Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Strategies ....................... 66
Balancing relationships throughout the organization. ....................................................... 66
Opportunities for administrative exploration. ................................................................ 67
Not all teachers want to be administrators. .................................................................... 68
A non-traditional structure. ................................................................................................ 69
Administration who actively teach. ................................................................................ 70
Frequent turnover of administration. .............................................................................. 71
The price of the system. ..................................................................................................... 71
Fiscal examples. ............................................................................................................. 72
Strain on support staff and teachers. .............................................................................. 73
Discussion of Research Question 2 ....................................................................................... 74
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 75

Chapter 5: Summary ..................................................................................................................... 77
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 77
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 78

vi

Summary of the Findings .......................................................................................................... 78
Contributing Practices ........................................................................................................... 78
Models the way. ................................................................................................................. 78
Inspires a shared vision. ..................................................................................................... 79
Challenges the process. ...................................................................................................... 79
Enables others to act. ......................................................................................................... 80
Encourages the heart. ......................................................................................................... 80
Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Practices ............................................................ 80
Implications for Practice and Policy ......................................................................................... 81
Site Administrators ................................................................................................................ 82
Charter Organizations and School Districts .......................................................................... 83
Educational Organizations ..................................................................................................... 85
Recommendations for Future Studies ....................................................................................... 85
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 87

References ..................................................................................................................................... 89

Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 99
Appendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter ............................................................................ 99
Appendix B: Administrator Interview Questions .................................................................... 101
Appendix C: Teacher Interview Questions ............................................................................. 105
Appendix D: Observation Protocol ......................................................................................... 109

vii

List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Study Participants................................................................................ 32

Table 2. Summary of Data Collection Methods used in the Study......................................... 40

Table 3. Del Giorgio Middle School Student Demographics.................................................45

Table 4. Carry-costs of Leadership Team Mentorship Program........................................... 72

viii

List of Figures
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework.......................................................................................... 35
Figure 2. Model for Qualitative Data Analysis..................................................................... 41

ix

List of Appendices
Appendix A—Participant Recruitment Letter....................................................................... 99

Appendix B—Interview Protocol (Administrators)............................................................... 101

Appendix C—Interview Protocol (Teachers)........................................................................ 105

Appendix D—Observation Protocol...................................................................................... 109

x

Abstract
This study examined the promising practices utilized by a large dependent charter middle school that
were perceived to build the leadership capacity of the organization. Furthermore, this study also
recognized that challenges to building leadership capacity within the charter organization exists. The
Leadership Team Mentorship program served as the case study for this project. Triangulation of data
included: document analysis, observations, and semi-structured interviews. The analysis of data suggests
that the Leadership Team Mentorship program builds leadership capacity by recognizing on-campus
teacher leaders who are then groomed by a team of senior administrators through being provided diverse
opportunities to practice administrative duties in a sheltered environment with extensive feedback through
structured mentorship. This study can benefit site leaders, districts and charter organizations, as well as
local educational licensing organizations that are seeking to develop a more mentor-based model of
leadership development.
Keywords: K12 organizational leadership, succession management, leadership capacity building,
charter schools

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem
Strong leadership in schools positively influences student achievement, second only to
highly effective classroom teachers (Leithwood et al., 2008). Multiple studies have shown that
the most effective organizations proactively identify and develop potential leaders from within
the organization to build the next generation of leadership, thereby ensuring student success
(Goddard & Miller, 2010; Northouse, 2013). The National Association of Secondary School
Principals (NASSP) (2010) confirmed that most educational organizations within the United
States lack formalized systems and structures to build the next generation of leaders through
strategic succession planning, noting that aspiring leaders are typically identified by existing
leaders who have not been given specific criteria or directives of the qualities or criteria for
identification.
Identifying and developing the next generation of school leaders presents an on-going
struggle, statistically considering the limited number of years many individuals spend in
positions of leadership and their age at entry (Beteille et al., 2012), with as many as 22% of
principals in public schools leaving their school sites each year. The United States Bureau of
Labor Statistics (2014) projected the employment rates of K12 leadership to nationally increase
year-over-year by 6% for the years 2012–2022 primarily owing to projected retirements.
California’s prospective labor market trends determined that more than 53% of school leaders
were between the ages of 46 and 55 and a majority of retiring school leaders did so at age 55
(White et al., 2010). These trends are further exasperated in areas serving historically
disadvantaged students (Goldring & Taie, 2014; White et al., 2010). Keigher (2010) also noted
that teachers (the primary candidates for administrative positions) are exiting the profession

2

within the first nine years at a rate 6% higher than that of those exiting due to retirements.
Furthermore, many educators who possess the basic qualifications to fill leadership positions are
simply choosing not to do so (DeAngelis & O’Connor, 2012).
Intentionally planning for leadership succession within an organization by developing
practices for both formal and informal opportunities allows for the development of leadership
capacity within the teachers in an educational organization (Collins, 2001; Fink, 2011; Myung et
al., 2011). When organizations strategically plan for and develop their members, the net effect is
that not only is there a pool of highly qualified candidates available but also the overall level of
leadership efficacy is increased system-wide (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007; Fink,
2011).
Background of the Problem
Studies have suggested that in much the same manner as the role of the principal has
significantly shifted, so too has the role and expectations of school districts themselves (Fullan,
2014; Slater, 2008; Turnbell et al., 2013). School districts are far-removed from the time of only
running the business aspects within educational entities. School districts are now expected to
both be transformational organizations and create transformational leaders (Darling-Hammond,
LaPointe et al., 2007; Turnbell et al., 2013) who will, in turn, maximize achievement for all
students and continuously seek to narrow achievement gaps among the most underserved
populations. According to Kouzes and Posner (2012), transformational leaders are those who
have developed five practices within their organizations, including modeling the way, inspiring a
shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart. In
addition, Northouse (2013) noted that the most effective organizations take responsibility for

3

developing leaders from within, thus increasing the overall leadership capacity of the
organization and resulting in increased student achievement (Leithwood et al., 2004).
School districts and site leaders have a critical role to execute in developing
organizational leadership capacity (Lambert, 2005) to ensure a pool of qualified candidates are
available and ready as positions of school leadership open within the organization through the
process of succession management (Fitzgerald & Sabatino, 2014). Moreover, the NASSP has
highly recommended the implementation of formal development practices for educational
organizations to ensure the continuance of organizational missions (National Association of
Secondary Principals, 2002). In support of this, Marzano et al., (2005) found a significant (.25)
correlation between student achievement and principal leadership, and an additional study by
Waters and Marzano (2006) found that there is a statistically positive correlation between student
achievement and district leadership. There is a need for succession management through the
development of a leadership pipeline of transformational leaders at both the site level and the
organizational level through the on-going cultivation of leadership capacity within educational
organizations (Fitzgerald & Sabatino, 2014; Myung et al., 2011).
Statement of the Problem
There is a looming shortage of K12 school administrators in California owing to pending
retirements and a general lack of interest among qualified potential candidates (Campbell &
Gross, 2012). Most K12 organizations do not have succession plans in place, nor do they have
any formal structures in-house to identify and develop leadership successors (Johnson et al.,
2010). At the national level, the U.S. Department of Education’s 2012–2013 Principal Attrition
and Mobility survey revealed that 36% of principals have left the site-level position to work in a
district-level position (NCES, 2014) and nearly 67% of current principals claim that they intend

4

to leave the principalship before reaching retirement (Kearney, 2010) and only serve in the
position for four years on average (Jacobson et al., 2007), creating short spans of leadership at
the site level. If a district lacks a sufficient supply of leaders who are both qualified and
developed in accordance with the district’s guiding mission, vision, and philosophy, time is lost
as each successive leader enters the position and must acclimate and establish themselves within
the organization as they earn the trust of the members at the site through the development of
leadership capacity prior to executing strategic moves. Further, a significant decline among
teachers interested in pursuing leadership positions is well-documented (Fullan, 2014; Myung et
al., 2011) and is attributed to teacher turnover rates, with 14% exiting after year one, 33% by
year three, and as high as 50% by year five in many locations (Ingersoll, 2003).
The issue of building leadership capacity in California’s K12 school districts is directly tied
to student performance; multiple studies have shown distinct correlations between effective
school leadership and student performance outcomes (Darling-Hammond, Orphanos et al., 2007;
Fullan, 2014; Tucker et al., 2012). If districts are allowed to continue existence without
establishing leadership pipelines, the educational outcome of students will increasingly suffer
because the pool of candidates interested in the profession continues to shrink (Darling-
Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007; Myung et al., 2011). This effect will become even more
pronounced in areas registering large numbers of low socio-economic minority enrollment
(Myung et al., 2011).
There is a nationwide shortage of qualified aspiring leaders who are ready to fill potential
principal vacancies (Bierly & Shy, 2013), which Hitt and Tucker (2016) noted as having
significant implications relative to student achievement. The National Association of Secondary
School Principals (2019) reported that one in every five secondary principals did not return to a

5

principalship position the following school year and projected an annual 6% increase in
vacancies through the year 2022. A report titled The Condition of Education (2016) noted that
school leader positions have vacancy rates as high as 23% on an annual basis. Moreover, the
most experienced leaders are the ones typically retiring at higher rates because they are near the
retirement age and are therefore leaving institutions with significantly less-experienced
administrators in positions of leadership (TCOE, 2016). In 2012–2013, principals with the most
experience (10+ years) constituted 57% of the retirements in contrast to principals with three or
fewer years of experience, who constituted 16% of the retirements (TCOE, 2016). The possible
consequences of not solving this problem raise serious issues of equity and accountability
(Burke, 2004) because student achievement will decline in the absence of continuity in
leadership positions (Fullan, 2014).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the promising practices within Del Giorgio
Middle School that develops potential leaders from within the organization to systematize
succession management, thereby maintaining a leadership pipeline and ensuring minimal
disruption to the health and continuity of the organization. Practices were reviewed through the
perspectives of various (current and former) stakeholders in the charter organization. The study
sought to also identify significant challenges in supporting and maintaining succession
management practices over time.
Research Questions
To better understand the promising practices implemented to build future leadership
succession pipelines, the following research questions were developed in a collaborative effort
with a thematic group to guide the study:

6

1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at Del Giorgio Charter School?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to
build leadership capacity?
Significance of the Study
This study was designed to increase the understanding of the current practices in place at
Del Giorgio Charter School that contribute to building the next generation of school leaders.
This study is significant in that it adds to the limited literature linking leadership succession
plans and educational organizations. This research also provides policy makers and educational
organizations with documented successful strategies utilized as a system to significantly develop
leadership capacity within educational organizations. The unit of study (a dependent charter
middle school) serves as a potential model for other organizations seeking to develop leadership
capacity and implement a succession management system.
Educational organizations can utilize and model the promising practices found in this
study and evaluate the extent to which they have a leadership pipeline. If educational
organizations develop and implement succession management systems, they can then ensure a
talent pool of aspiring leaders who can continue the organizational mission. The study’s findings
further support the value of succession management as a necessary system within a structure
designed to continuously improve student achievement and will support educational
organizations in developing and implementing succession management structures. Because the
study identified challenges to supporting and maintaining the identified systems over time,
administrators are provided with identified structures within which to invest resources for long-
term sustainability and minimized downtimes.

7

Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions
There are multiple limitations of this study and all are possible factors that could have
influenced the results beyond my control. The most significant factor to consider is that the
study was executed in a qualitative manner wherein the researcher functioned as the primary
collector and analyzer of data; therefore, researcher bias may have impacted both the collection
and analysis of the project’s data (Merriam, 2009). An additional limitation is that there was a
three-month time constraint placed upon the Ed.D. dissertation schedule for the collection of the
project’s research. Also, the study was completely dependent upon voluntary participation of the
identified sample population. Triangulation of data (Creswell, 2014) was utilized in all areas
possible to increase the project’s validity and included interviews, observations, and document
analysis.
There are also delimitations to be considered as part of this project, and although they
were in my control, they could still have unintentionally influenced the results of this project.
The thematic dissertation group agreed to select large school sites or organizations with
succession management practices determined to be currently in place. In addition, my selection
of a charter organization was a limitation within my control. The site I chose to study was the
result of multiple network meetings that ultimately uncovered strong succession management
practices in place, specifically the Leadership Team Mentorship program. The Leadership Team
Mentorship program is a 4–6-year mentorship program wherein aspiring leaders serve as an
assistant principal who still teaches for a portion of the day while rotating through annually
assigned duties under the tutelage of the assistant principal who last completed the duties. This
format allows for the recruitment of teacher-leaders on campus, who are then carefully groomed

8

by mentor assistant principals and the principal. Considering these delimitations, the findings
from this study are considered limited and therefore may or may not be generalizable.
Definitions of Terms
Many terms are relevant to and referenced in this study and are used to describe and
inform the research. For the purpose of the study, the thematic dissertation committee has
defined the following terms:
a. Leadership capacity: an organizational concept meaning broad-based, skillful
participation in the work of leadership that leads to lasting institutional improvement
(Lambert, 2005)
b. Leadership pipeline: the development of individuals from within an organization for
the purposes of succession planning (Mehrabani & Mohamad, 2011)
c. Succession management: a purposeful effort by leadership to establish protocol and
processes to develop leadership capacity for the purpose of finding and developing
future leaders from within the organization (Fitzgerald & Sabatino, 2014)
Organization of the Study
This study examined the promising practices for building leadership capacity in multi-
campus, public K12 educational organizations. Chapter one provides an overview of the study
and establishes the importance of identifying promising practices for K12 educational
organizations. Chapter two reviews the literature relevant to the process of leadership capacity
development, beginning with a historical outline of succession planning in public educational
organizations, and reviews the known practices in leadership development programs currently
utilized in K12 organizations and in the public sector. This chapter also describes the theoretical
framework selected for this study. Chapter three outlines the research methodology for this

9

study. This includes a rationale for the utilization and application of a qualitative research
methodology approach. The sampling of units included in the study as well as the participant
selection, instrumentation, and unique forms of data that were collected and utilized in this study
are discussed. Chapter four reviews the findings of the research and outlines the common
themes that emerged from the research questions in relation to existing literature. Chapter five
presents the study’s results of identified promising practices utilized in K12 organizations and
presents the implications of this study’s findings in addition to identifying and proposing
potential areas of future research for further expansion of this study.

10

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This study explored the ways educational organizations utilize promising practices to
build future leadership succession pipelines through studying the practices that were perceived to
contribute to the building of the next generation of leaders while acknowledging that there were
challenges to supporting and maintaining those practices over time.
To further understand the significant issues surrounding the promising practices
implemented to build future leadership succession pipelines, this review of current research
begins by exploring the historical aspect of principalship and how that has changed with the
advent of accountability measures and 21
st
century leadership practices. This review examines
site-level promising practices that have been implemented to build future leadership pipelines by
reviewing studies and articles relevant to the research questions. Next, the research reviews how
educational organizations identify and develop potential leaders. The review then addresses the
challenges to supporting and maintaining those practices over time. Transformational leadership
theory was the lens through which this study examined the promising practices implemented to
build future leadership succession pipelines in K12 organizations. The conclusion of this chapter
connects current literature to this present study.
Historical Context
Leadership within the field of education has substantially evolved over time into the
present form (Rousmaniere, 2007). A position that once was only concerned with the
maintenance of the buildings on campus and the accuracy of attendance records and lunch counts
is now considered the pivotal position of influence at a school site and the lead agent of change
implementation (Fink & Brayman, 2006; Kouzes & Posner, 2012). A longitudinal study by
Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) analyzed the changes in the role of principalship, including the

11

extent to which individual principals were considered to be primarily the responsible party for
initiating change within their site in light of increasing pressures of accountability measures.
With the most recent federal achievement measures related to the Common Core State Standards
rollout still in the early stages of implementation, individual states are starting to address broader
guidelines for administrator evaluations (Davis et al., 2005).
Accountability and 21st Century Leadership
Today’s schools are led by more than a principal or even an administrative team. They
call upon all stakeholders to be active participants, engaged in an on-going effort to ensure the
highest levels of individual achievement for all students within their jurisdiction. Bolman and
Deal (2010) noted that the most effective principals cooperatively function with the entire
community to elevate learning practices for all students at their site. Likewise, Thompson (2004)
and Katzenmeyer and Moller (2001) observed that when change is effectively implemented at
the highest level, it is attributable to the principals who intentionally develop increased
leadership capacity among the staff members of their site by developing truly meaningful roles
for those staff members to take on throughout their campus.
Educational Leadership’s Impact on Student Performance
Principal leadership is second only to the impact of the classroom teacher on students and
student achievement (Leithwood et al., 2004). Paralleling this study, Darling-Hammond,
LaPointe et al. (2007) documented student achievement scores to be higher in the schools that
were determined to have effective leadership in place. Although the impact of a principal upon
student achievement is not definitively agreed upon throughout the studies, these studies have
reviewed all documented positive influences ranging from an estimated 25% up to 60%
(Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007; Leithwood et al., 2004; Marzano et al., 2005;

12

Valentine & Prater, 2011). Although much of what site leaders do is indirect (Louis et al., 2010),
they are ultimately responsible for setting high expectations, developing and implementing the
school’s vision, and generally executing the decisions that result in teacher growth and efficacy;
this, in turn, directly impacts the students.
Although effective site leaders are critical to on-going student achievement, both Darling-
Hammond, LaPointe et al. (2007) and Waters and Marzano (2006) found significant evidence
that high levels of student achievement were tied not only to site leadership capacity but also to
the district’s or organization’s senior leadership because these individuals are responsible for
collaborating at all levels of the organization while securing board support for the developed
goals of the organization.
The Responsibility of School Districts
Paralleling the evolution of principals as site leaders, school districts have also grown in
both responsibility and expectations. Bottoms and Schmidt-Davis (2010) noted that school
districts of high efficacy invest in learning at each level of the organization, from classroom
teachers to school board members, with an emphasis on leadership development at each of these
levels. Setting a vision for the entire district that each school site can adopt through the
development of a comprehensive plan addressing all student needs is just one of the many
responsibilities of contemporary school districts (Bottoms & Schmidt-Davis, 2010). This is a
marked contrast from the origins of performing basic business functionalities and day-to-day
operations (Honig, 2012).
Because high levels of leadership efficacy have been noted in multiple studies as a key
factor in ensuring student achievement, school districts have a responsibility to develop and
systemize succession plans for leadership vacancies to ensure the developed visions continue in

13

the absence of occurring vacancies in leadership positions. Bottoms and Schmidt-Davis (2010)
noted that districts must be able to internally identify teacher-leaders who exhibit high potential
for the development of leadership capacity within the organization to more efficiently and
accurately ensure leadership sustainability.
The History of Principals as Site Leaders
Both the expectations and the role of the principal’s position have significantly evolved
over time, paralleling the timeline of increasing accountability measures throughout the field of
education. Valentine and Prater (2011) noted that the role of the principal was primarily a
position originally formed out of convenience for the greater educational organization’s benefit
because the early roles were narrowly focused on the day-to-day administrative tasks of a school
such as tracking attendance and maintaining bells: tasks that are now relegated to secretarial
positions.
It is commonly thought that the initial transition of the modern principalship from a
position of being task-based to being leadership-focused was initiated by the release of the 1977
United States Senate Committee Report on Equal Education that defined the school principal as
being the most influential position within educational organizations (Darling-Hammond,
LaPointe et al., 2007). This trajectory was further accelerated with the release of the national
report, A Nation at Risk (NCEE, 1983), as it is considered to be the impetus for the shift in the
public’s perception of student achievement and how student achievement is connected to the
efficacy of a school’s site-level leadership (Center for Education Reform, 1998). This initial
push for accountability in the mid-1980s led to standardized student achievement assessments
and eventually the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2002.

