Teacher Mentorship
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Teacher Mentorship as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 58,502
- Pages: 121
Mentorship for Teacher Leaders
Collection Editor: Fred Mednick
Mentorship for Teacher Leaders Collection Editor: Fred Mednick Authors: Arnold Barrera James E. Berry Bonnie Beyer Richard Braley Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. Kathleen Campbell Ed Cox Rayma Harchar Mary Harris-John Colleen Kennedy Angus MacNeil
Andra McGinn Carol Mullen Larry Ragan Patricia Reeves Sherri Ritter Linda Searby William Sharp John Slate Bob Smith Michael Yelvington
Online:
CONNEXIONS Rice University, Houston, Texas
©
2008 Fred Mednick
This selection and arrangement of content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Table of Contents 1 Elearning for Mentors 1.1 e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching and Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.3 Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Mentorship and Leadership Practices 2.1 A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2 Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3 The Role of the Principal 3.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.2 The Long View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.3 The Principalship: Manager to Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.4 Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: Continuous 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10
Learning for Professional Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Reality Check: Designing a New Leadership Program for the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 THE CULTURE AUDIT: A LEADERSHIP TOOL FOR ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING IN DIVERSE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty:
Implementing Triangular Mentoring
Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in Educational Leadership and Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Attributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
iv
Chapter 1
Elearning for Mentors 1.1 e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching 1
and Leadership
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Professional development is both a growing trend and an increasing need in this country for those employed in a wide variety of professions. It is a way for employees to engage in workplace learning to improve performance levels and skills, and to learn new ones as well. According to the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD), Many economists and business leaders agree that the key to achieving business results and sustaining a competitive advantage is a fully engaged, knowledgeable, and skilled workforce (Rivera & Paradise, 2006, p. 2). According to this same report, American industry spends an estimated $109.25 billion annually on professional development activities. Educators make up about two percent of the American workforce (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007). According to the US Department of Education (USDOE), there are over 2.7 million full-time teachers in this country, and they play a critical role in the quality of education. In a 2004 report by the USDOE, The single most important factor aecting student achievement is teachers. . . (Kleiman, 2004). The importance of highly-quali ed teachers is evident, and therefore the question becomes:
how do we keep 2.7 million
teachers trained and current so they may deliver the quality education this country's children deserve? Professional development is a key component to maintaining a skilled workforce and producing quality teachers, so the challenge lies in providing and delivering training so that it is meaningful, high-quality, and presented in the most eective format. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, teachers on average spend over 40 hours per week on school duties both inside and outside of the classroom. In addition, they work 10 months during the year and then during their two-month break many take second jobs, teach summer courses, or spend time in workshops or college classes to continue their education (U.S. Department of Labor, 2006).
To complicate matters,
many teachers live in rural areas where they do not have access to professional development opportunities. Additionally, there is the problem of a shortage of quali ed teachers in such elds as mathematics, science,
1
This content is available online at
2
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
and foreign languages who need speci c training and courses to obtain state certi cation (Kleiman, 2004, p. 1). Electronic professional development (e-PD) may provide the solution to some of these training issues. It provides teachers with opportunities to participate in quality in-service education while staying in their communities, and even in their classrooms. Having the opportunity to meet the standards of high-quality professional development while living a normal life may encourage more teachers to participate, thus reducing some of the shortages we now face. We are just beginning to see the full potential of e-PD, but to be eective these programs must address the quality standards like those outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001; in other words, professional development today must be relevant, meaningful, useful, and standardsbased.
These standards include such criteria as being delivered by quali ed individuals with appropriate
credentials and providing training in the use of technology. Forty states have written professional development standards and thirty nine of those engage in nancing professional development opportunities for their teachers (National Center for Education Statistics, 2006). This fact alone highlights the importance of how state and federal governments contribute to quality teacher training. Ohio, for example, has developed a Tri-Tier Model of School Improvement, which aligns resources, information, tools, professional development and technical assistance. This model, found on the Ohio Department of Education website, http://www.ode.state.oh.us
2 , focuses on six areas: data analysis; best practices; plan-
ning; implementation and monitoring; resource management; and high-quality professional development. All of these are integrated for the purpose of improving student achievement, teacher instruction, and overall school performance. Ohio's professional development plan is built around the needs of educators by responding to the needs of the students. It is also aligned with local, state, and national goals. The state's standards for professional development are the following: Standard 1 High Quality Professional Development (HQPD) is a purposeful, structured and continuous process that occurs over time; Standard 2 HQPD is informed by multiple sources of data; Standard 3 HQPD is collaborative; Standard 4 HQPD includes varied learning experiences that accommodate individual educators' knowledge and skills; Standard 5 HQPD is evaluated by its short- and long-term impact on professional practice and achievement of all students; and Standard 6 HQPD results in the acquisition, enhancement or re nement of skills and knowledge. The use of e-PD as a viable source for developing quality teachers is becoming more common, but as with all new ventures, the lack of accepted standards make for a wide range of quality learning opportunities. Some questions to be considered are: What dierent types of e-PD courses are available? administrators and teachers look for when trying to choose a quality e-based course?
What should
How should an e-
based professional development course be evaluated? The goals of this paper are to help identify good e-PD courses, and to help the reader understand the process of distinguishing electronic high quality professional development programs so they can make informed decisions when considering various e-based opportunities. Background of Traditional Professional Development: Taking Aim According to Roland Barth (2001), traditional professional development for educators has been characterized by assorted courses at universities, episodic in-service activities in school districts, or incoherently planned workshops. Barth describes this as a wasteland of professional development, and Malone (2001) concurs, stating that after a rather intense period of formal training for educators, it seems that the professional development that follows is rather informal, self-guided, and sporadic. Teaching and school administration are intense, complex jobs, and without regular, well-planned, relevant professional development, educators become stagnant and less productive in terms of new ideas, instructional strategies, time management, interpersonal and communication skills, and the energy required to keep up with the pace of teaching and learning, especially under the stringent guidelines of No Child Left Behind. Barth (2001) contends that in the past, those traditional forms of professional development drew upon common assumptions and logic: nd schools where students achieve at high levels, observe and identify those traits that are exhibited by the teachers and principals, and develop professional activities based on those traits. While this appears sound on the surface, Barth asserts that the aw in this design comes from assuming that the main measure of eective teachers and principals comes solely from high student test scores. However, as we now know, a good education is much more than high test scores, and schools are
2
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/
3
very seldom that similar. Unlike teachers, school principals were actually not assumed to require professional development prior to the 1980's, and only in the 1990's did participation in administrative sta development become common. Today, many states require that school administrators complete a speci ed number of in-service hours or courses over a speci ed period of time (Hallinger and Murphy, 1991).
Likewise, teachers in almost every
state are required to attend in-service workshops to renew their teaching certi cation, meet state standards, or maintain their jobs. Two decades ago, principals were seen as the learn-ed, while teachers and students were the learn-ers. Principals were required to know everything from building management to human relations to every subject in the curriculum.
Their needs for professional development came dead last; it was simply assumed that
they knew all they needed to know, and therefore had no immediate need for professional development. As we moved into the 1990's, professional development for principals came to be viewed as a `necessary evil' for the advancement of administrative skills, knowledge, and abilities. Workshops and conferences abounded all over the country, and indeed, there was a movement toward sharpening principals' management skills and ne-tuning their knowledge of curriculum, instruction, assessment, supervision, and more recently, the use of technology as a management tool. With professional development, we often expect a great deal of change for a minimum amount of eort (Caldwell, 2001).
Whether it is increased leadership competency or other signi cant behavior changes,
principals are sometimes expected to exhibit changes in leadership ability or habits by simply being exposed to new ideas and motivational speakers. In the past two decades, it has been common practice to expose principals to short-term, topic-speci c in-service sessions held out of the district, which in essence ended up being appropriate for only awareness-level development. These experiences have not usually had an ongoing, consistent nature, which is needed to build leadership skills and result in substantive behavior change. Recent research indicates that principals need continuous professional development to support their eorts to improve their schools and to revitalize their commitment to maintaining positive learning communities (Foster, Loving and Shumate, 2000; Evans and Mohr, 1999; Neufeld, 1997). Today's increasingly complex society requires that principals learn to guide their schools through greater challenges than ever. The federal legislation No Child Left Behind, for example, has changed the landscape of accountability for all children's learning, and principals, more than ever are being held accountable for how well teachers teach and students learn. Traditional views of professional development for principals essentially took on the assumption that transferring knowledge from experts to practitioners would su ce. This, however, has proven to be disappointing and insu cient to principals, negating the assumption that periodic in-service, oered in a remedial manner, was most eective and that the most eective way for principals to learn was to be exposed to a speaker. Past practice assumed that professional development involved acquiring new skills, instead of building the capacity for re ective practice (Evans and Mohr, 1999). The research on best practices in professional development outlines another set of assumptions, which serve to empower the principal not only as a school leader but as an adult learner.