14

Today’s principals must be instructional leaders as opposed to site managers. Lynch
(2012) determined that principals are no longer encouraged but rather obligated to embrace the
challenges of being the “lead learner” because they are ultimately the responsible party for their
site’s student achievement. Hallinger (2010) determined that the pivotal element in developing a
student-achievement–centered school is the focus of utilizing the leader’s instructional skill set to
guide practices in areas of both site management and site leadership.
Development of Site-Level Leaders
Increased leadership capacity benefits all members of a given educational organization,
from the students, to the teachers, to the existing leaders. Goddard and Miller (2010) found
significant correlations between the efficacy of site leaders and students’ achievement gaps at
those sites. Amagoh (2009) observed that when educational organizations align their leadership
development programs with their internal culture in a systematic manner, aspiring leaders are
produced with greater leadership capacity. Not only does this develop a stronger candidate pool
within the organization but also all associated members benefit from the increased capacity.
Identification of Potential Site Leaders
The initial act of existing school administrators selecting specific teachers to develop as
aspiring leaders in administration is referred to as “tapping.” The term was first coined by
Turner (1960) as an informal process of structuring opportunities wherein identified teachers are
encouraged by site leaders to engage in the pursuit of administrative activities within the
organization.
Multiple studies have shown that in most organizations, the tapping process is largely
unstructured and organizations fail to provide existing leaders with descriptions, goals, and
trainings on the type of candidates and the qualities of the candidates that should be approached

15

or considered for tapping (Myung et al., 2011; Russell & Sabina, 2014). Myung et al. (2011)
found supporting evidence of veteran leaders favoring the tapping of aspiring leaders who were
male over female and typically were of the same ethnic composition. Conversely, Leithwood et
al. (2007) found that when veteran leaders were given specific criteria to use in tapping teachers,
aspirational leaders were identified based on qualities such as interpersonal skills, expertise in
the field, and their level of organizational commitment.
Practices Utilized to Prepare Leaders
Once potential leaders have been identified, organizations must go about the work of
inserting those individuals into a developmental program of one type or another. The range of
formal programs established in organizations throughout the country includes internship
programs, university-based programs, cohort models of various types, district-based professional
development programs, and various formats of mentoring models (Hitt et al., 2012; Kearney,
2010; Levine, 2005; Tucker et al., 2012; Turnbell et al., 2013).
The jobs of educational leaders continually evolve and present new challenges; therefore,
the most effective leadership development programs also continue to evolve (Slater, 2008).
Marzano et al. (2005) outlined 21 effective school leadership responsibilities that have the
greatest correlation to increased student achievement, whereas Turnbell et al. (2013) determined
successful site leaders to be able to develop a vision of academic success, cultivate leadership
across the organization, improve instruction, and manage all systems in ways that will generally
foster school improvement.
Similarly, Leithwood et al. (2004) found successful site leaders to be those who were able
to define their organization’s direction, develop individuals and groups within their organization,
and redesign their organization’s needs. Therefore, designing a leadership development model

16

for a specific organization can present a significant challenge to educational organizations. A
preview of the most typical leadership development programs follows.
Internship Models
Internship programs provide site-based experiences for new and aspiring leaders under
the close supervision of a veteran leader of the organization. Studies have shown that the
strategic selection of experiences for the new and aspiring leaders to engage in has proven to be
the most beneficial component of any leadership development program because the real-world
daily demands of educational leaders offer the participants the greatest degree of sheltered yet
authentic application of newly acquired skills essential to success in school site leadership
positions (Amagoh, 2009; Thessin & Clayton, 2013).
Carefully structured internships require the establishment and development of trust on
behalf of both the veteran leader and the aspiring leader in a way much similar to how a
mentoring relationship works because the veteran leader must trust the aspiring leader to
correctly interpret/apply/execute the skills throughout the experience and the aspiring leader
must in turn trust the veteran leader in situations that may not always initially be comfortable but
are ultimately designed to grow and stretch the aspiring leader (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et
al., 2007; Hitt et al., 2012; Johnston et al., 2010).
Cohort Models
Leadership programs structured in a cohort format offer numerous benefits to the
participants, including shared learning opportunities and greater development of interpersonal
skills. Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al. (2007) found that the problem-based learning
experiences typical of cohort models allowed for higher cognitive approaches and an increased
ability to enact learned practices for those cohort participants already in positions of leadership.

17

Multiple studies have found that there are several key elements that contribute to a
successful cohort model: they should be continuous in nature, they should provide continuous
and specific feedback, they should allow for continuous assessment, reflective practices should
be embedded, and relevant problems of practice should be dissected, analyzed, and restructured
(Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007; Hitt et al., 2012; Turnbell et al., 2013). The
communal support structure that develops as a result of leaders and aspiring leaders working
together in a cohort structure has also been found to further establish interests within the aspiring
leaders to continue on the path toward school leadership positions (Pounder & Crow, 2005).
District Professional Development Models
Districts that strategically utilize formalized professional development models based on
identified best practices accomplish multiple goals, including attracting aspiring leaders and
tapped teachers and further developing veteran principals within the organization, thereby
continuously increasing the leadership capacity of the organization (Furtick & Snell, 2013).
According to Kearney (2010), the most effective of these models provide learning opportunities
that are both research and standards based and ultimately work to improve both teaching
practices and student learning within the organization. Tucker et al. (2012) suggested that these
formalized programs align with the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium’s standards
that focus on community engagement, resource management, professional ethics, increased
effectiveness of classroom instruction, and the articulated development of leadership personnel
as the lead-learner of their site.
Although the commitment of funding for professional development by educational
organizations for their leaders and potential leaders that aligns with the overall site and district
goals has been shown to be beneficial (Furtick & Snell, 2013; Kearney, 2010; Leithwood et al.,

18

2004), it is also one of the practices that proves to be challenging to maintain; this is addressed in
a subsequent section of this study.
Mentoring Models
The practice of mentorship applied to succession management and the development of
leadership capacity within an organization surfaces in multiple studies (Anast-May et al., 2011;
Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007; Fink, 2010; Hansford & Ehrich, 2006; Kilburg &
Hancock, 2006; Silver et al., 2009; Zepeda et al., 2012). Despite substantial research showing
evidence of the benefits of mentorship in secular organizations as systematic practices, Darling-
Hammond, LaPointe et al. (2007) found few programs that incorporated mentoring from
experienced school leaders that would sufficiently guide the new and inexperienced leaders in
educational organizations. Strong and well-connected mentoring practices not only build
leadership capacity within teachers (Clayton et al., 2013) but also ultimately are a contributing
factor to tapped teachers seeing school administration as a viable transition (Howley et al., 2005;
Kilburg & Hancock, 2006; Solansky, 2010).
Initial tapping and early mentoring. Within the framework of many mentoring models,
the most frequently utilized method of teacher selection is typically referred to as tapping (Fink,
2010; Hobson et al., 2009; Howley et al., 2005). Tapping is the process wherein teacher-leaders
exhibiting great leadership potential on campuses are identified by current administrators who
then intentionally work to move the identified teachers into entry points and positions of school
administration. These “tapping” actions typically lack any organizational structure on campus or
within the district, and these tapped teachers are rarely in formal preparation programs outside
the district where they are employed (Fink, 2010; Fink & Brayman, 2006).

19

Multiple studies have found commonalities among teacher claims that reveal many were
directly made more aware of the positive aspects of school administration owing to an
association with their principal who significantly encouraged and supported their career moves
(Hansford & Ehrich, 2006, Howley et al., 2005; Zepeda et al., 2012). In addition, Howley et al.
(2005) specifically found that the districts and organizations that strategically utilized mentorship
opportunities for their teachers were able to develop a pool of qualified and interested candidates
that also, in turn, resulted in greater organizational leadership capacity throughout its members.
Mentoring of pre-credentialed administrators. Multiple studies have positively linked
increased leadership capacity of organizations with improved practices through the mentorship
of novice principals (Howley et al., 2005; Kilburg & Hancock, 2006). Anast-May et al. (2011)
determined that mentorship practices offered both the individuals and the organizations increased
opportunities to better prepare teacher-leaders who had been tapped. Furthermore, mentorship
arrangements utilizing veteran principals (and recently retired principals) as mentors have been
found to develop better-prepared candidates for principalship (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et
al., 2007). Anast-May et al. (2011) determined three primary components for further improving
the leadership capacity of mentees: developing the use of data to support student achievement,
creating and developing a culture of learning, and creating authentic opportunities of
instructional leadership at the site level. Although the mentoring of pre-credentialed
administrators is beneficial, it is also beneficial to continue that mentorship relationship
throughout the early phase of new administrators once they are placed into their first positions
within the organization.
Mentoring of new administrators. In as much as teacher-leaders benefit from the
mentoring process when transitioning into positions of leadership and pseudo-leadership

20

(department chair, teacher-on-special-assignment (TOSA), etc.), individuals early in their
administrative careers also benefit from a similar structure of on-going mentorship (Silver et al.,
2009), and a broad span of benefits has been documented by Hansford and Ehrich (2006) on
behalf of both the mentors and mentees, including increased development in the areas of problem
solving, professional development, sharing of ideas, and support/empathy. Furthermore, new
principals functioning in their initial principalships indicated significantly higher levels of
support and increased opportunities for reflection under the guidance of veteran leaders (Simeiou
et al., 2010), thus affording them the opportunity to carefully work through first-year challenges
under the tutelage of those who have navigated similar paths.
Multiple studies on mentoring programs and strategies utilized within greater succession
management plans have repeatedly found the practice of mentoring to be beneficial to both the
individuals and the overall organization as a means of leadership capacity development (Fink,
2010; Fink & Brayman, 2006; Silver et al., 2009; Simeiou et al., 2010; Zepeda et al., 2012).
Although the benefits of leadership development programs are well-documented, there are
challenges to supporting and maintaining the practices within organizations.
Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Practices
The development of a succession management plan is defined by it being a purposeful effort
designed by the organization with clearly established protocols and processes with the strategic
intent of identifying and developing future or aspiring leaders from within the organization
(Collins, 2001; Fitzgerald & Sabatino, 2014). This study examined promising practices as the
key elements to succession management plans through the lens of transformational leadership
theory (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). This entire process demands that existing senior leaders within
the organization analyze current leadership practices to ensure transferability, thereby enabling

21

the next generation of site leaders to become leaders of learning as they continue the vision and
mission of the organization (Fink, 2011). Fink (2011) further found that certain elements or
qualities of leadership are essential to the viability and sustainability of an organization’s plan,
including depth, length, breadth, social justice, diversity, resourcefulness, and conservation.
Challenges to Building Leadership Capacity at Sites
Despite numerous studies calling for the increased development of leadership capacity in
K12 educators to expand leadership succession pipelines, there are significant challenges in
supporting and maintaining these practices over time (Fink, 2011; Hitt & Tucker, 2016; Kearney,
2010; Rhodes & Brundrett, 2009). Based on the current literature on teacher leadership
development and capacity building, common themes around cultural issues such as autonomy
and seniority raise significant challenges to the practices in place designed to promote the growth
of leadership succession pipelines (Myung et al., 2011; Turnbell et al., 2013) that in turn create
increased leadership capacity at the site level.
Barriers of Systematic Approaches to Succession
In K12 education, sustained leadership is critical to achieving on-going organizational
goals such as increased student achievement. Although there are many barriers to K12
organizations systematically creating and implementing succession plans, perhaps none are as
challenging as the barrier of the profession’s culture itself. According to Myung et al. (2011),
the general culture of the education profession at the K12 level is one of egalitarianism that
collectively norms all teacher-members through methods such as unionization and standardized
salary schedules. Johnston et al. (2010), however, suggested that this culture is not impossible to
overcome if districts explicitly outline the expectations of principal effectiveness and then focus
on developing supportive environments for new administrators. Fink (2011) suggested that

22

equally important is the idea that a K12 organization must develop an internal culture of
portraying leadership roles within the organization as desirable positions.
Lack of Practices and Transferability
Although some K12 agencies have started the process of addressing the inadequacies in
their leadership succession pipelines, one of the significant challenges to supporting and
maintaining the succession pipeline over time is simply the lack of necessary practices needed to
do so within organizations. K12 organizations do not generally have standardized and replicable
systems in place to systematically identify potential future leaders. Johnson et al. (2010)
recommended districts to implement several strategies to increase the attractiveness of positions
leading to the organization’s succession pipeline, including the expansion of existing site-level
leadership teams, development of strategic career paths for the most effective teachers within the
organization to enter positions of leadership, and offering significant incentives to rookie
administrators in the succession pipeline to commit to serving in high-needs sites. Although
these strategies are viable, many K12 organizations continue to depend on potential future
leaders to simply self-identify (Johnston et al., 2010). Multiple studies have identified several
key competencies or actions evident within organizations that have been deemed to have high
levels of leadership capacity, including those identified by Kouzes and Posner (2012) as being
practices of transformational leadership (Kouzes & Posner, 2012; Leithwood et al., 2004; Myung
et al., 2011).
Theoretical Framework: Transformational Leadership Theory
The theoretical framework utilized for this study was the transformational leadership
theory based on Kouzes and Posner’s (2012) model because it not only has the greatest impact
on student achievement (Valentine & Prater, 2012) but also serves as a foundational model that

23

many other elements of organizational leadership can be established upon and further developed
around. Although the term “transformational leader” was first coined in the 1970s in the secular
marketplace (Burns, 1978), multiple adaptations of the theory have been utilized throughout
educational organizations since that time (Kouzes & Posner, 2012; Leithwood et al., 2004).
According to Kouzes and Posner (2012), educational leaders who are considered to be
transformational have developed five practices within their organizations, including modeling
the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and
encouraging the heart. These practices, when exercised with fidelity in an organization, allow
leaders to “get extraordinary things done” (Kouzes & Posner, 1995, p. 9).
Challenge the Process
Challenging the process is the mantra of transformational leaders. Whereas some
stakeholders may view failure as a result to be punished, transformational leaders encourage it as
a tool of learning and pushing an organization to even greater growth (Kouzes & Posner, 1995,
2002). Experiments are executed and calculated risks are taken with the possibility of
developing ideas into actionable items or strategies for greater growth within a given
organization. This study analyzed the perceived practices of a charter organization to better
understand how the organization’s leaders challenge traditional practices to push the
organization to greater growth in leadership development and sustainability.
Model the Way
Transformational leaders do not lead from behind; instead, they are out in front of their
organization, leading the way and articulately communicating their organization’s values and
philosophies (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). Modeling the way may also be thought of as showing
rather than telling the organization how things should be. The leader’s philosophy is clear,