These assumptions
include: that ongoing professional development is needed for substantial change to occur; that school change is partly due to personal change; that a goal of professional development is to support the inquiry into and study of teaching and learning; that principals learn as a result of training, practice, feedback, and re ection; that professional development is essential to school development; and that professional development should be primarily school-focused and job-embedded (Mann, 1998). If we view principals as key gures in the eort to improve schools, we begin to understand the special professional development needs they have. Principals are pivotal to creating conditions that lead to eective schools, and this is well-documented in the research literature on school improvement. According to Ron Edmonds' work in the 1970's, strong leadership in the person of the school principal is one of the Correlates of Eective Schools.
Studies show that in schools with high student achievement and a clear sense of
community, good principals can make a signi cant dierence (Boyer, 1983; Center for Educational Policy Analysis, 2003; DuFour, 1991). Improved professional development not only gives principals the con dence to take on their roles as leaders, it gives administrators the competence to be successful and motivated
4
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
through job satisfaction (Howley, Chadwick, and Howley, 2002). Growth of Needs-Based Professional Development: Hitting the Target What are the characteristics of successful professional development for principals and teachers?
The
research literature identi es several key features: (a) it is built upon practice and re ection; (b) it takes place in the context of the school (job-embedded); (c) it is most successful when presented in a collaborative learning environment; and (d) it requires appropriate resources (Bezzina, 1994). Additionally, we need to look at the most successful methodologies for principal professional development.
Murphy and Hallinger
(1992) advocate problem-based learning because it incorporates the content of the principal's role (e.g., legal issues, instructional supervision, sta development) with the management skills and processes that go along with this leadership role (e.g., interpersonal relationships, communication, decision-making). Two decades ago, Joyce and Showers (1983) contended that eective professional development involves a wellplanned sequence of relevant activities including presentation of theory, demonstrations, and opportunities for practice, feedback, application, and re ection. They have further asserted that short-term conferences or workshops seldom provide these, because the importance of the application and re ection phases of training lies in learning by doing. Even though these researchers proposed this nearly a quarter of a century ago, it makes sense for professional development in the 21st century as well. Professional development for principals should focus on learning new behaviors or re ning skills that can be directly related to the business of providing school leadership (Caldwell, 2001). We have known for a long time that people learn best when given the opportunity to practice, re ect on their own learning, and react to feedback. This mindset serves us well today as it did then. The National Sta Development Council (2005) has been dedicated to the issue of providing quality professional development, as are the state and national professional principals' organizations (e.g., National Association of Elementary School Principals - NAESP, and the National Association of Secondary School
3 ), the Leadership
Principals - NASSP). For example, according to the NAESP website (www.naesp.org
Academy oers workshops, seminars and e-learning opportunities with continuing education units (CEU's) or professional development units (PDU's) for each hour of engaged learning in the on-line environment.
4 ) outlines the George Lucas
Likewise, the NASSP's website (www.edutopia.org/foundation/courseware.php
Educational Foundation's Professional Development Modules, where each module contains articles, video footage, PowerPoint presentations, and other features on innovative classrooms and educational leadership. The National Sta Development Council also supports other approaches to long-term professional development. One example is Area Cooperative Educational Services (ACES) in Hamden, Connecticut. Their Professional Development and School Improvement Program oers a variety of thematic modules for teachers and administrators that can be implemented over a period of one to ve years. According to the company's philosophy, the one-shot or short-term workshop designs may ll speci c, immediate needs of schools districts, but theirs is designed for long-term, systemic improvement. According to their website (www.aces.k12.ct.us
5
), the integral components to ACES's approach are online training modules, remote coaching and support. While there are eorts to provide professional development for school leaders, it seems to be a matter of quality vs. quantity. According to Barth (1986), principals seem to have built up antibodies against useless professional development activities.