24

standards are set reasonably high, principles for operating are in place, and organization-specific
goals have been developed and clearly communicated throughout the organization by the leader
(Kouzes & Posner, 2002, 2012). Modeling the way is an intricate characteristic within the
organizations that utilize mentoring structures as one of their promising practices for the
development of leadership capacity (Northouse, 2013). This study analyzed how the leaders of a
charter organization modeled the way and utilized organizational goals to address the challenges
to the perceived practices of building leadership capacity.
Inspire a Shared Vision
Inspiring a shared vision is a critical skill in true transformational leadership.
Transformational leaders must develop and communicate a clear vision that is ultimately the
organization’s future, as envisioned by the transformational leader. Transformational leaders
believe so strongly in their vision for the organization that they are able to inspire members of
the organization to buy into this future vision and align their own actions within the organization
for the sake of the greater good of the organization (Northouse, 2013). Transformational leaders
utilize their genuine enthusiasm for their future organization so that members of the organization
also believe they can make a difference by envisioning this same future the leader has forecast
(Kouzes & Posner, 2012). This study analyzed how the leadership team of a charter organization
was able to bring members of the organization into common alignment to build the next
generation of site leaders.
Enable Others to Act
Transformational leaders carefully and strategically grow cultures of trust within their
organizations through the development of their followers in a non-threatening and collaborative
atmosphere of mutual respect (Northouse, 2013). When leaders enable others within their

25

organization to act, they are involving followers in the decision-making process and, in turn, are
allowing their followers to stretch further toward realizing their full potential within the
organization. A sense of ownership and responsibility for the organization at large is fostered
through this process, as leaders take into consideration the needs and interests of the various and
diverse followers. By granting power to other members within the organization, leaders
strengthen the overall power of the organization (Abu-Tineh et al., 2009; Kouzes & Posner,
2012; Northouse, 2013). This study analyzed how the leadership of a charter organization
strategically enabled leaders of varying abilities throughout the organization to reach their
personal potential, thus resulting in increased leadership capacity at all levels of the charter
organization.
Encourage the Heart
Transformational leaders encourage members of their organization through public group
recognition by celebrating achievements together as a whole, resulting in an increased sense of
belonging for the entire organization (Kouzes & Posner, 1995). To strategically influence
members of the organization, leaders directly connect public recognition and organizational
rewards with the follower’s performance within and for the organization (Kouzes & Posner,
2012). The corporate and very public celebrations, conducted by the leader, result in even
greater levels of inspiration among the members of the organization as increased organizational
identification is realized (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). This study analyzed how the leadership of a
charter organization publicly encouraged members throughout the organization to aide in the
development and growth of leadership capacity throughout the organization and ultimately
increased organizational identification throughout all facets of the charter school.

26

Summary
The intent of this study was to better understand how K12 charter organizations can
utilize the promising practices that develop potential leaders from within their organization to
systematize succession management, thereby maintaining a leadership pipeline and ensuring
minimal disruption to the vision, health, and continuity of the organization. After reviewing
literature relevant to leadership succession through both the theoretical framework of
transformational leadership theory and the practices of Kouzes and Posner’s (2012) model, it is
evident that many K12 educational organizations fail to establish practices that contribute to the
development of the next generation of educational leaders.
As both the job description and subsequent expectations of principalship continue to
evolve, K12 charter organizations have a responsibility to identify and develop potential site
leaders who are able to challenge processes, model the way, inspire a shared vision, and enable
others to act while encouraging the heart for the greater good of students (Kouzes & Posner,
2012), ultimately resulting in continuously increasing student achievement. In agreement with
Kouzes and Posner, Valentine and Prater (2012) and Hitt et al. (2012) found that site leaders who
were able to execute the aforementioned transformational qualities were able to increase student
achievement.
The following chapter addresses the research methods utilized to determine how an
educational organization has developed promising practices for the development and growth of
the next generation of educational leaders and supports and maintains those practices over time
in a K12 setting. Perceptions of the identified promising practices greatly varied among the
participants of the study. In addition, challenges to supporting and maintaining those practices
throughout the organization were acknowledged by the study participants. The intent of this

27

study was to contribute to the greater body of knowledge concerning promising practices that can
be replicated in K12 educational organizations, thereby further increasing leadership capacity at
all levels of the organization.

28

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to examine the practices that are perceived to contribute to
developing the next generation of leaders at Del Giorgio Charter School. This study also
explored the challenges to supporting and maintaining those practices over time. The results of
this qualitative study contribute to the knowledge base of promising practices for developing the
next generation of highly qualified site leaders at charter schools who will directly contribute to
ever-increasing levels of student achievement. The practices associated with developing the next
generation of leaders were viewed through the lens of transformational leadership.
Chapter three delineates the research design of the study and provides an overview of the
participants and sample selection, including the criteria for identifying the participants and
sample. The theoretical framework of transformational leadership is re-introduced, and the
conceptual framework used as the basis for the study is introduced. Instrumentation used
throughout the project and the triangulated data collection methods are explained. Finally, the
process for data analysis is examined, and the ethical considerations taken into account for the
participants in the study are addressed.
Research Questions
In an effort to gain insights into successful leadership capacity building, research
questions were developed by five members of a University of Southern California Ed.D.
thematic dissertation group. The investigation sought to illicit responses to the following
research questions:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at Del Giorgio Charter School?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the practices over time?

29

Research Design
This study utilized both interviews and observations with educational professionals in
various positions and at various levels of leadership in a Southern California charter school that
was identified as having promising practices with regard to the cultivation of in-house employees
with leadership potential that ultimately leads to a sustainable leadership succession pipeline,
thus resulting in the continuity of the charter organization’s vision for increasing student
achievement.
Qualitative methods were chosen as the means of inquiry for this study because the
research questions provided a guiding framework in seeking to identify practices of potential
leadership identification, development, and succession planning at the site level within a district.
Although quantitative methodologies could certainly be of value, it was determined that a
qualitative methodology (specifically, observations and interviews) with individuals serving (or
having served) in various positions of site-level and district-level leadership would potentially
provide a far richer data set yielding denser and more valuable meaning in unique contexts
(Merriam, 2009). Patton (2002) analogized the process of interviewing carefully selected
candidates as a process by which researchers and readers may enter another individual’s
perspective. These rich and thick descriptions of experiences are best understood through a
qualitative case study (Gall et al., 2007).
Sample and Population
Many key criteria were identified as critical elements to the selection of a site for this
study. These elements included a student population of at least 1,100, a high-performing status
as per standardized test scores, being located in a K12 district, and having practices in place that
contribute to the development of the next generation of school leaders. Ultimately, Del Giorgio

30

Charter School was selected as the most appropriate site for this study because it fit all the
determined criteria for selection based on the Leadership Team Mentorship program in place that
is utilized to identify potential aspiring leaders among the staff members, who are then groomed
for leadership positions.
The primary method of obtaining a meaningful sample for this study was purposeful
sampling. It was determined that purposeful sampling would be most appropriate because it is
the intent of this study to examine the practices perceived to contribute to the development of the
next generation of school leaders at a specific school site. Therefore, because the phenomenon
of identifiable promising practices would not necessarily be considered commonplace at a
randomly selected school site, most other types of sampling such as typical sampling or
convenience sampling would not be appropriate, as they would not have provided a meaningful
population (limited resources) for a study relative to the determined research questions (Patton,
2015).
The school site of the study, Del Giorgio Charter School, was selected owing to the
Leadership Team Mentorship program, a practice in place that was determined to be contributing
to the development of a site-level leadership pipeline. For the purpose of this study, practices
were considered to be the collective culture of assumptions, expectations, cultural norms, and the
mission of an organization as well as the organization’s policies, programs, rules, and procedures
in existence (DuFour & Fullan, 2013). Specific to this study, the Leadership Team Mentorship
program was considered to be the practice to be studied within the Hills Unified School District.
The Leadership Team Mentorship program is a 4–6-year commitment as an assistant principal
who continues to teach for a portion of the day while rotating through annually assigned duties
under the tutelage of the assistant principal who last completed the duties. This format allows

31

for the recruitment of teacher-leaders on campus who are then carefully groomed by mentor
assistant principals and the co-principals.
After establishing the selection criteria for this study, a recruitment letter was sent to the
faculty of Del Giorgio Charter School requesting participation in the study. This letter included
a summary of the study, the requirements for the participants elected to be involved in the
project, and a copy of the informed consent form for this project.
Solicitations were made to multiple individuals occupying identified positions of
leadership within the charter organization. Key positions along the spectrum of leadership were
identified as emerging, intermediate, or senior level. Individuals within the school site were
solicited to complete in-person interviews. Respondent one was a former leadership team
member, now serving in the local district as the assistant superintendent of curriculum and
instruction. Respondent two was a TOSA who had been in the position for three years.
Respondent three was a nine-year veteran assistant principal (leadership team member) who was
hired from outside the charter organization. Respondent four was a three-year veteran assistant
principal (leadership team member) who had previously served in the charter organization as a
teacher and department chair and was then recruited into the Leadership Team Mentorship
program while serving as a teacher-leader within the charter organization. Respondent five was
one of the current co-principals of the charter organization who previously served as a leadership
team member and then as an associate principal before becoming the lead principal for the
charter organization. Respondent six was a multi-term board member of the charter
organization. Respondent seven was one of the current leadership team members who was an
external hire. Respondent eight was a former leadership team member who was an external hire
and served on the team for six years before being hired into an outside middle-school

32

principalship. Respondent nine was a co-principal and a former leadership team member who
went on to serve in other administrative positions within the local district prior to returning to
Del Giorgio and ultimately led the staff into its charter. Respondent ten was a former leadership
team member who was an external hire, served on the team for four years, and then went on to
another middle-school principalship. Respondent eleven was a former leadership team member
who went on to be a local high-school principal, a personnel director, and ultimately an assistant
superintendent of human resources.
Table 1
Summary of Study Participants
Participants Years in the
organization
Years in
current role
Other relevant
characteristics
Length of
interview
Co-principal A

11 6 Former leadership
team member
97 min
Co-principal B

32 24 Former leadership
team member
121 min
Leadership Team
Member 1

9 9 External hire 58 min

Leadership Team
Member 2

8 4 Internal hire,
former TOSA
72 min
Leadership Team
Member 3

3 3 External hire,
activities director
76 min
TOSA

15 3 Teacher-leader 48 min
Charter Board
Member

6 2 Classified Union
President
42 min
Former Team
Member, Principal

6 6 External hire,
external principal
59 min
Former Team
Member, Principal
4 2 External hire,
external principal
74 min

33

Former Team
Member, Assistant
Superintendent
6 5 Secondary director,
assistant
superintendent
52 min
Former Team
Member, Assistant
Superintendent
6 8 H.S. Principal,
Director, Assistant
Superintendent
82 minutes

Owing to the potentially sensitive nature of the interviews (employees discussing their
supervisors), all interviews were anonymously conducted. Informed consent forms were
completed by all study participants and all participants were informed that they had the option of
concluding their participation in the project at any time (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992). At all times,
possible negative outcomes were kept in consideration in addition to the likely positive outcomes
of each interview.
Overview of Organization
Del Giorgio Charter School is a dependent charter school located in Southern California
in a suburban environment serving approximately 1,150 students within a large district. Del
Giorgio Charter School has previously been designated multiple times as a California
Distinguished School and as a Gold Ribbon School. The demographics of the student population
of Del Giorgio Charter School are as follows: African American 1.8%, American Indian 0.2%,
Asian 19.1%, Filipino 3.6%, Hispanic or Latino 18.8%, Pacific Islander 0.4%, White 52.3%, and
two or more races 2.2%.
The staff of Del Giorgio Charter School comprises 2 co-principals, 4 assistant principals,
1 school psychologist, 1 speech and language pathologist, 1 librarian, 1 librarian assistant, 1
community liaison, 1 health clerk, 1 attendance clerk, 1 part-time nurse, 3 front office
administrative assistants, 3 custodians, 44 general education certificated teachers, 2 Resource
Services Program teachers, 2 Special Day Class teachers, and 12 classified student aides. Of all

34

the students, 13.7% are socioeconomically disadvantaged, 3.7% are English learners, 6.6% are
students with disabilities, and 0.1% are foster youth.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework, designed by the thematic group, was based on emerging
themes from the literature review. Transformational leadership was the theoretical framework
that guided the creation of this conceptual framework on succession planning and building a
leadership pipeline in schools and districts by increasing both individual and organizational
leadership capacity. In Figure 1, the encompassing circle refers to the ongoing transformational
leadership practices of the organization according to Kouzes and Posner (2002). Through the
lens of transformational leadership, the organization’s succession management plan is organized
into three categories: identification and recruitment of potential leaders, the development of
individuals’ leadership capacity, and the on-going support of school leaders.
The framework acknowledges the challenges that will be present within a given
organization as the succession plan is implemented, managed, and sustained at the site
level. Next, the framework illustrates an assessment of the organizational and societal
challenges that will require the consideration of the organization as it plans, implements, and
develops leadership capacity. Once considered, capacity-building practices are sorted into three
categories: (a) identification and recruitment of potential leaders, (b) the development of
individuals’ leadership capacity, and (c) the on-going support of school leaders. The framework
acknowledges that as leadership-capacity–building practices are implemented and sustained
within the organization, challenges will also be present.
The framework proposes an increased leadership capacity for both the individuals in the
pipeline and the organization as a whole as a result of the identification, development, and

35

support of future leaders cyclically using transformational leadership practices throughout the
organization. The final result is a reservoir of highly qualified leaders who have developed
through and embody transformational leadership practices at all levels of the organization. This
pool of highly qualified potential leaders completes the cyclical nature of succession
management, as new transformational leaders inform and participate in the succession
management plan.

36

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework, Ed.D. Thematic Group, 2017
Instrumentation
Instrumentation for this study consisted of semi-structured interviews, observations, and
collections of artifacts as the primary means of data collection. Merriam (2009) as well as
Creswell and Clark (2007) determined semi-structured interviews to be well-adapted to
potentially sensitive subject areas subjected to qualitative research methods wherein a researcher
needs to further probe interviewees. This particular format allowed the researcher to respond
and adapt to unanticipated topics that emerged throughout the interview process and provided for
greater exploration of the interviewees’ perceptions and opinions of the area of study, thus
yielding a rich and dense set of data with which to work.
This study was developed utilizing a semi-structured interview process with two assistant
superintendents who previously served on the leadership team, one TOSA, three assistant
principals (management team members), two external principals who previously served on the
leadership team, two co-principals, and one board member of the charter organization from Del
Giorgio Charter School. All of these participants were identified as key positions in what were
identified to be promising practices in developing the next generation of school leaders. Each
participant was interviewed at least once for a minimum of 45 min; two participants were
interviewed a second time for clarifying questions. Participants were asked to discuss the
practices that are perceived to contribute to building the next generation of leaders within their
organization. Moreover, participants were asked to discuss the challenges to supporting and
maintaining those practices over time.
According to Creswell (2014), documents provide information that may not always be
observable and indicate data points the participants have purposefully made a priority. For this

37

project, data were collected through the examination of documents such as leadership team
agendas, the Del Giorgio Charter document, the Del Giorgio Memorandum of Understanding
(from the charter-granting district), and the meeting agendas of the Del Giorgio Charter School
board to gain a more thorough understanding of Del Giorgio Charter School’s organization and
structure. Each of the documents reviewed further validated data found through observations and
interviews. The Del Giorgio Charter document and the Del Giorgio Memorandum of
Understanding with Hills Unified clearly outline the responsibilities and conditions upon which
the organization’s charter is granted and outlines the structure of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program. Meeting agendas from Del Giorgio Board meetings delineated
organizational decisions voted upon by the Board such as programs and costs associated with the
Leadership Team Mentorship program.
The observations provided essential data to further answer the research questions and
included various organizational experiences such as department meetings led by the chair,
leadership team meetings, and a charter board meeting. Structurally, Del Giorgio’s Leadership
Team Mentorship program is embedded in every element of the organization. In department
meetings, aspiring teacher-leaders work closely with the assigned Leadership Team member to
both guide their department academically while also developing leadership skills. In Leadership
Team meetings, senior administrators coached and challenged the team of mentees as they
collaboratively worked through organizational challenges. In a charter board meeting, board
members discussed both the merits and the costs associated with maintaining the model of the
Leadership Team Mentorship program. Through the triangulation of instrumentation, data pieces
from this project validated the research findings (Patton, 2002). The interview and observation
protocols were collaboratively developed with five members of an Ed.D. dissertation cohort at

38

the University of Southern California. The research questions were aligned with the type of data
collection in the study (Table 2).
Finally, document analysis offered an additional view of the practices identified to be key
components of the subject’s succession plan and included items such as organizational
flowcharts, the charter agreement, the chartering district’s Memorandum of Understanding,
charter board meeting agendas, the charter’s master schedule, agendas from leadership team
meetings, agendas from departmental meetings, and the charter organization’s annual and
projected budget. The aforementioned reviewed documents are discussed in further detail in a
subsequent section. Observational data, in conjunction with the various interview responses and
the analyzed documents, triangulated the total data captured for the qualitative analysis.
Data Collection
Data for this project was collected from multiple interviews, observations, and document
analysis to triangulate and further validate the project’s findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Prior to the execution of fieldwork for this study, pilot interviews were conducted to ensure the
developed questions were both appropriate and understandable to the potential interviewees
(Weiss, 1994). Interview and observation protocols for this project were collaboratively
developed by an Ed.D. thematic group at the University of Southern California.
Data Collection Approach
Interviews. The interviews for this study were conducted in an off-site location with the
department lead, the TOSA participant, and the board member in the assistant principals’ site
offices and in the principal’s office. Each of these locations was selected by each of the
interviewees for convenience and scheduling. The researcher dressed in standard business attire
to reflect the dress of the interviewees but acted as an overt participant in the process. Each

39

interview took place during normal working hours and ranged in length from 41 to 84 min. Each
was recorded and transcribed. During all interviews, the interviewer took notes on a laptop
while recording the entire interview. All interviews conducted for this project were executed in a
semi-structured format. Although it was hoped that all interviews would be completed in the
initial appointment, for two participants, follow-up interviews were necessary for clarification
and were scheduled accordingly.
Observations. Observations were conducted for the following four instances.
Observation one was a site-based instructional leadership team meeting. Observation two was a
leadership team meeting. Observation three was a charter board meeting. Observation four was
a department meeting. Each of these meetings was selected for observation, as it was believed
that each meeting would provide a glimpse of the respondents explicitly functioning in their
varying roles of leadership within a condensed amount of time. The observations conducted as
part of this project served to function not only as sources of rich contextual information but also
as reference points for the interviews conducted as part of this study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Document analysis. Document analysis further added to the qualitative case study
analysis approach by providing a more holistic view of the practices employed in the succession
plan. Analyzed documents provided data that triangulated interview responses and observational
data. The specific documents selected for document analysis in this project included items such
as the organizational flow chart, the charter document, the charter’s Memorandum of
Understanding, board meeting agendas, the organization’s master schedule, agendas from
leadership team meetings, agendas from departmental meetings, and the organization’s annual
budget. Items were only included for analysis in this study if they provided additional sources of
data or if they served to further triangulate other pieces of data for the study. The documents

40

analyzed did in fact triangulate and validate the characteristics and functions of the Leadership
Team Mentorship program in various ways, such as validating why and how decisions are made
regarding the mentorship process and the members therein, and served to further document the
funding sources and master schedule allocations in ways that directly addressed how the charter
organization mitigates the on-going challenges to sustaining the identified practices.
Data and alignment. Because the aim of this project was to identify the practices that
are perceived to contribute to the development of Del Giorgio Charter School’s next generation
of leaders while acknowledging the challenges to those practices over time, data sources
(interviews, documents, and observations) were specifically triangulated to ensure validity. All
points of data in this project were aligned to one or both of the determined research questions.
Also, each of the interview protocol questions (Appendix B and Appendix C) were created to
illicit an answer directly based on one of the research questions.

Table 2
Summary of Data Collection Methods Used in the Study
Research Question Interviews Documents Observation
1. What are the systems and structures that are
perceived to contribute to building the next
generation of leaders at Del Giorgio Charter
School?

X

X

X
2. What are the challenges to supporting and
maintaining the systems and structures over
time?

X

X

X

41

Data Analysis
Data analysis was completed using the six steps for qualitative data analysis by Creswell
(2014). For field analysis, data was broadly collected, and all interviews were audio recorded
and then transcribed by a third-party vendor. Follow-up data collection sessions were also
planned in accordance with previously captured data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggested an open approach to coding when analyzing
qualitative data to identify themes, categories, and patterns relative to the guiding research
questions. As discussed by Merriam and Tisdell (2016) and Creswell (2014), patterns and
emerging themes were sought after to consolidate, reduce, and interpret all pieces of data
collected as part of the study. The following diagram, Figure 2, was collaboratively created by
five members of an Ed.D. thematic dissertation group at the University of Southern California
and details the process utilized to analyze the project’s data.

Note: Adapted from Creswell (2014) by the thematic group in 2017

42

Figure 2. Creswell’s (2014) Model for Qualitative Data Analysis
As illustrated in Figure 2, the initial step was to organize and prepare all the data
collected for the study, including interviews, documents, and observations. All interviews and
extended notetaking were transcribed by Rev.com. Next, I examined all collected data for
overarching topical themes. This process included reviewing all transcripts, document analysis
notes, and observational data to seek patterns and emerging themes. The coding process was
initiated by organizing the data set into general themes (Creswell, 2014). Following the initial
coding process, the coding was then extended to identify emerging categories. Next, a narrative
representation of all discovered themes was developed, and this led to the final step where the
data were interpreted to make meaning from the findings and results, formally recognizing the
common themes and regularities that emerged throughout the process as opposed to interpreting
the data as individual sources or pieces of the study.
Ethical Consideration
Prior to conducting research for this project, the thematic group submitted for
Institutional Review Board approval. Throughout the development of this project, ethical
considerations were always kept at the forefront of the project’s design (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015). As this project was developed in partial fulfillment of
program requirements for the Ed.D., all procedures of ethical conduct for the University of
Southern California were followed.
Owing to the potentially sensitive nature of the interviews (employees discussing their
evaluators), all interviews were anonymously conducted. Informed consent forms were
completed by all study participants and all participants were informed that they had the option of
concluding their participation at any time (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992). At all times, possible

43

negative outcomes were kept in consideration in addition to the likely positive outcomes.
Respondent validation was utilized to minimize and/or eliminate all possible misinterpretations
of meaning of what participants contributed (Maxwell, 2013).
To ensure high levels of confidentiality, all recordings were destroyed once the project
files were transcribed. In addition, confidentiality was extended by using pseudonyms at all
times throughout the project to eliminate all unnecessary risks to the participants (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).

44

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
The purpose of this study was to examine how educational organizations utilize
promising practices to build the next generation of school leaders within a dependent charter
organization. The findings of this study aimed to provide insights by adding to the limited
literature base linking leadership succession plans and educational organizations. This chapter
describes the educational organization, the Leadership Team Mentorship program, and the
participants. The findings have been presented by research questions.
This study used qualitative research methods to explore participants’ responses toward
the research questions. Interview protocols for all participants were prepared and utilized during
the study that correlated to the research questions of this study. The research questions are as
follows:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at Del Giorgio Charter School?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Triangulations of multiple data sources increased the validity of the findings. The participants
and the organization are introduced, followed by the study’s findings.
Overview of Organization
Del Giorgio Charter School is a dependent charter school located in Southern California
in a suburban environment serving approximately 1,200 students within a large district. Del
Giorgio Charter School has previously been designated multiple times as a California
Distinguished School and as a Gold Ribbon School. The staff of Del Giorgio Charter School
consists of 6 administrators, 44 general education certificated teachers, and 31 support staff.

45

Table 3
Del Giorgio Charter School Student Demographics
Student Demographic Report

Student enrollment by group: Percent of total enrollment
Asian/Pacific Islander

19.5
Hispanic or Latino

18.8
White

52.3
Other ethnicities

9.4

Socioeconomically
disadvantaged

13.7
English learners

3.7
Students with disabilities

6.6

Student enrollment by grade:

Number of students
Grade 7

582
Grade 8

591
Total 1173
Note. Data compiled from 2016–2017 California Department of Education Student
Accountability Report Card

Overview of Program
The unit of analysis for this case study was the Leadership Team Mentorship program, a
4–6-year mentorship program wherein aspiring leaders serve as assistant principals who continue
to teach for a portion of the day while rotating through annually assigned duties under the
tutelage of the assistant principal who last completed the duties in conjunction with the
mentorship of the acting co-principal. This format allows for the recruitment of teacher-leaders
on campus who are then carefully groomed by the mentoring assistant principals and principals.
Upon completing year four of the program, mentees are typically considered ready to move on to
the principalship of a school site of their own. Mentees are expected not to stay longer than six
years to continually provide openings in the organization’s mentorship program.

46

Overview of Participants
Participant Years in
Education
Years in
Organization
Distinct Characteristics
Co-principal A
(Ms. Streeter)
22 13 Served as a local HS history teacher,
ASB advisor, and multiple summer
school administrative positions. Was
hired into the Leadership Team
Mentorship program. Served in the
program for five years before
assuming the position of co-principal
for the charter.
Co-principal B
(Mr. Nichols)
38 28 First served in the organization as an
ELA teacher and then was recruited
into the Leadership Team Mentorship
program. Served as an HS AP at
multiple sites before returning to take
the principalship at Del Giorgio,
where he served for 20 years and led
the school into becoming a charter
organization.
Team Member 1
(Laura)
18 9 Served as a local ELA and history
teacher and intervention specialist
before joining the Leadership Team
Mentorship program. Has served as
lead AP within the Leadership Team
Mentorship program as well as ASB
advisor and AVID director.
Team Member 2
(Todd)
12 8 Served as a local P.E. teacher and
department chair before joining the
Leadership Team Mentorship
program. Currently in year four.
Team Member 3
(Troy)
8 3 Served as a local Spanish teacher and
cheer advisor before joining the
Leadership Team Mentorship
program. ASB advisor. Currently in
year three.
TOSA
(Crystal)
15 15 Teacher-leader, served as a science
teacher and department chair.
Board Member
(Landon)
8 8 Site plant manager (eight years).
Serving second term as the classified
unit’s board representative.

47

Former Team Member
1, Principal
(Daniel)
12 6 Served as a local history teacher prior
to joining the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, where he served
for six years. Currently serves as
principal for a high-performing public
middle school in Southern California.
Former Team Member
2, Principal
(Renae)
26 4 External hire. Served as an
elementary teacher for 16 years prior
to joining the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, where she
served for four years prior to
becoming a middle school principal.
Former Team Member
3, Assistant
Superintendent of
Instruction &
Curriculum
(Jennifer)
16 6 Served as a local math teacher prior to
joining the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, where she
served for five years before serving as
a local high school principal,
secondary education director, assistant
superintendent of educational services,
and superintendent.
Former Team Member
4, Assistant
Superintendent of
Personnel
(Brandon)
36 6 Served as a local history teacher prior
to joining the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, where he served
for four years before becoming an
assistant principal at a local high
school. Went on to serve as principal
at a local elementary school and
eventually retired as an assistant
superintendent of human resources.

48

Data Findings
Research Question 1: Perceived Practices Contributing to Building Leaders
The first research question for this study aimed to identify the practices that contribute to
building the next generation of leaders. After reviewing the data collected through interviews,
observations, and artifacts, three overarching themes emerged as to how Del Giorgio Charter
School builds the next generation of leaders. First, Del Giorgio Charter School has developed a
culture wherein building leadership capacity among all staff members is both a daily routine and
the expectation. Second, although the Leadership Team Mentorship program has taken many
forms since its inception in 1975, the ideology that guides the program has stayed true to its
beginnings, maintaining clearly defined goals of developing teacher-leaders into progressive
school administrators. Third, the Leadership Team Mentorship program is carefully structured to
ensure all participants learn and execute the various tasks required of administrators to operate a
school site yet ensuring that the participants do so with the highest level of support from fellow
leadership team mentor members and other constituents of the school site.
A culture of capacity through cyclical growth and coaching. The Leadership Team
Mentorship program is both responsible for and the product of an organization that continually
develops leadership capacity in all employees and stakeholders at all levels of the organization.
This culture of capacity is maintained and promoted in two ways: having a defined vision with
clear values and the development of strong cross-organizational relationships.
A defined vision and clear values. The guiding question for all decisions made at Del
Giorgio Charter School is “are we doing what it takes to maximize all students’ learning?”
Although the question may initially sound simplistic, it has far-reaching implications when an
entire organization commits to holding all members to the same level of accountability

49

regardless of their position within the organization. Each and every member of the organization
knows they will be required to defend their position or proposition based on that one guiding
question. Consequently, teachers may ask that question of each other or of a leadership team
member. Likewise, a leadership team member might be called upon by a board member or even
a custodian to explain how a decision or a proposal is truly maximizing all students’ learning.
For leadership team members, the same guiding question is applied in a similar manner: each
member of the team is required and expected to hold themselves and their teammates
accountable for continuously ensuring they are maximizing each other’s learning and
development within the leadership team. When specifically asked about a team vision, each
member of the team retold the program’s vision in their own words but each was clear on the
principle of practicing administrative duties in a sheltered environment to be able to go out and
become an innovative site leader on their own. One of the co-principals, Mr. Nichols, stated:
I firmly believe that all of the leadership team mentees always felt that they could
question me about anything because they should be able to and I should be able to back it
up. If I can't back it up, then maybe my idea sucks and maybe it isn’t what’s best for kids
despite how brilliant I thought it was.
Todd, a year four mentee, noted “Even though we all get into some heated conversations in our
weekly management meetings, it always feels like a very safe environment.” Both Todd’s and
Co-principal Nichols’ reflections underscore the clarity of the program’s vision in developing
tomorrow’s educational leaders by structuring sheltered administrative experiences while
fostering innovation.
Document analysis of the leadership team’s meeting agendas and in-person observations
of the meetings further validated the program’s vision and practices. Observing one of the

50

Leadership Mentorship Team’s weekly meetings, several items were noted. The meeting was
held in a conference room, not any of the team member’s offices. Each of the team members
took turns leading portions of the weekly meeting, and each team member had to explain how
their portion of the meeting (updates and forecasts for all of their administrative and leadership
duties) related to maximizing all students’ learning on campus. This directly ties to both the
school’s vision (maximizing all students’ learning) and the vision of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program of holding each other accountable in leadership development while
practicing administrative duties in a sheltered environment leading to the end-goal of becoming
an innovative site leader. During the observation of one particular Leadership Team Mentorship
meeting, multiple team members respectfully challenged the mentee in charge of developing the
master schedule for the following year. The mentee was repeatedly called upon to justify various
expenditures and staffing allocations as to how each cost was related to the organizational vision
of maximizing all students’ learning. Although the environment was professional and
appropriate, the team at-large asked repeated challenging and probing questions before
committing staffing allocations and funding programs.
Renae, former leadership team alum, reflected:
There was always an open-door policy at Del Giorgio that if, at any time, I had any
issues, I could always talk to the other team members and we would sit down and work it
out. It wasn’t always an easy conversation or a pretty conversation, but we always
worked it out. We were a team.
Strong cross-organizational relationships. Del Giorgio Charter School has maintained
some form of the Leadership Team Mentorship program since the school’s inception in 1975.
Although the large success of the program may be attributed to many individual components,

51

each interviewee (without exception) stated that a significant strength of the site and ultimately
the Leadership Team Mentorship program is the cross-organizational relationships referenced
throughout the organization, both formal and informal.
Although there are the obvious formal structures and relationships within departments or
in grade-level teams, it is the countless informal relationships occurring throughout the
organization that offer the greatest points of strength for both the Leadership Team Mentorship
program and the organization as a whole. Laura, a year six mentee, explained the organic
evolution of both the formal and informal as follows: “We have the department chairs who
attend team meetings. But we also have teachers who have taken on leadership of entire
programs. Like right now, we have our two AVID teachers who are going through board
certification with that program.” Whereas teachers may not intentionally set out upon a path to
become a teacher-leader, those who do show interest or initiative in a particular program or area
of focus are highly encouraged by site administrators to take the lead and become involved at a
deeper level.
The teacher turnover rate at Del Giorgio is extremely low and one of the benefits of this
is that there are veteran staff members who not only help “train” the new classified and
certificated employees who join the site but also assist in the development of the leadership team
mentees. A significant strength of Del Giorgio is that all members of the site, regardless of title
or position, are very much aware of the strengths and challenges of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program. A program of this nature requires a significant amount of communication
both to and from the team members to ensure all individuals in the organization are aware of
which leadership team mentee is leading which programs and responsibilities on campus.