Instead of being told Here it is and this is what I expect of
you, principals don't want their valuable time wasted with a so-called expert speaker or another canned lecture. They want something they can take back to their schools today and really put to use. For example, This is how you can use your Palm Pilot to record data during a teacher observation, and This will help with organization and time management in your supervision duties. Or, This is what will happen in the courtroom during a level four grievance hearing. And nally, Here are some suggestions for dealing with a special education child advocate in an IEP meeting. These are real issues that principals deal with. With their input, substantial professional development can be crafted around topics like these to meet their needs and interests.
And without follow-up and some link between the professional development activities and
their own practice, principals will gain little or sustain much learning - from the experience.
3 4 5
http://www.naesp.org/ http://www.edutopia.org/foundation/courseware.php http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/
5
According to the Virginia Department of Education (2004), there are several key factors that de ne high-quality professional development. First is richness of content that is speci cally selected to deepen and broaden the knowledge and skills of teachers and principals.
Next, it is based on well-de ned objectives.
High-quality professional development is well thought out regarding how it is delivered, the amount of time it takes, the styles of pedagogy included, and the use of formative and summative assessments.
Finally,
high-quality professional development is delivered by individuals who have demonstrated the appropriate quali cations and should provide training for educators in the use of technology so that it results in improved teaching and learning. e-Based Professional Development: Making a Bullseye Distance education in the United States has evolved from the tradition of independent learning, where learners who did not have geographical access to a physical site studied their own materials, generally in isolation of other similar learners (Frydenberg, 2002). Online professional development includes a variety of technologies. Typically, the term online refers to instruction delivered via the Internet. But, other forms of computer-based courses and training exist, such as CD-ROM's (Killion, 2000). Today, the Internet provides a virtual landslide of resources, including those mentioned previously through the national professional organizations.
Universities, both the brick-and-mortar kind as well as the online ones, oer courses and
continuing education courses for every content area, as well as those on leadership, instructional strategies, use of technology in education, and numerous others. Warmack-Capes (2005) reports that some other sources of online courses for educators include: Classroom Connect, IDE Corporation, Atomic Learning, and Scholastic. The Public Broadcasting Service's (PBS) TeacherLine, found at http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline
6 ,
is a premier professional development resource, delivering courses online for PreK-12 teachers, both for graduate credit and recerti cation. Tapped In, an online workplace for educational professionals located at
7 , is an e-based forum where teachers, administrators, and others can gather
http://tappedin.org/tappedin
to learn, collaborate, share, and support one another in learning as well as in professional practice. Another source is individual state departments of education. West Virginia, for example, is on the cut-
8 )initiative, supported by a one million
ting edge with its 21st Century Leadership (http://wvde.state.wv.us
dollar grant. While principals spend some of their time in face-to-face workshop sessions, there is also an online component, which oers the participants the opportunity to evaluate professional development sessions, journal and communicate with others in the program, and receive information on the current research on various topics. South Carolina oers online professional development and training through its website found at http://ed.sc.gov
9 , where topics include character education, special education, community collabora-
tion, and facilitating partnerships. Other state eorts in professional development include: Alabama's Best Practices Program; Alaska Professional Development; the Arkansas Leadership Academy; Florida's Online Reading-Professional Development (FOR-PD) Project; the Iowa Professional Development Model; the University of Hawaii's Education Laboratory School; and the Washington Professional Development Initiative (http://www.teacherquality.us
10 ).
Today's educators, both classroom teachers and building principals, are part of what Bartlett (2005) refers to as the Net Generation (Net Geners). They are not only technology savvy, they expect to receive information, entertainment, and even learning opportunities via some form of technology. As Bartlett asserts, the Net Geners are not only acculturated to the use of technology, they are saturated with it. From laptops to iPods to Palm Pilots to sophisticated cell phones, technology consumes our lives both at home and at work. Most professionals in any eld also value education. They may learn in dierent ways than those ten or twenty years ago, but they still want to learn.