52

Prior to the start of each school year, one of the annual components of the kick-off is the
assignment of duties among team members and the subsequent sharing of those responsibilities
with the rest of the staff. Troy, a year three mentee, noted: “The veteran teachers obviously
understand how the leadership team works in cycles. It’s the newly hired teachers who don’t
really get it until the end of the first year; it takes the new teachers we hire a year or so to adapt
to the system here.” It is not untypical for teaching or classified staff members to aide in the
training of new leadership team mentees for specific job duties. At Del Giorgio, both certificated
and classified staff members see this need for training simply as one of the duties that comes
with working at Del Giorgio and even take pride in knowing they are directly contributing to
shaping the next generation of school leadership, regardless of whether those individuals
ultimately stay local or move on to other schools and locations.
A guiding ideology of expansive leadership opportunities. The second significant theme
that emerged in addressing the question of how Del Giorgio builds capacity within the
organization is rooted in the leadership ideology of the organization at large. It is the belief of
both the leadership team and members across the organization that everyone who is a part of Del
Giorgio is responsible for building leadership capacity at all levels and in every position of the
organization. Co-principal Nichols stated, “The whole premise of the team to begin with was
that there was no ‘us’ or ‘them.’ We are you and together we serve our community.” This
message is clearly conveyed both to and from every position within the organization, and there is
an obvious level of exposure, involvement, and engagement from all levels of the organization.
Todd, a year four leadership team mentee, explained:

53

When teachers approach the leadership team with ideas for classes or program
development, we’ll say, “Okay, let’s see if we can make that happen.’ To me, that’s the
first sign of leadership: people who decide to step up and show initiative.
From the initial selection process of potential mentees, all the way through the time mentees
eventually leave to assume the principalship of their own site, all levels of Del Giorgio
stakeholders are involved in the development and growth of the leadership team mentees, and
subsequently, the overall leadership efficacy of both the organization and the individuals within
the organization continuously grows. An analysis of Del Giorgio’s organizational flow chart
verified significant vertical and lateral relationships at all levels of the organization.
Co-principal Streeter reflected, “There are always natural leaders on campus, and they’re
not always your department chairs. When the leadership team notices leadership qualities in
teachers, we try to really reinforce those qualities and encourage them to take on more leadership
roles in various ways throughout campus.” Co-principal Nichols further explained, “The hope is
that a core group develops in leadership capacity who will then want to further explore additional
avenues in leadership and eventually look at administration as a viable option.” Co-principal
Nichols expounded on this by stating, “As a leadership team, when we feel teachers are
comfortable taking that next step, we will bring them in to work with the team on projects such
as building the master schedule.”
Both of the co-principals currently leading Del Giorgio previously served in mentee
positions on the leadership team and thoroughly understand both the approach and the value of
the approach to developing aspiring leaders in the Del Giorgio model. The current mentees also
understand the value of the system as explained by Troy, a year three mentee:

54

Being a member of the leadership team is like being in a true multi-year training program
where you experience all aspects of being a principal, and you have the end goal of being
a principal, but you still have the safety net of the leadership team in every decision you
make.
The strategic and intentional development of leadership capacity among the leadership team
members is not an isolated mechanism. Rather, it is the model upon which the entire
organization is structured and that highly aligns with Kouzes and Posner’s (2008) model of
transformational leadership. Daniel, former leadership team alum, reflected on his time on the
team: “We were always asking, ‘How can we be better?’ We were constantly collaborating and
getting the best ideas and practices from each other. Often times, in traditional district settings,
leaders tend to work in isolation, and yet it’s not an isolated profession.”
Selection of mentees. The process by which mentees have been selected over the life of
the program has changed in form numerous times. It has ranged from only internal candidates
being tapped for grooming to flying the position internally and externally with no additional
credit given to internal candidates. It has always been a goal of the program to hire the best
candidate possible for the organization at any given time there has been an open position. Co-
principal Nichols explained that when looking for the next candidate, “we specifically state that
we are not looking for an individual who has previous administrative experience to join the team.
What we are looking for are innovative teacher-leaders who are interested in administration.”
Individuals within the organization are always highly encouraged to apply, regardless of whether
the current administration team believes they are 100% ready for the position. The philosophy is
that even though teachers may not yet be ready for the position, they will still gain valuable

55

experience taking part in the entire interview process and the follow-up coaching process post-
interview.
In questioning the current mentees on the leadership team as to how they aided in
selecting the next mentee to join the team, the following was noted by Co-principal Streeter:
Characteristics that matter the most in school leadership are also some of the most
difficult to quantify. But it comes down to having people skills. We look for future
leaders who can communicate effectively and efficiently with all stakeholders, whether
it’s students, parents, staff, or other administrators. They should be firm but not hard.
They’re warm and genuine and they’re really good listeners. They know how to build
relationships.
Todd, a year four mentee, pointed out that “There is a lot of gray in leadership. You’re trying to
juggle everyone at all times when one person only sees their perspective. To that part, you really
have to get someone who understands that leadership can be gray, undefined, more than anything
else.” Co-principal Nichols further observed that “You have to get someone who’s going to be a
team player, especially in this position; it can’t be all about self. It can’t be a me-me-me type of
thing. You have to be flexible and willing to learn the position more than anything else.”
Development of mentees. The present iteration of the Leadership Team Mentorship
program is a virtually continuous web of interwoven mentoring relationships. In the words of
Troy, a year three mentee, “It’s almost like a teaching position, but at the administrative level.”
Currently, there are two lead co-principals, one who oversees both the business and the facilities
divisions of the organization and one who oversees the students and academics division of the
organization. Owing to the structural divide of the organization, the four-member team of
mentees who serve directly under them has extensive interactions with each of the co-principals

56

on a daily basis, both individually and as a team. Brandon, former alum of the leadership team,
explained his breadth of experience as follows:
I served at Del Giorgio for six years, so I had the opportunity to experience every role
there as an advisor/assistant principal. And everything from testing coordination to the
management of the behavior program for emotionally disturbed students, handling all
evaluations, developing the school’s SARC and SPSA, and then being the most senior
teammate and helping guide new administrators who joined the team.
Supported group mentorship and targeted administrative growth. The foundational
practices of the Leadership Team Mentorship program provide a defined structure that teacher-
leaders are recruited into. A significant emphasis is placed on the mentorship component on
behalf of the co-principals and the assistant principals who also serve on the leadership team all
while giving each member of the team large amounts of autonomy in the site-level decision-
making process in line with Kouzes and Posner’s (2008) model of transformational leadership.
Troy, a year three mentee, stated:
I know I can easily walk over to anyone’s office and bounce ideas off them and get help
if I need it. The senior team members have done whatever I’m finding challenging
thousands of times now, so they can easily help me with the questions I have. We all
help each other. As a team, we definitely have each other’s backs. It’s a great learning
experience.
Jennifer, former leadership team alum, explained the benefits of the program as follows: “Before
being offered a leadership team position, I knew I wasn’t going to know some of the job. But I
also knew, from working there as a teacher, that the other team members would know what I
didn’t yet know.” Expounding, she stated, “I don’t think I would have been willing to leave my

57

classroom and join the leadership team if I wasn’t so sure of the system. The other teammates
gave me a lot of freedom, but they were also quick to warn me of potential pitfalls.”
Teacher-leaders who have been selected to enter the Leadership Team Mentorship
program agree to serve for no less than four years and no more than six. In addition, the newest
member of the team is assigned “soft” duties for their first year to reasonably ensure successes
both publicly and within the mentorship team. As mentees progress through the years and
become more experienced, they eventually transition into being more active mentors to the
newer members of the program. Laura, a year six mentee, explained the process as follows:
We divvy up all of the major administrative duties each year . . . for two years you hone
and you learn how to do your assigned duties very well and then on that third year you
hand it off, but you are also responsible for training them and teaching them.
This constantly shifting team not only allows for new members from year to year but also
provides increased capacity across all other areas of the organization because it requires all
stakeholders to be committed to being both good team players and lifelong learners, as all
members contribute to the development of the members of the Leadership Team Mentorship
program. Even if campus teachers choose not to become part of the management team, they get
a lot of exposure to the administrative side of the school, including areas such as running the
school site council, building the master schedule, and a plethora of other tasks required to move
schools forward in their daily operations.
Group feedback. A key component, as indicated by multiple members of the
Leadership Team Mentorship program, is the various forms of group feedback. Group feedback
is offered in several ways and includes both intentional formally scheduled feedback components
and extensive opportunities for casual and even impromptu feedback sessions. All six of the

58

current leadership team members directly mentioned the personally perceived value of the
feedback provided by the other leadership team members in addition to indicating the value they
perceived their feedback to afford the newest members of the team. Further supporting the
current team’s beliefs, Jennifer, alum of the leadership team, stated:
It was helpful that one of us had always been there a little longer than others. Sometimes
the new teammate would be nervous to go to the principal, but they knew they had that
first line of communication with any of the other team members. If one of us senior
teammates saw them struggling, we were always available for them to ask those
questions.
Troy, a year three mentee, stated: “The leadership team is a daily support system. Our principals
are very accessible. They are incredibly busy, running a large charter school is like running an
entire district in many ways, but they are always accessible.”
Group feedback is not limited only to other members of the leadership team. Group
feedback is also provided to the leadership team members by members of the instructional
leadership team. The instructional leadership team consists primarily of department chairs and
other teacher-leaders on campus. At Del Giorgio Charter School, this dynamic relationship
between two teams on campus serves to continuously provide constructive criticism in a
multidirectional approach freely flowing between the two leadership groups, with both groups
actively involved in the continuous development and growth of the organization from two very
different perspectives. Document analysis of multiple department meeting agendas served to
support the bi-directional flow of constructive input and recommendations between the various
leadership groups on campus and added further support to observations conducted of the
instructional leadership team meetings and the Leadership Team Mentorship program meetings

59

as well. At Del Giorgio, the Instructional Leadership Team consists mostly of department chairs,
program leads, and other staff members who are interested in various areas of school leadership.
The Instructional Leadership Team meetings were facilitated by one of the co-principals and one
of the assistant principals. According to Co-principal Nichols, this serves a twofold purpose.
Ultimately, the co-principals are directly responsible for the educational programming and
direction of the school. By allowing one of the Leadership Team mentees to also actively
participate in the facilitation of the Instructional Leadership Team meeting, mentees experience
group feedback from across the entire spectrum of the organization, and they in turn, report back
to the Leadership Team with bi-weekly updates that include areas of growth and challenges that
need to be addressed by the Leadership Team members.
In describing the advantages of learning in a team environment, Co-principal Streeter
stated, “There is a point of reference. Someone to learn from, someone to ask questions of,
someone to bounce ideas off of—team members always have an open-door policy with each
other.” This same idea was referenced by each of the mentees interviewed. Todd, a year four
mentee, explained it this way: “Good work breeds more good work. People see great things
happening around them, and they want to be a part of it. That’s a good thing. The biggest thing
we as school leaders can do is give people more opportunities.”
Interdisciplinary growth. Co-principal Nichols, who oversees the business and the
facilities divisions, stated: “In most cases, in an assistant principal position, which is what the
leadership team is, the traditional assistant principal isn’t going to have 90% of the experiences
the members of the leadership team do.” The Leadership Team Mentorship program is
intentionally designed to stretch mentees beyond the traditional scope of an assistant principal
position through articulated exposure and development of areas typically left to the principal or a

60

district’s central office. For example, mentees will rotate through duties such as negotiations,
marketing, accreditation, curriculum, and finance in addition to the traditional assistant principal
duties of safety, activities, and discipline. Co-principal Streeter summarized the Leadership
Team Mentorship programs as follows:
It’s that broad base experience factor of doing all the jobs and additionally having the
collaboration of the team to be supportive in everything we do. Every job assigned to
you, somebody on the team has done before you and can support you.
Co-principal Nichols further explained the difference in traditional assistant principal positions
and the positions of the leadership team members when it is time to seek a principalship: “So
they go looking for their next position, only having learned to be a great assistant principal; they
have not learned how to be a great principal. It’s not their fault; that’s all they’ve been trained to
do.” Conversely, members of the leadership team who have completed 4–6 years of rotating
duties have managed all components of typical school functions and have been exposed to many
additional experiences normally executed only by principals or central office personnel. These
non-traditional additional duties were clearly outlined in the charter’s Memorandum of
Understanding between the charter and the granting district and confirmed what study
participants outlined during interviews.
Selective professional development. K12 educational organizations typically schedule
out the professional development for aspiring administrators in a one-size-fits-all approach on a
year-by-year basis. Organizations that are large enough to support varied tiers of professional
development may offer/implement two tracks such as a “new administrators” line of professional
development and a “mid-career” path. The Leadership Team Mentorship program at Del
Giorgio Charter School is individually tailored to each member’s strengths and weaknesses while

61

keeping in mind the individual’s long-term career goals. Although the senior administrators (co-
principals) of Del Giorgio Charter School and/or the charter’s board make the final decisions, the
professional development of the mentees is largely left to the discretion of the individual. There
is no predetermined annual budgetary line item for the team; rather, all potential expenditure for
professional development is discussed by the entire leadership team prior to being submitted to
the board for approval. There is no one-size-fits-all approach; on a team of six administrators,
there very likely are six distinct programs of professional development taking place during any
given school year. Laura, a year six mentee, explained the opportunities as follows:
The leadership team has an annual budget that we can use for professional development.
Last year I attended the Every Child Counts symposium; this year I’m participating in the
Alternative Discipline Seminar and a few of our teacher-leaders are enrolled with me as
well. One teacher, specifically, is interested in administration and was interested in
attending. There are many opportunities like that for teachers who are interested and
show leadership initiative.
Multiple leadership team members noted that this approach yields significant levels of growth
across all team members because there is an established expectation that the individual team
members will share their knowledge with the entire team.
Co-principal Streeter stated, “One of the many unique benefits of the leadership team is
the opportunity to select your own professional development. If there’s a conference, class, or
anything that you want to participate in to expand your own knowledge, that’s always available.”
In further support of this, Co-principal Nichols explained, “No is not a word we use around here
a lot.” Targeted professional development for classified staff, certificated staff, and leadership
team members pays significant dividends to the entire school, as leadership efficacy organically

62

grows at all levels of the organization when fostered in this manner, directly aligning with
Kouzes and Posner’s (2008) practice of enabling others to act and inspiring a shared vision
across the organization.
Sheltered application of duties and experiences. The Leadership Team Mentorship
program has taken on a myriad of formats since its inception in 1975. At all times, however,
there has been a safety net for the newest members of the team once they come on board. In the
present iteration, the newest member of the team is assigned only “low-risk” job duties with the
goal of allowing them to be stretched but with very forgiving margins for error during their first
year on the team. The purpose behind this is twofold. First, it develops significantly greater
levels of confidence in the new member both individually and from a team perspective. Second,
it allows the newest member of the team to be publicly successful within the organization, thus
developing greater degrees of trust at all levels of the organization.
In explaining the level of support and sheltered application given to mentees, Co-
principal Nichols stated:
As one of the co-principals, I’ve said this to every leadership team member at some point,
and usually it’s the activity director, and that is, “Okay. This is your gig and we’re all
working for you today. You are the person in charge. Today, I’m working for you.” I
want them to take their role seriously. They need to know that I’m not going to override
them. Sometimes they make mistakes, but we try to sort those out in our weekly
meetings before they happen publicly. The leadership that develops through
collaboration is priceless.

63

Troy, a year three mentee, explained the sheltered application approach from the perspective of
joining the program with virtually no administrative experience and then growing over that
three-year period as follows:
My first year, I was you know, I was always on the edge of my seat, trying to retain as
much knowledge as possible. And those duties that are assigned to you during that first
year, they were just simplistic compared to your second- or third-year duties. I have the
master schedule this year, so that is a beast in and of itself as we build a very student-
centric schedule each year. I think, you know, in the last two years, with helping on the
master schedule and some tougher duties, I’ve been able to kind of prove myself to the
rest of the team.
Although some members selected for the program come onboard with extensive teacher-
leadership experience and others have very little, all members are assigned the same experiences
and responsibilities over the duration of time they spend in the program. These responsibilities
are assigned by group consensus depending upon each member’s aptitude and other significant
duties.
Discussion of Research Question 1
The first research question addressed two emergent themes that made clear the practices a
charter organization used to develop leadership capacity in potential school leaders. The
findings of this study are in agreement with the theoretical framework of transformational
leadership, as the practices demonstrated by Del Giorgio Charter School built and increased
leadership capacity among members of the classified and certificated staff and members of the
Leadership Team Mentorship program. The culture of capacity that has been created by the Del
Giorgio model fosters a shared vision that enables others within the organization to act. The

64

abundance of opportunities members of the Leadership Team Mentorship program have for the
authentic practice of administrative activities closely aligns with Kouzes and Posner’s (2008)
practice of enabling others to act. The guiding ideology that drives the selection and subsequent
development of mentees serves to model the way while concurrently inspiring a shared vision
(Kouzes & Posner, 2008). The Del Giorgio format of supported group mentorship clearly aligns
with the transformational practices of challenging the process and enabling others to act (Kouzes
& Posner, 2008).
Developing a culture of capacity that is centered around a defined vision and clear values
establishes a solidified base from which the Leadership Team Mentorship program is built. To
construct an intentional plan for broader leadership capacity development across all staff
members, Del Giorgio utilizes Kouzes and Posner’s (2008) transformational practices of
enabling others to act and inspiring a shared vision. The Del Giorgio Charter School’s
leadership team model is an effective one because its origins are found in the strength and
intentionality of the relationships that have developed over time between site administrators and
stakeholders at all levels of the organization. Co-principal Nichols noted the legacy of the
Leadership Team Mentorship program over the life of the program to date: four superintendents,
eight assistant superintendents, thirteen directors, and nearly forty principals have been produced
by the program since its inception in 1975. Brandon, former alum of the leadership team,
commented that “Everybody who served on the leadership team went on to something bigger.
There’s absolutely no question about the ability of the leadership team to build leadership
capacity; it really does.”
Authentic application and practice of administrative work has been documented to
increase the preparedness of potential administrative candidates and the perceived self-efficacy

65

of those candidates (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007). The members of the Del Giorgio
Leadership Team Mentorship program are immersed in the daily operations of school systems.
Co-principal Nichols stated, “There’s so much coaching that occurs on the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, and not just between principal and mentees but way more so between the
mentees on the leadership team.” As a charter organization, these candidates are exposed to a
much broader range of operational and structural components such as marketing, budgeting, and
human resources that are all experienced over a multi-year commitment by the mentees. Del
Giorgio utilizes a heavily cooperative/distributive model wherein mentees and all other
stakeholders are empowered to actively contribute to the decision-making and development of
the organization’s vision and goals at large (Northouse, 2013).
As mentees complete their commitment at Del Giorgio, they report feeling well-prepared
to enter a principalship. In addition, multiple alums of the mentorship program report feeling
significantly better prepared than other professional acquaintances when faced with first-year
challenges in the administrative roles they took on at the conclusion of their service in the Del
Giorgio program. Co-principal Nichols summarized the difference between traditional
preparation programs and one such as Del Giorgio’s as follows:
In education, they make you an assistant principal. And what do assistant principals do?
They do discipline. Then after you do discipline very well, they make you a principal,
and what do principals do? Well, they probably never do any discipline, but they weren’t
trained in anything else. And so, they have to figure it out on the job. So, I’m really
proud to send people out who really know their stuff from day one on the job of being a
principal.