Convenience, after quality, is one of the main issues
these adult learners look for when choosing professional development opportunities. No longer is the lecture format interesting or convenient for them; in fact, with the current Net Geners, it would not even be attractive or acceptable. Professional development that does not include at least a module of technology-
6 7 8 9 10
http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline http://tappedin.org/tappedin http://wvde.state.wv.us/ http://ed.sc.gov/ http://www.teacherquality.us/
6
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
based oerings will probably be less than successful considering the characteristics of current adult learners who are autonomous in their approach to learning. The Net Generation is selective about those kinds of professional development oerings where they can make the best use of their valuable and limited time. This is especially true of school principals, whose days are jammed with meetings, classroom observations, parent conferences, and problem solving.
Anything less than high-quality, relevant, and convenient professional
development for the 21st century educator will not be acceptable. Summary Today's workforce, whether in the eld of business or education requires quality, continuous, jobembedded professional development to remain current with best practices, and to continually improve skills, knowledge, and abilities.
In a highly competitive world laced with a variety of technological devices and
software, it becomes imperative that this training is oered in a manner that is both convenient and relevant to the worker, and that includes oering training in an e-based format. Teachers and school principals, in many cases do not have the funds or the time to spend away from their schools, and with shrinking budgets, school districts are wise to explore oering professional development in this alternative manner. Furthermore, training modules oered online can be revisited an unlimited number of times by educators so that its content and strategies become imbedded into daily practice. Planning time for teachers can become time for study, research, and further training, while principals can engage in problem-based learning and use what they learn immediately to improve their own practice. Electronic professional development (termed here e-PD) also has broad implications for delivering training to very rural schools, where teachers and principals might otherwise not have the opportunity to attend training sessions due to distance or cost.
The delivery of e-based professional development also makes it
possible for larger numbers of participants to `attend' the same training session(s), whereas the traditional lecture delivery method could reach only a small, isolated audience. As we move forward into the 21st century, we nd a strong relationship between educational reform and the use of technology for learning; technology enhances the learning power of the people who use it. The use of technology for professional development has begun to transcend the former isolationism of this kind of learning to a level of collaborative professional growth (Serim, 2007). The development of professional learning communities built around e-based platforms promises to encourage a lifetime of learning through online professional development opportunities for all educators. References Area Cooperative Educational Services (ACES). Professional development and school improvement. Retrieved March 30, 2007 http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/
11
Barth, R.S. (1986). Principal centered professional development. Theory into Practice, 25, 156-160. Barth, R.S. (2001). Learning by heart. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bartlett, M. (2005, May 9). Generation x? So old school the emphasis is now on the `Millennial'. Credit Union Journal. Bezzina, M. (1994).
Empowering the principal through professional development.
Paper presented at
the annual conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association, July 3-6, 1994. Boyer, E.L. (1983). A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper & Row. Caldwell, S.D. (2001). Eective practices for principals' in-service. Theory into Practice, 25, 174-178. Center for Educational Policy Analysis.
(2003).
What we know about successful school leadership.
Retrieved March 15, 2005 from http://www.epa.gse.rutgers.edu/
12 whatweknow.pdf
DuFour, R.P. (1991). The principal as sta developer. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. Evans, P. & Mohr, N. (1999).
Professional development for principals: Seven core beliefs.
Phi Delta
Kappan, 80, 530-533. Foster, E., Loving, D., & Shumate, A. (2000). schools. Teaching and Change, 8, 76-98.
11 12
http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/ http://www.epa.gse.rutgers.edu/
Eective principals, eective professional development
7
Frydenberg, J. (October, 2002). Quality standards in e-learning: A matrix of analysis. Retrieved April
13
29, 2007 from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/109/189
Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J. (1991). Developing leaders for tomorrow's schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 514-520. Howley, A., Chadwick, K., & Howley, C.W. (2002, April). Networking for the nuts and bolts: The ironies of professional development for rural principals.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1983). Power in sta development through research on training. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Killion, J. (2000, Summer). To reap bene ts of online sta development, ask the right questions. Journal of Sta Development, 21. Kleiman, G. M. (2004). Meeting the need for high quality teachers: e-Learning solutions. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/o ces/list/os/technology/plan/2004/site/documents/KleimanMeetingtheNeed.pdf
14
Malone, R.J. (2001). Principal Mentoring. (ERIC Digest No.149). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED457535) Mann, M. (1998). Professional Development for Education Leaders. PREL Brie ng Paper, Honolulu, HI. Murphy, J. & Hallinger, P. (1992).