66

The ability of the leadership team mentees to authentically practice administrative skills over an
extended period of time increases both the preparedness and perceived self-efficacy of the
mentees when the time comes for the mentees to move on to principalships or other positions of
leadership (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al., 2007).
The findings of this study affirm that the Del Giorgio Charter model inspires the
development of a shared vision of increased leadership capacity (Kouzes & Posner, 2008;
Northouse, 2010). The mentees of Del Giorgio’s program report heightened levels of
community connectedness and encouragement between them and all other stakeholders within
the organization; this ultimately contributes to increased levels of self-efficacy and confidence
specifically related to job performance as a new administrator. The Del Giorgio Leadership
Team Mentorship program extensively utilizes practices emanating from transformational
leadership theory to further develop members at all levels of the organization, thus resulting in
increased leadership capacity throughout the organization as a whole.
Research Question 2: Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Strategies
The second research question sought to understand the challenges in supporting and
maintaining the strategies designed to build leadership capacity throughout the staff at Del
Giorgio Charter School. Within this system, some of the themes that emerged as challenges to
supporting and maintaining the system were the balancing of relationships throughout the
organization, the non-traditional structure, and the overall financial cost of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program.
Balancing relationships throughout the organization. The structural nature of a charter
organization calls for site leadership to be significantly more involved in areas that would
traditionally be handled by other divisions within a school district, such as the personnel or

67

business services division. Because the site-based leadership team must assume and conduct
many of the duties and actions that are traditionally handled off-campus at the district level,
leadership team members are placed in a position of direct contact with all of the site’s staff
members on nearly a daily basis. This constant exposure requires a delicate balance of
relationships between administration and all other positions, thus requiring refined leadership
skills to continuously balance the needs of the overall organization with the forward thrust of the
organization toward continuously increasing student achievement. This requisite and delicate
balancing act results in the evolution of strong personal relationships in and among all levels and
all members of the organization.
Opportunities for administrative exploration. The Leadership Team Mentorship
program is a long-established structure at Del Giorgio Charter School, originating at the school’s
inception in 1975. As such, it is as much a part of the organization’s fabric as any other program
or structure on campus. The exposure of the structure to all members of the organization is
highly conspicuous and is strategically incorporated into virtually every component of the daily
operations and the school’s charter document itself. Laura, a year six mentee, explained the
breadth of exposure the mentees receive as follows:
As a leadership team member, we may not be a master of everything it takes to run a
school, but we have at least some experience and some knowledge and can speak to
nearly any area with a significant amount of legitimacy all while providing better service
to our community and student population.
The breadth and depth of experiences extends beyond the leadership team members and
potentially includes all classified and certificated personnel on campus. In offering opportunities

68

to explore administrative opportunities to all members of the organization, leadership efficacy
increases throughout the organization.
Not all teachers want to be administrators. Crystal, a current Del Giorgio TOSA,
stated that “most of the teaching staff on campus understand what we [administrators] do and
they support us . . . they just personally don’t want any part of it.” This sentiment was one
repeated by other interviewees as well. “Most teachers enter the profession to teach, not to go
into administration,” Brandon, former alum, reported. Considering the current iteration of the
Leadership Team Mentorship program, there are six administrative positions for a charter school
of nearly 1,200 students. In contrast to typical staffing ratios at traditional school campuses, Del
Giorgio may be considered heavily staffed with administrators. However, administration and
site representation both diligently work to ensure site teachers are well-represented.
When hiring new staff members, teachers and administrators work closely together to
screen and interview potential staff members who exhibit the greatest levels of teacher-
leadership. When leadership team members were questioned as to how they personally groom
potential teacher-leaders on campus, Laura, a year six mentee, stated:
When I take notice of a particular teacher showing promising signs of leadership, I try to
get into their classroom even more. I want to see how they are in the classroom. I want
to see how they treat everyone they come in contact with, especially their students. I start
looking more closely at how they interact with their peers, and then I’ll start having those
intentional, personal conversations.
From a year-three perspective, Troy contributed, “to have someone in a leadership team position
who is confrontational and doesn’t budge doesn’t work.” Further expounding, he stated, “even
though we may not always like it, sometimes, we have to bend a little bit so that the final result is

69

positive for everyone or is positive for as many people as possible.” Adding to this narrative,
Co-principal Streeter stated:
We don’t all see the same situation the same way. We don’t always agree on how things
should be handled. And so the challenge in that is coming to an agreement. Not
necessarily a compromise but an agreement. And that doesn’t always sit well with
everyone.
A non-traditional structure. From the very inception of Del Giorgio Charter School, the
structure of the school and the subsequent operations have been the antithesis of traditional
operations in K12 environments. The opening version of Del Giorgio allowed for a
comprehensive K8 pathway for up to 600 students. At that time, the leadership team members
were assigned a caseload of roughly 100 students to whom they provided support during one half
of the day. During the other half of the day, the mentees functioned as traditional elementary
school teachers. Over the course of several years, Del Giorgio transitioned into what appeared to
be a typical middle school campus while the student population throughout the region gradually
increased.
Over the course of the first several years, the leadership structure of Del Giorgio
eventually evolved into a format of one principal with three assistant principals who actively
taught two periods a day and served a total of approximately 1,200 students. It was during this
iteration that the credentialed staff petitioned to take the school into a public charter conversion.
Several years into the charter, the governing board deemed the level of activity and involvement
required by the position of the principal to be sufficiently involved to the point of splitting the
position into two co-principal positions wherein one position would focus on the business and
human resource components of the organization whereas the other position would focus on

70

students and academics. The most recent (and current) iteration of this model continues to
consist of two co-principals and four assistant principals who teach two periods a day in a seven-
period schedule.
Administration who actively teach. The concept of site-level administrators who are
still actively involved in the classroom has been one of the organization’s constants throughout
the years since the school’s inception. Both current site administrators and multiple members of
the teaching staff report this feature as being one of the most beneficial and simultaneously
significant departures from traditional formats of K12 charter school administrative structures.
Co-principal Nichols stated:
When we are filling a vacant position on the leadership team, we are really looking for
teacher-leaders. The people we hire are, almost without exception, very, very strong
teachers. That’s also the part that kills you. You know you are taking a great teacher out
of the classroom.
The leadership team members typically share the classroom they use with one of the other staff
members on campus from the department in which they are teaching. The constant exposure and
crossing of paths in and among staff members on a daily basis only serve to further validate the
critical necessity of extensive casual relationships on campus between site administrators and all
other stakeholders in the organization. Daniel, former leadership team alum, stated:
I think the format is beneficial because you set up a structure of duties and rotate them. If
you really, truly value bringing leaders up and moving them on, they have that
opportunity to learn a lot of different aspects of education—that they’re not just a
facilities person, they’re not just a curriculum person. When I left the leadership team, I
had firsthand experiences in every aspect of leading a school.

71

Developing a breadth of sheltered administrative experiences while continuing to teach in the
classroom and concurrently growing interpersonal relationships within content-area teams result
in mentees who are highly skilled aspiring school leaders.
Frequent turnover of administration. Owing to the structure of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, most years witness the departure and arrival of at least one team member.
Although this does not necessarily have direct impacts on teachers in their classrooms, it does
affect the organization at large because there is a constant rotation of duties among the
administrators and this results in staff members continuously dealing with a new member in
administration to accomplish some aspect of their job, whether it be in dealing with student
discipline, executing activities, or arranging field trips, etc. Because the team is structured in a
way that students are evenly split among administrators, all staff will potentially deal with and
help train the new administrator throughout the process of onboarding during year one. Because
the job duties of the members of the Leadership Team Mentorship program are constantly
rotating on an annual basis, clear communication to all members of the organization at the
beginning of each school year is of utmost importance for the success of the entire team. During
the annual welcome-back staff day, administrative job duties and assignments are discussed in
detail with the entire organization.
The price of the system. Del Giorgio Charter School maintains an average enrollment of
nearly 1,200 students on an on-going basis. By typical staffing ratios for middle schools, there
would be one principal and two assistant principals, one to two counselors, and one school
psychologist. Del Giorgio has two co-principals, four assistant principals, and one school
psychologist. Each of the four assistant principals teaches two class sections per day, thereby
absorbing 1.25 FTE teaching allocations, as reflected in Del Giorgio’s master schedule.

72

Fiscal examples. Through carefully thought out staffing appointments and maximized
staffing allocations, Del Giorgio Charter School is able to absorb the majority of the monetary
costs associated with the Leadership Team Mentorship program. Table 4 represents an analysis
of the net realized cost of the Leadership Team Mentorship program on an annual basis, as
delineated in the organization’s annual budget.

Table 4
Carry Costs of the Leadership Team Mentorship Program

Assistant Principal Matrix:
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Monthly: 8,577 8,997 9,418 9,838 10,256 10,778
Annual: 89,715 94,108 98,512 102,905 107,277 112,737
STRS: 17,943 18,822 19,702 20,581 21,455 22,547
Benefits: 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
Total Cost: 125,235 130,927 136,632 142,324 147,988 155,062
Principal Matrix: Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Monthly: 9,431 9,896 10,356 10,821 11,285 11,865
Annual: 102,514 107,569 112,569 117,624 122,668 128,972
STRS: 20,503 21,514 22,514 23,525 24,534 25,794
Benefits: 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
Total Cost: 141,448 147,979 154,439 160,970 167,487 175,631
Teacher Matrix (Year 10): Counselor Matrix (Year 10):
Monthly: 8,293 Monthly: 8,826
Annual: 82,925 Annual: 88,264
STRS: 16,585 STRS: 17,653
Benefits: 9,000 Benefits: 9,000
Total Cost: 116,803 Total Cost: 123,743
Typical Carry Cost (Annual): Typical FTE Offset Absorbed:
351,262 175,204
535,118 123,743
886,380 298,947
A typical middle school of 1,200 ADA would utillize:
175,631
278,956
123,743
578,330
Net realized cost of Leadership Mentor Program: 9,103
2 Assistant Principals:
1 Counselor:
Total:
Total:
4 Assistant Principals:
2 Principals: 1.5 FTE Teacher Absorbed by Admin:
1.0 FTE Counselor absorbed by Admin:
Absorbed Total:
1 Principal:

73

Strain on support staff and teachers. Although many benefits of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program were noted by nearly every participant interviewed for the study, there were
several citations of additional strain placed upon various members of the school’s support staff
and the teachers of the charter school. Owing to the structure and cost of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, positions that are typical for the size of middle school are either reduced or
eliminated all-together.
One example of a non-existent position at Del Giorgio Charter School is that of school
counselor. Despite maintaining an average enrollment of 1,200 students, the charter organization
has elected to shift all traditional counselor duties to either the school psychologist and/or the
members of the Leadership Team Mentorship program. As a result, student services that require
a school counselor or school psychologist are all directed to the school psychologist. This is a
challenge because the psychologist is already heavily impacted, as there is only one psychologist
for a large site; consequently, this position is heavily impacted owing to assessments and other
legal obligations relative to special education services.
The certificated and classified staff of Del Giorgio Charter School noted areas of strain.
Each of the leadership team mentees teaches two sections per day in their area of credentialing.
Although this does absorb much of the costs of having an organization that is heavily staffed in
administration, it was noted throughout the interviews that this comes at a price to the content-
area departments and the teaching staff members themselves because any potential extra sections
are absorbed by administration rather than new or additional staffing allocations. At the same
time, the study participants noted that there are significant benefits to this arrangement because
site administrators attend all departmental meetings and therefore take a very active role in the

74

day-to-day academic direction of the organization. Todd, a year four leadership team member,
expounded on this point:
You can’t be afraid to fail. You need to do the dirty work yourself, before leading others
to do it. You need to be willing to get down and do the hard stuff that needs to be done
so people see that you’re really doing it with them.
The study participants noted that with the typical turnover among members of the Leadership
Team Mentorship program, classified staff members of the charter organization often times have
felt as if part of their job duties was to train new leadership team mentees within the
organization. Although this is not the case, the high levels of collaboration between
administration and classified support staff do provide a high level of institutional memory and
this serves the organization well throughout the frequent shifts in structure and staffing.
Discussion of Research Question 2
There are a variety of factors that both support and maintain the strategies designed to
build leadership capacity throughout the staff at Del Giorgio Charter School. Parallels were
noted between current literature on the development of leadership capacity (Kouzes & Posner,
2008; Northouse, 2010) and key features of the Management Team Mentorship program
developed by Del Giorgio Charter School.
Research by Darling-Hammond, LaPointe et al. (2007) and Kouzes and Posner (2008)
noted significant challenges to the strategies designed to build leadership capacity within
organizations. The participants in this study found that the structure of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program provided for authentic real-world application of administrative duties while
concurrently functioning as a classroom teacher and department leader and simultaneously

75

orchestrating the delicate act of building and maintaining positive working relationships
throughout the organization.
Similarly, the participants of this study also disclosed challenges with the non-traditional
structure of Del Giorgio. Many of these challenges require revisiting or re-affirming the
organization’s vision and goals by the entire staff. Multiple study participants outlined examples
of their active and on-going contributions to organizational decision-making in a manner similar
to the process delineated by Northouse (2013). With the intentional and planned turnover of
members of the administration team, it is critical to the organization’s overall health to not only
acknowledge this but also actively incorporate this into its daily operations.
Costs associated with the Leadership Team Mentorship program extend beyond the fiscal
impact at the school site. The additional strain evidenced throughout the organization cannot be
ignored because the persistent shift in job duties and mentees results in an on-going retraining of
all staff members to various degrees.
Summary
This chapter explored the study’s findings based on the research question and, in doing
so, outlined the key practices that a dependent charter organization uses to build leadership
capacity in the next generation of school leaders and the challenges that inhibit leadership
development within the organization. It identified the perceived practices that contribute to the
culture of capacity within the organization. With a defined vision, clear values, and guiding
ideology, the organization is able to continuously recruit and develop mentees who serve in non-
traditional teacher-leader positions where they are able to apply leadership practices in a
sheltered environment.

76

Teacher-leaders who serve within the charter organization as leadership team mentees are
given extensive opportunities for administrative exploration. While teaching partial contracts,
mentees are given continuous group feedback in their administrative positions. Mentees
appreciate the supportive nature of the leadership team format, and both classified staff and
teachers within the organization value the degree of involvement expected at each level of the
organization.
This study identified several factors that serve to influence the strategies the charter
organization uses to build the next generation of school leaders. Factors that promote these
identified strategies include intentional planning and asset allocation by the charter
organization’s board and administrators, administrators who actively teach, extensive sheltered
application, and group feedback. Also found in this study were factors identified as challenges
to the support and maintenance of the Leadership Team Mentorship program: namely, the
constant rotation and turnover of mentees and administration and the resulting strain on support
staff and teachers. Further challenges involve the financial costs independently funded by the
charter organization.