The Principalship in an Era of Transformation.
The Journal of
Educational Administration, special issue. National trieved
Center
March
for
30,
Education
2007,
from
Statistics.
Institue
of
(2006). Education
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/res_tab4.asp National ing
School
Sta
Development
Quality
Through
Council.
Principal
16
(2005).
15
State
Learning
Professional
Education
Sciences to
U.S.
Lead,
Development.
Reforms
Department Leading
Retrieved
to
March
(SER) of
Learn: 15,
.
Re-
Education: Improv-
2005
from
http://www.ndsc.org/library/leaders Neufeld, B. (1997).
Responding to the Expressed Needs of Urban Middle School Principals.
Urban
Education. Vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 490-510. Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2006). No Child Left Behind Federal De nition of High Quality Professional Development.pdf. Retrieved April 9, 2007, from O ce of Educator Quality and Certi cation: http://www.ridoe.net/EducatorQuality/prodev.aspx Rivera, R. J., & Paradise, A. (2006). ASTD 2006 State of the Industry. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from ASTD: Workplace Learning and Performance: http://www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/A314C9A6-D2F1-42C7-
17 .
AD72-F2F3EA0D688F/11196/2006SOIRExecsum.pdf Serim,
F. (2007).
Building Virtual Communities for Professional Development.
http://www.ws.gov/Techn ology/Futures/serim.html U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
(2007).
18 .
U.S. Department of Labor.
Retrieved from
Retrieved April 2, 2007, from
19
Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet U.S. Department of Education O ce of Postsecondary Education.
(2005, October).
The Secretary's
Fourth Annual Report on Teacher Quality: A Highly Quali ed Teacher in Every Classroom .
Retrieved
March 30, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/teachprep/2005Title2-Report.pdf U.S. Department of Labor. (2006, August 4). Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#emply
20
Virginia Department of Education (April 2004). High-Quality Professional Development Criteria.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/109/189 http://www.ed.gov/about/o ces/list/os/technology/plan/2004/site/documents/Kleiman-MeetingtheNeed.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/res_tab4.asp http://www.ndsc.org/library/leaders http://www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/A314C9A6-D2F1-42C7-AD72-F2F3EA0D688F/11196/2006SOIRExecsum.pdf http://www.ws.gov/Techn%20ology/Futures/serim.html http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#emply
8
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
Warmack-Capes, D. (2005). Online Professional Development Courses for Teachers. School Executive. March/April.
1.2 Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development
Note:
21
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
1.2.1 As technology expands the professional development available outside the traditional classroom, it is important that educational executives consider the role of distance education in the development of school leaders. The student population has changed with many older adults, particularly school administrators attending universities and urging the universities to provide instruction in more convenient ways. More districts are seeking to develop leadership in their districts through customized leadership programs. Working adults want education delivered direct to them, at home or the workplace. . ..
Preparation may be weaker than
among conventional students; motivation may be stronger (Jones & Pritchard, 1999, p. 56). These new methods of delivery include television and the Internet, both of which allow students to access coursework miles from the traditional campus classroom. Instruction will have to change and assignments will need to be more tailored to a population that is not on campus. College instructors will increasingly encounter classes that are much larger than the traditional graduate level class. Decisions regarding which courses are selected for distance education need to be carefully considered.
As Lamb and Smith (2000)
pointed out, The distance education environment tends to exaggerate both the positive and the negative aspects of all the elements of instruction (p. 13). Kelly (1990) noted that instructors must develop new skills for distance education teaching in the areas of timing, teaching methods, feedback from students at remote sites, and the evaluation of students. Stammen (2001) noted that technologies in and of themselves do not change the nature of leadership but the way educators use the technology does. The new technology requires instructors to re-consider and develop additional learner centered environments. To make learning happen instructors need to understand both how to work the content and how the technology is impacting their instruction. Some are skeptical of university motives noting the prospect of not having to build new facilities to accommodate more students has great economic appeal (Weigel, 2000).