77

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY
The leadership of schools is second, in impact, only to that of classroom teachers (Hitt &
Tucker, 2016; Louis et al., 2010; Marzano et al., 2005). Furthermore, there is a growing need for
the development of highly qualified educational leaders (Hargreaves & Fink, 2010). Most K12
educational organizations do not have formalized leadership development plans in place (Fink,
2011), even though there is significant and growing data showing that organizations that do have
formalized structures in place also show indicators of increased teacher efficacy throughout the
organization (Leithwood et al., 2008).
The practices that Del Giorgio Charter School employs can serve as a model for building
the next generation of school leaders. This chapter provides a summary of the findings from this
study, their implications for practice, and recommendations for future research.
Purpose of the Study
Despite a well-documented need for strong school leadership, there continues to be a lack
of formalized systems and structures by which to build the next generation of potential or
aspiring leaders from within educational organizations (Leithwood et al., 2008). The most
effective organizations proactively identify and cultivate potential leaders from within their
organizations (Northouse, 2013), thus ensuring continually increasing student achievement
(Goddard & Miller, 2010).
The purpose of this study was to contribute to the research on the perceived practices
utilized by a charter middle school to grow and develop leadership capacity within teachers who
will develop into the next generation of school leaders. This study sought to thoroughly analyze
the various ways in which Del Giorgio Charter School develops leadership capacity in teachers
who work within the organization as they enter the Leadership Team Mentorship program, what

78

perceived practices contribute to the development of aspiring leaders within the organization,
and what challenges the support and maintenance of the identified strategies.
Research Questions
To better understand the promising practices implemented to build future leadership
succession pipelines, the following research questions framed the study:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at Del Giorgio Charter School?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Summary of the Findings
The findings revealed that Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship
program built leadership capacity in its aspiring teacher-leaders in a way that was both
systematic and structural utilizing this study’s theoretical framework delineated by Kouzes and
Posner (2012). The transformational practices of modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision,
challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart were all evidenced
throughout the Leadership Team Mentorship program. Concurrently, this study found
challenges to supporting and maintaining those strategies designed to build leadership capacity at
Del Giorgio Charter School.
Contributing Practices
Models the way. Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship program
models the way for mentees by growing and coaching the team in a cyclical structure. As new
members are recruited into the Leadership Team Mentorship program, they commit to stay in the
program for at least four years but no more than six years. This consistent turnover of team

79

members provides stability for the organization while ensuring that members of the site’s
administration team are consistently exposed to new and differing ways of doing business. Not
only does each co-principal lead the teams within the site, each leadership team mentee is
responsible for coaching and training the next teammate in line for each assigned duty. The
highly intentional and supportive relationships built within the Leadership Team Mentorship
program provide countless mentoring opportunities, as all members of the team work on all
administrative assignments both vertically and horizontally over the course of their tenure in the
program.
Inspires a shared vision. Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship
program inspires a shared vision by highly tailoring each team member’s professional
development opportunities and pathways based on both the members’ areas of strength and their
areas of growth. The daily application of authentic administrative practices combined with the
team approach to running the school site ensures no decisions are made in a vacuum but that
each decision is made with the careful input and forethought of multiple stakeholders across the
leadership team and the school site. The end result of this highly collaborative and dynamic
culture is that the entire staff understands and shares in the leadership’s vision for the site.
Challenges the process. Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship
program challenges the process by encouraging all members of the organization to actively
participate in leadership opportunities. In addition, all members of the organization are expected
to be able to provide justification for the decisions made based on how closely those decisions
align with the school’s mission of maximizing all students’ learning. The leadership team
actively seeks input from multiple staff leadership groups on campus. The members of the

80

Leadership Team Mentorship program make commitments of 4–6 years to participate in a unique
system intentionally designed to build the next generation of school leaders.
Enables others to act. Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship
program enables others to act by functioning in an interdisciplinary manner, resulting in the
growth of mentees in areas of both school leadership and professional growth. While mentees
are immersed in an organizational culture that focusses on growth, they are also tested through
daily exposure in all areas of school administration, personal growth, and organizational
efficacy.
Encourages the heart. Del Giorgio Charter School’s Leadership Team Mentorship
program encourages the heart by ensuring aspiring leaders have intentional opportunities to
practice administrative duties and responsibilities in a sheltered environment. Team members
are assigned administrative responsibilities on an annual basis; however, team members never
function in isolation. The Del Giorgio leadership team meets on a weekly basis at minimum to
provide each other with timely feedback, but all team members are available to all other
members at any time. This intentional structure allows aspiring leaders to develop greater self-
efficacy in their own leadership.
Challenges to Supporting and Maintaining Practices
This study found the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to
build leadership capacity at Del Giorgio Charter School, including the balancing of relationships
throughout the organization, the non-traditional structure, and the costs associated with the
Leadership Team Mentorship program (fiscal and otherwise).
Leadership team members work in a uniquely blended assignment, teaching two sections
daily while providing services for up to 300 students in addition to the annually assigned

81

administrative responsibilities. Although the structure of the Leadership Team Mentorship
program is intentionally designed to immerse aspiring school leaders in sheltered applications of
administrative exercises, multiple study participants noted that the non-traditional structure
results in additional costs to the organization’s stakeholders both fiscally and by way of reduced
services and increased workloads in some positions. Principals of charter organizations are
asked to do so much, with so little. As a dependent charter, Del Giorgio operates with strict
conformance to the memorandum of understanding between the charter and the charter-granting
district. While some services are contracted back to the granting district (payroll, insurance and
benefits, etc.) there are many areas of school business that charter principals must oversee that
traditional principals are not exposed to nor are they required to be actively engaged in.
Multiple stakeholders who participated in this study noted organizational strain owing to
a lack of student services in areas such as school counselors and an insufficient school
psychologist allotment relative to the number of identified students on campus receiving
services. Although minimal, all fiscal costs are directly absorbed by Del Giorgio Charter School.
As a dependent charter school, the Del Giorgio board is responsible for approving the
organization’s annual budget. Ultimately, the viability and sustainability of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program will rest upon the choices annually made by the charter’s board.
Implications for Practice and Policy
The findings from this study revealed that the promising practices implemented by site-
level systems and structures of a charter middle school significantly aided in the development of
perceived practices that contributed to the building of the next generation of leaders at Del
Giorgio Charter School. Implications for both practice and policy are geared toward site
administrators, charter organizations or school districts, and educational organizations that

82

provide some form of organized or formal administrative licensure within the state of California.
Each of these three groups may utilize the findings from this study to better prepare future school
leaders and thereby positively contribute to the growing pool of qualified candidates for school
administration.
Site Administrators
Utilizing the findings of this case study, site administrators can intentionally develop
practices and thereby contribute to forming the next generation of school leaders when they
embrace the process of identifying educators with promising leadership abilities from within
their individual sites and develop a formal structure by which to do so. Del Giorgio Charter
School’s administration utilizes a very informal initial identification process; however, once
potential leadership mentees are identified, the mentees are exposed to multiple pseudo-
administrative activities and responsibilities under the careful guidance of current veteran school
administrators. The process then takes an even more formal step as mentees are selected to serve
on the Leadership Team Mentorship program, which is a minimum commitment of 4–6 years.
Members and former alumni of this program very strongly felt that their participation in this
program significantly increased their leadership skills and their working knowledge of day-to-
day school administration while sheltered in a safe environment.
This study reviewed the systems and structures at Del Giorgio Charter School that are
perceived to contribute to building the next generation of school leaders. In reviewing the
systems and structures of Del Giorgio Charter School, many of the data points directly or
indirectly indicated the benefit of aspiring mentees working in real-world authentic environments
and/or applications wherein feedback was designed to be immediate and open-ended. These
findings are in alignment with Boerma (2011), Amagoh (2009), and Northouse (2013), who have

83

found leadership succession pipelines to be best built by identifying potential candidates while
they are in teaching positions. This can be done through various applications of transformational
leadership in K12 educational organizations (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005).
A positive and sheltered environment in which to explore administrative and leadership
opportunities was a key factor in the successful participation of many former Leadership Team
Mentorship program alumni who were interviewed as part of this study. These alumni varied in
experience from current program participants to educators who were involved in the program
many years prior and have since gone on to become site leaders, district directors, assistant
superintendents, superintendents, and other educational leaders. The Leadership Team
Mentorship program serves as an example of how site administrators and administrative teams
can grow the leadership capacity among all staff members through implementing
transformational leadership methods to build the next generation of school leaders.
Charter Organizations and School Districts
Both school districts and charter school organizations could reap significant benefits by
approaching organizational leadership succession plans from the perspective of developing and
applying transformational leadership practices throughout all levels of their organizations. In
doing so, they would promote a system-wide corporate culture of systematically and
continuously growing the next generation of school leaders internally, from within their
organizations.
Even though the charter school of this study’s focus has housed the Leadership Team
Mentorship program within the district in one form or another for over 40 years, the level of
support from the host district has significantly varied throughout the program’s history and
currently does little to promote the program as a recognized structure within the district. Charter

84

organizations and school districts alike could support structures such as the Leadership Team
Mentorship program and even incorporate such programs as part of their succession management
plans as they look ahead to building the next generation of school leaders. If charter
organizations and school districts would commit to more intimately working with site leaders in
developing and formalizing practices, a consistently stronger and more viable pool of candidates
would be internally cultivated while providing a more robust level of teacher-leadership efficacy
throughout their campuses.
This study found that although there are clearly perceived practices that contribute to
building the next generation of school leaders at a site, there also exist challenges to supporting
and maintaining strategies designed to build leadership capacity that could be significantly
minimized at the site level if school districts and charter organizations were to provide greater
levels of support. In most cases, the area of greatest impact would be additional financial
support from the district or charter organization directed to the site level to afford increased
amounts of release time for teachers heavily involved in programs, such as the Leadership Team
Mentorship program, but who are not yet formally hired into an administrative position within
the organization. Further, note that although the net effective financial cost to the charter
organization of this study’s focus was minimal, several study participants voiced definitive
concern that the more taxing costs were found in student services not provided on campus in
exchange for additional staffing allocations owing to the Leadership Team Mentorship program,
such as the lack of a school counselor.
Although many alumni of the Leadership Team Mentorship program did eventually
accept leadership positions within the local school district, many alumni also looked beyond the
scope of the local district when they began seeking career advancement. Regardless of whether

85

alumni accepted positions internally or externally, and although most of them reported feeling
well-prepared when entering a leadership position, many alumni reported that much of their
training in the Leadership Team Mentorship program did not necessarily align with typical
operating procedures outside Del Giorgio Charter School, at least with regard to traditional
principalship positions. Some level of increased standardization between site- and district-level
practices, or more closely aligned succession plans across the organizations at large, would
lessen the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies put in place to build leadership
capacity within the organization.
Educational Organizations
Collaboration between organizations offering administrative credentialing options and
those offering certifications or specializations for aspiring school leaders could provide
synergistic benefits by creating partnerships with local districts and charter organizations to offer
their students and candidates opportunities for real-world application. Davis et al. (2005)
documented the critical importance of aspiring educational leaders having a sheltered place in
which to practice authentic administrative applications while under the mentorship of veteran
educational leaders. In much the same way as teacher credentialing agencies now require
candidates to participate in extended periods of student teaching, educational organizations
focusing on aspiring administrators could work with local districts and charter organizations to
facilitate extended periods of administrative fieldwork as one component of the administrative
credentialing process.
Recommendations for Future Studies
This study examined the promising practices that a charter school used to build
leadership capacity among the identified potential school administrators to enter the Leadership

86

Team Mentorship program. Although thorough attempts were made to collect thorough data to
address the identified research questions, additional questions beyond the scope of this study
have emerged. This section details four recommendations for future study.
First, although this study examined a full administrative team of a charter school, it is
limited. The responses of the participants provide perceptions of the Leadership Team
Mentorship program; however, a cross-case analysis of multiple sites and/or multiple districts
could reveal additional common practices. Furthermore, an expanded study may identify
differentiating elements that exist between organizations and the leaders of those organizations,
potentially resulting in generalizations regarding effective practices utilized by leaders (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2015).
The second recommendation for future study is to expand the scope and focus of the
study to include traditional school settings in comparison with the charter organization studied.
A comparison of charter and traditional organizations that utilize various forms of site-based
mentorship programs (similar to the Leadership Team Mentorship program) could serve to
improve the strategies utilized in developing aspiring leaders across dissimilar school settings.
The third recommendation for future study is to analyze how K12 educational
organizations in urban, suburban, and rural areas utilize practices that contribute to building the
next generation of school leaders. In this study, a dependent charter organization in a suburban
area identified teacher-leaders to transition into sheltered administrative positions, and these
mentees developed school leadership capacity within that demographic. A comparative analysis
of practices utilized by K12 organizations in urban, suburban, and rural areas could afford a
greater understanding of both commonalities and divergences among implemented practices that
will potentially vary with each setting while ensuring diversity in aspiring school leadership.

87

The final recommendation for future study is to conduct a detailed longitudinal study that
details the alumni of the Leadership Team Mentorship program to more accurately assess the
global impact of utilizing promising practices in leadership training programs. Research
conducted and analyzed over time may yield additional insights regarding the perceived practices
utilized by organizations and leaders to develop aspiring leaders. While conducting research for
this study, it was learned that many of the alumni of the Leadership Team Mentorship program
went on to district-level leadership positions after serving as site leaders, both within and outside
of the local district.
Conclusion
As a qualitative study of a charter organization, this project sought to expand the
understanding of how leadership capacity can be cultivated in staff members to begin preparing
them to develop into highly effective educational leaders in K12 organizations. The findings
from this research suggests that site-based administrative mentorship programs not only provide
an arena for the sheltered application of administrative practices but also offer opportunities for
all members of the school site to develop greater teacher-leadership efficacy.
K12 educational organizations, and the leaders therein, have evolved from traditional
brick and mortar institutions into highly dynamic organizations. Gone are the antiquated days of
whiteboards, notebooks, and pens. Today’s leaders must be flexible, adaptable, and forward
thinking. As a result of a global pandemic, the K12 education experience is no longer limited to
classrooms on a school campus. Distance education has forever changed the idea of how leaders
lead, teachers teach, and students learn. Therefore, the development of leadership capacity
within K12 organizations must also evolve to ensure a continuous reservoir of highly qualified
school leaders for the next generation despite unforeseen and significant challenges.

88

Because strong school leadership has significant positive correlations to students’
academic success (Leithwood et al., 2008; Marzano et al., 2005), districts and charter
organizations should commit resources to further developing leadership efficacy throughout their
organizations.

89

References
Abu-Tineh, A. M., Khasawneh, S. A., & Omary, A. A. (2009). Kouzes and Posner’s
transformational leadership model in practice: The case of Jordanian schools. Journal of
Leadership Education, 7(3), 265–283.
Amagoh, F. (2009). Leadership development and leadership effectiveness. Management
Decisions, 47(6), 989–999.
Anast-May, L., Buckner, B., & Geer, G. (2011). Redesigning principal internships: Practicing
principals’ perspectives. The International Journal of Educational Leadership
Preparation, 6(1), 1–7.
Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2012). Stepping stones: Principal career paths and
school outcomes. Social Science Research, 41(4), 904–919.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.03.003
Bierly, C., & Shy, E. (2013). Building pathways: How to develop the next generation of
transformational school leaders. Bain & Company.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2010). Reframing the path to school leadership: A guide for teachers
and principals. Corwin Press.
Bottoms, G., & Schmidt-Davis, J. (2010). The three essentials: Improving schools require district
vision, district and state support, and principal leadership. Southern Regional Education
Board.

90

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook (2014-
15 ed.) 2015. Elementary, Middle and High School Principals.
http://www.bls.gov.ooh/management/elementary-middle-and-high-school-principals.htm
Burke, J. C. (2004). The many faces of accountability. In J. C. Burke (Ed.), Achieving
accountability in higher education: Balancing public, academic, and market demands
(pp. 1–24). Jossey-Bass.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
Campbell, C., & Gross, B. (2012). Principal concerns: Leadership data and strategies for states.
Center on reinventing public education. University of Washington.
Center for Education Reform. (1998, April 30). Still a nation at risk. Washington, D.C.: Author.
https://www.edreform.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/02/A_Nation_Still_At_Risk_1998.p
df
Clayton, J., Sanzo, K., & Myran, S. (2013). Understanding mentoring in leadership development:
Perspectives of district administrators and aspiring leaders. Journal of Research on
Leadership Education, 8(1), 77–96.
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great (1st ed.). Harper Collins.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Sage.
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr, M. T., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing
school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership programs.

91

Darling-Hammond, L., Orphanos, S., LaPointe, M., & Weeks, S. (2007). Leadership
development in California. Stanford University, Institute for Research on Education
Policy & Practice and the School Redesign Network.
Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership
study: Developing successful principals. Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.
DeAngelis, K. J., & O’Connor, N. K. (2012). Examining the pipeline into educational
administration: An analysis of applications and job offers. Education Administration
Quarterly, 48(3), 468–505.
DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last: Making PLCs systemic. Solution Tree.
Fink, D. (2010). The succession challenge: Building and sustaining leadership capacity through
succession management. SAGE.
Fink, D. (2011). Pipelines, pools and reservoirs: Building leadership capacity for sustained
improvement. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(6), 670–684.
Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School leadership succession and the challenges of change.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 62–89.
Fitzgerald, M., & Sabatino, A. (2014). Leadership succession planning in Catholic education.
National Catholic Education Association.
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. Jossey-Bass.
Furtick, K., & Snell, L. (2013). Weighted student formula yearbook: Overview. The Reason
Foundation.
Gall, M., Gall, J., & Borg, W. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson
Education.

92

Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Longman.
Goddard, R., & Miller, R. (2010). The conceptualization, measurement, and effects of school
leadership: Introduction to the special issue. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2),
219–225.
Goldring, R., & Taie, S. (2014). Principal attrition and mobility: Results from the 2012-13
principal follow-up survey. First look. NCES 2014-064. National Center for Education
Statistics.
Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research.
Journal of Educational Research, 49(2), 125–142.
Hansford, B., & Ehrich, L. C. (2006). The principalship: How significant is mentoring? Journal
of Educational Administration, 44(1), 36–52.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230610642647
Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and
non-sustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3–41.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X05277975
Hitt, D., Tucker, P., & Young, M. (2012). The professional pipeline for educational leadership.
The University Council for Educational Administration.
Hitt, D. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2016). Systematic review of key leader practices found to influence
student achievement: A unified framework. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 531–
569. doi:10.3102/0034654315614911

93

Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning
teachers: What we know and what we don’t. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1),
207–216.
Honig, M. (2012). District central office leadership as teaching: How central office
administrators support principals’ development as instructional leaders. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 733–774.
Howley, A., Andrianvaivo, S., & Perry, J. (2005). The pain outweighs the gain: Why teachers
don’t want to become principals. Teachers College Record, 107(4), 757–782.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? (Research Report No. R-03-4).
University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Work in Education:
http://www.cpre.org/there-really-teacher-shortage
Jacobson, S., Brooks, S., Giles, C., Johnson, L., & Ylimaki, R. (2007). Successful leadership in
three high-poverty urban elementary schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(4),
291–317.
Johnston, M., Walker, R., & Levine, A. (2010). Fit for the principalship: Identifying, training,
and clearing the path for potential school leaders. Principal, 89(5), 10–12.
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2001). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop
as leaders. Corwin Press.
Kearney, K. (2010). Effective principals for California schools: Building a coherent leadership
development system. WestEd.
Keigher, A. (2010). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2008-09 teacher follow-up
survey (NCES 2010-353). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education
Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pibsearch

94

Kilburg, G. M., & Hancock, T. (2006). Addressing sources of collateral damage in four teacher
mentoring programs. Teachers College Record, 108(7), 1321–1338.
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (1995). 4 ways to share power and strengthen your staff. Executive
Female, 18(5), 16.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary
things happen in organizations. Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary
things happen in organizations (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Lambert, L. (2005). What does leadership capacity really mean? Journal of Staff
Development, 26(2), 38–40.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/2
11509245?accountid=14749
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership. School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27–42.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences
student learning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for Applied Research and
Educational Improvement; Toronto: University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education.
Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007).
Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 37–67.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760601091267
Levine, A. (2005). Educational School Leaders. The Education Schools Project.

95

Louis, K., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). How does leadership affect student
achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement: An International journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 21(3), 315–
336.
Lynch, J. (2012). Responsibilities of today’s principal: Implications for principal preparation
programs and principal certification policies. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 31(2),
40–47.
Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to
results. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL).
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage.
Mehrabani, S., & Mohamad, N. (2011). Succession planning: A necessary process in today’s
organization. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-
Learning, 1(5), 371–377.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research design: A guide to design and implementation.
Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Myung, J., Loeb, S., & Horng, E. (2011). Tapping the principal pipeline: Identifying talent for
future school leadership in the absence of formal succession management programs.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 695–727.
National Association of Secondary Principals. (2002). Principal shortage. Reston, VA: Author.
https://www.nassp.org/who-we-are/board-of-directors/position-statements/principal-shortage

96

National Association of Secondary Principals. (2017). Position statement: Principal shortage.
https://www.nassp.org/policy-advocacy-center/nassp-position-statements/principal-
shortage/
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2011–12). Schools and staffing survey (SASS), Public
school district data file, 2011-12. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education
Sciences.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2014). Principal attrition and mobility: Results from
the 2012-13 principal follow-up survey.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2014064
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for
educational reform: A report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education, United States
Department of Education. The Commission: [Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O. distributor].
Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Evaluation in the field: The need for site visit standards. American Journal
of Evaluation, 36(4), 444–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214015600785
Pounder, D., & Crow, G. (2005). Sustaining the pipeline of school administrators. Supporting
New Educators, 62(8), 56–60.
Rhodes, C., & Brundrett, M. (2009). Growing the leadership talent pool: Perceptions of heads,
middle leaders and classroom teachers about professional development and leadership
succession planning within their own schools. Professional Development in Education,
35(3), 381–398.

97

Rousmaniere, K. (2007). Presidential address: Go to the principal’s office: Toward a social
history of the school principal in North America. History of Education Quarterly, 47(1),
1–22.
Russell, J. L., & Sabina, L. L. (2014). Planning for principal succession: A conceptual
framework for research and practice. Journal of School Leadership, 24, 599–639.
Silver, M., Lochmiller, C. R., Copland, M. A., & Tripps, A. M. (2009). Supporting new school
leaders: Findings from a university-based leadership coaching program for new
administrators. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 17(3), 215–232.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13611260903050148
Simeiou, F., Decman, J., Grigsby, B., & Schumacher, G. (2010). Lean on me: Peer mentoring for
novice principals. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 5(1), 1–
9.
Slater, L. (2008). Pathways to building leadership capacity. Education Management &
Leadership, 36(1), 55–69.
Solansky, S. (2010). The evaluation of two key leadership development program components:
Leadership skills assessment and leadership mentoring. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(4),
675–681.
Thessin, R., & Clayton, J. (2013). Perspectives of school leaders on the administrative internship.
Journal of Educational Administration, 51(6), 790–811.
Thompson, S. C. (2004). Developing teacher leaders: The principal’s role. National Middle
School Association.

98

Tucker, P., Young, M., & Koschoreck, J. (2012). Leading research-based change in educational
leadership preparation: An introduction. Journal of Research on Leadership, 7(2), 155–
171.
Turnbell, B., Riley, D., Arcaira, E., Anderson, L., & MacFarlane, J. (2013). Six districts begin
the principal initiative. The Wallace Foundation.
Turner, R. H. (1960). Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system. American
Sociological Review, 25(6), 855–867.
Valentine, J., & Prater, M. (2011). Instructional, transformational, and managerial leadership and
student achievement: High school principals make a difference. NASSPP Bulletin, 95(1),
5–30.
Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of
superintendent leadership on student achievement. Mid-continent Research for
Educational and Learning (McREL).
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative review studies.
The Free Press.
White, M. E., Fong, A. B., & Makkonen, R. (2010). School-site administrators: A California
county and regional perspective on labor market trends (Issues & Answers Report, REL
2010-No. 084). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational
Laboratory West.
Zepeda, S. J., Bengtson, E., & Parylo, O. (2012). Examining the planning and the management
of principal succession. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(2), 136–158.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211210512

99

Appendices
Appendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter
DATE:

Dear Participant:

You have been selected to participate in this study due to your experiences with leadership
capacity building strategies in your charter organization. As a participant in this study, your
contribution will assist those interested in implementing or expanding leadership capacity
building strategies in the educational settings in which they work.

The aim of this study is to explore how your organization identifies, cultivates, and supports
future charter leaders as a part of a succession management plan. The following research
questions are posed in an effort to gain insight into successful leadership capacity building
strategies:

1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders?

2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?

100

Identifying strategies that charter organizations use to successfully build the next generation of
education leaders may provide a guide for other charter organizations to follow. Exploring the
perceptions of stakeholders regarding the leadership-capacity–building strategies may improve
the content, execution, and reach of such programs. Finally, the identification of facilitators and
inhibitors of the strategies may help others recognize catalysts and pitfalls for their current or
future leadership-capacity–building efforts.

Your participation in this study should take approximately a few hours of your time over a period
of six weeks and will consist of the following activities:

• One to three interviews lasting 45–60 min in length
• One or more observations of you in your work setting

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Kathy
Stowe. She can be reached at KStowe@rossier.usc.edu. If you have any questions or concerns
regarding your rights as a subject in this study, you may contact the IRB Compliance Office at
the University of Southern California.

Thank you for your willingness to participate in this study.

With gratitude,

Kevin Johnson

101

Appendix B: Administrator Interview Questions
The following questions framed each of the semi-structured interviews:
1. Tell me about your role at_______.
2. How long have you been at this organization?
3. Who was influential in your decision to become an administrator? How have they
assisted you in your professional development?
4. How have you assisted your teacher leader, administrative leaders, etc., in their
development?
5. What traits or characteristics do you possess in your leadership role?
6. What professional goals do you have for the next five years? How do you plan to
achieve those goals?
7. What are your school’s mission and vision?
8. Tell me about your school’s belief or philosophy regarding building leadership capacity.
9. How does your organization identify the next generation of leaders?
10. What do you believe is the goal of developing school leadership programs?
11. What resources are accessible for developing leadership at _________? (Could possibly
go into the challenges RQ if participant answers in the negative).
12. What formal and informal leadership opportunities are available at your site?
13. What does your site/organization succession plan look like and how is that articulated to
stakeholders?
14. How are principals used to support the succession plan?

102

15. What program is currently in place that helps teachers develop leadership capacity?
Probe: describe any instructional programs or practices related to school leadership at
your site.
16. What leadership standards or benchmarks guide the formation of future principals?
17. How are these leadership standards used to develop and then assess leaders?
18. How is the succession plan implemented at your school site?
19. Have you demonstrated leadership capacity amongst your peers? Follow up: if so, how?
If not, why not?
20. In what ways are you supported by the leadership at your school?
21. How does the district support potential school leaders?
22. What influenced you to take on a leadership role?
23. What was significant in you becoming an administrator?
24. Your school was identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. How
would you articulate those practices?
25. Your school was identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. How
are those practices communicated to you?
26. What does your site/organization succession plan look like and how is that articulated to
stakeholders?
27. In what ways are you supported by the leadership at your site/organization?
28. What district/institutions/school supports are in place to help develop future leaders?
29. When you are thinking about identifying a potential leader, what skills/qualities/traits are
you looking for?

103

30. What support have you received from your district/institution/school in developing
leadership capacity?
31. When you are thinking about tapping/identifying a potential future leader, what
characteristics/qualities are you looking for?
32. When you notice an individual with these qualities, what do you do?
33. What areas typically need the most improvement/attention before moving staff members
into leadership roles?
34. When you think about a dynamic or transformational leader, what qualities or
characteristics stand out to you?
35. Why did you decide to transition into administration?
36. How do you support an individual who is not currently ready for a leadership position but
is interested?
37. What differences have you experienced in the leadership positions at previous school
sites?
38. If applicable, describe your experience in the leadership development program? What
district leadership building practices were beneficial in preparing you to be a new
principal?
39. Is there anything I have not asked that would allow me to better understand the
recruitment and selection process of principals in this district?
40. From your experience, what are some of the challenges associated with being an effective
leader?
41. How do stakeholders play a role in developing a leader?
42. If someone said quality leadership is not sustainable, what would you say to that?

104

43. Have you experienced any challenges when working with others in developing leadership
challenges? What worked or did not work? Follow up: do you believe these challenges
could have been avoided?
44. What are some of the challenges you have experienced during the implementation of the
school leadership program?
45. What do you believe are the benefits of implementing a program related to school
leadership?
46. What forms of formal and informal mentoring are available in your organization for
veteran leaders?
47. How do you support potential leaders at your school site?
48. What are some of the barriers you faced when you initially transitioned into a leadership
role?
49. Considering your current succession pipeline, what are the changes you (have or) might
consider implementing(ed) to overcome the challenges? Follow up: what do you
envision those changes to look like?
50. What are the challenges in your school system in addressing principal turnover?
51. Are there any challenges in implementing your succession plan and what are they?
52. As we finish the interview, to help me fully capture your experience with building
leadership capacity, is there anything else you would like to share that you feel is
important?
53. Are there any individuals that have stepped into leadership roles in the last two years?
Follow up: if so, how many?

105

Appendix C: Teacher Interview Questions
The following questions framed each of the semi-structured interviews:

1. Tell me about your role at_______.
2. How long have you been at this organization?
3. Who was influential in your decision to become an administrator? How have they
assisted you in your professional development?
4. How have you assisted your teacher leader, administrative leaders, etc., in their
development?
5. What traits or characteristics do you possess in your leadership role?
6. What professional goals do you have for the next five years? How do you plan to
achieve those goals?
7. What are your school’s mission and vision?
8. Tell me about your school’s belief or philosophy regarding building leadership capacity.
9. How does your organization identify the next generation of leaders?
10. What resources are accessible for developing leadership at _________? (Could possibly
go into the challenges RQ if participant answers in the negative).
11. What formal and informal leadership opportunities are available at your site?
12. What does your site/organization succession plan look like and how is that articulated to
stakeholders?
13. How are teachers used to support the succession plan?

106

14. What program is currently in place that helps teachers develop leadership capacity?
Probe: describe any instructional programs or practices related to school leadership at
your site.
15. What leadership standards or benchmarks guide the formation of future principals?
16. How are these leadership standards used to develop and then assess leaders?
17. How is the succession plan implemented at your school site?
18. Have you demonstrated leadership capacity amongst your peers? Follow up: if so, how?
If not, why not?
19. In what ways are you supported by the leadership at your school?
20. How does the district support potential school leaders?
21. What influenced you to take on a leadership role?
22. What was significant in you becoming a teacher-leader functioning as a __________?
23. Your school was identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. As a
teacher, how would you articulate those practices?
24. Your school was identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. As a
teacher, how are those practices communicated to you?
25. What does your site/organization succession plan look like and how is that articulated to
stakeholders?
26. In what ways are you supported by the leadership at your site/organization?
27. What district/institutions/school supports are in place to help develop future leaders?
28. What support have you received from your district/institution/school in developing
leadership capacity?

107

29. What support have you received from your district/institution/school in developing
leadership skills?
30. In what areas do you think you needed the most improvement/attention before moving
into your current leadership role?
31. When you think about a dynamic or transformational leader, what qualities or
characteristics stand out to you?
32. Why did you decide to go into a position of leadership?
33. Describe your experience in the leadership development program. What district
leadership building practices were beneficial in preparing you to be a new teacher-leader?
34. From your experience, what are some of the challenges associated with being an effective
leader?
35. How do stakeholders play a role in developing a leader?
36. If someone said quality leadership is not sustainable, what would you say to that?
37. Have you experienced any challenges when working with others in developing leadership
challenges? What worked or did not work? Follow up: do you believe these challenges
could have been avoided?
38. What are some of the challenges you have experienced during the implementation of the
school leadership program?
39. What do you believe are the benefits of implementing a program related to school
leadership?
40. What forms of formal and informal mentoring are available in your organization for
veteran leaders?
41. How do you support potential leaders at your school site?

108

42. What are some of the barriers you faced when you initially transitioned into a leadership
role?
43. Considering your current succession pipeline, what are the changes you (have or) might
consider implementing(ed) to overcome the challenges? Follow up: what do you
envision those changes to look like?
44. What are the challenges in your school system in addressing principal turnover?
45. Are there any challenges in implementing your succession plan and what are they?
46. As we finish the interview, to help me fully capture your experience with building
leadership capacity, is there anything else you would like to share that you feel is
important?
47. Are there any individuals that have stepped into leadership roles in the last two years?
Follow up: if so, how many?

109

Appendix D: Observation Protocol
Name of Site: Date:
Type of Observation:
Participants:
Purpose/Focus:
Time Started: Time Ended: Total Time:
Environment
Observation

Observer’s Notes
Setting/Location
• What does the environment look like?
• What is the physical set up?
• How are people positioned?
• What does the agenda look like?
• Does the meeting follow the agenda?
• How many people are in the meeting?

Participant(s)
• Attire of participants
• Participant engagement
• Who is leading the meeting?

110

• Who sits where?
• Are they talking?
• Are they making eye contact?
• What are the leader’s practices in
interacting with others?
• Are people coming late/leaving early
• Diversity of the room (gender/ethnic)

111

Context
Observation

Observer’s Notes
Who is talking to whom?
• What is their relationship?
• What are the roles of the participants?
• What is the topic of the interaction?
• Where is the interaction taking place?
• What is the length of the interaction?
• What is the purpose of the interaction?
• Is the interaction planned or unplanned?

Overall tone
What is the tone of the interaction?

112

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined the promising practices utilized by a large dependent charter middle school that were perceived to build the leadership capacity of the organization. Furthermore, this study also recognized that challenges to building leadership capacity within the charter organization exists. The Leadership Team Mentorship program served as the case study for this project. Triangulation of data included: document analysis, observations, and semi-structured interviews. The analysis of data suggests that the Leadership Team Mentorship program builds leadership capacity by recognizing on-campus teacher leaders who are then groomed by a team of senior administrators through being provided diverse opportunities to practice administrative duties in a sheltered environment with extensive feedback through structured mentorship. This study can benefit site leaders, districts and charter organizations, as well as local educational licensing organizations that are seeking to develop a more mentor-based model of leadership development.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools

PDF

Building charter school leadership capacity: a look into leadership practices at accelerated academy

PDF

Leadership capacity building within a Hawaiian-based nonprofit organization

PDF

Building leadership capacity to support principal succession

PDF

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

PDF

Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals

PDF

Promising practices for developing leadership capacity in future school administrators

PDF

Promising practices: developing principal leadership succession

PDF

Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions

PDF

Leadership capacity and pipeline in higher education

PDF

Leadership capacity building within a Native Hawaiian nonprofit organization

PDF

Promising practices for building leadership capacity: a community college case study

PDF

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

PDF

Principal leadership succession: developing the next generation of leaders

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture for LatinX students: a case study of a large comprehensive high school

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

Leadership capacity building: promising practices in principal preparation

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Johnson, Roy-Kevin Edward (author)

Core Title Promising practices for building leadership capital in educational organizations

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 09/11/2020

Defense Date 08/21/2020

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

Tag charter schools,leadership capacity building,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational leadership,succession management

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Escalante, Michael (committee member), Malloy, Courtney (committee member)

Creator Email rkejohnson@mac.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-369782

Unique identifier UC11666612

Identifier etd-JohnsonRoy-8953.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-369782 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-JohnsonRoy-8953.pdf

Dmrecord 369782

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Johnson, Roy-Kevin Edward

Type texts

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

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

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

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