Regardless, the opportunity to improve the instruction and
availability through the new technology is here to stay. It is important to determine the eectiveness of the new methods of delivery and periodically compare them to traditional campus classroom instruction. Swan and Jackman (2000) discussed Souder's 1993 comparison of distance learners with traditional learners, stating that the distance learning students performed better than the host-site learners in several areas or elds of study, including exams and homework assignments (p. 59). Citing the limited number of studies comparing dierent methods of instruction in higher education, Swan and Jackson looked at remote-site and home-site students at the secondary school level. They found no signi cant dierences in student achievement between the two sites when comparing grade point averages.
21
This content is available online at
9
Methodology In 2002, educational leadership students in our school nance class and school principalship classes at Ball State University were surveyed (Sharp & Cox, 2003). Of these students, 12 in the nance class were in a studio classroom, with 89 taking the course on television at 42 o-campus sites around the state of Indiana. In the principalship course, 25 students were in the studio and 60 were at 22 remote television sites. In 2004, when one of the professors had moved to the University of South Carolina, we again surveyed our distance learning classes. This time, we had 75 students in the school nance television class and seven in the studio class at Ball State.
At South Carolina, we had 64 in the televised sections of school law and leadership
theory and 35 students in the studio sections of those courses. The purpose of the identical surveys in both years was to see if there were diering points of view regarding the questioning format, attendance, and assessment procedures between the studio groups and the groups at the remote sites and whether there were any changes in opinion between the survey conducted in 2002 and the one done in 2004. We also wanted to collect data regarding any technological problems and information about the students themselves and their backgrounds. The survey for the research study was added to an evaluation form so that all students would complete the survey. The results were not given to us until after nal grades were submitted. Proctors at the remote sites distributed surveys to the students to complete onsite and then mailed them back to the o ce for scoring.
Thus, every student in attendance completed a survey.
The research questions addressed in the
study were as follows: (a) What was the prior experience with television classes?, (b) How did students accept the practice of not being able to ask questions anytime they wished?, (c) Did students feel that attendance should be taken in these large classes?, (d) Did the students like the testing method used for them?, and (e) Were there major technological problems?. Results and Discussion Distance learning has become more popular with students in general and with educational leadership students in particular. We wanted to see if this was true with our students, and we wanted to see to what extent they had prior experience with television classes.
Also, it is possible that the attitude of the on-
campus students towards the o-campus arrangements (taking time for attendance, discussing technological problems, etc.)
could be aected if they had also utilized these o-campus classes in the past.
We also
wanted to know the experience that the educational leadership students had previously had with television classes to see how popular this format was for educational leadership students (see Table 1). Table 1
While the majority of students in both 2002 groups had prior experience with television classes, less
10
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
than 14% of either group had four or more courses. In 2004, over 52% of both groups had taken four or more courses by television before taking the courses that were surveyed.
This is a large increase in the
participation of students in distance education, and looking at the individual counts for the two universities (not shown here), this increase is evident for both places and from both groups of studentsstudio and o-campus students. The gures show that over half of these students are taking, at the minimum, their fth television course. Thus, whatever problems the students may have encountered, they continue to take courses with this delivery format. It should be noted that the studio students have taken the same number of courses via television (except this course).This may help explain why the majority of on-campus students were generally understanding of interruptions from o-campus sites, as shown in later results. Technology enabled students at the remote sites to push a button to dial in to talk to the professor during class. When someone dialed in, a beep would sound in the studio classroom indicating that someone was calling. In discussing live television classes with other instructors, we were told that one common problem was that the students would call in without warning (unlike students raising their hands in class) and interrupt the ow of the class for all the other students and the instructor. In 2002, both of us told students that they could only call in to ask questions during designated question and answer times. Since this waiting for permission to ask questions was so dierent from the usual graduate classroom routine, we wondered how the students would accept this new procedure. In our 2002 classes, the students cooperated and did not call into the studio until we asked for questions or until we called on students to call in to answer questions. In the earlier survey, we asked the students for their opinion on this no call-in rule. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 2. Table 2
The 2002 results indicated that 82.1% of the studio students said that this rule was reasonable due to the class size, and 83.5% of the remote site students agreed. In 2004, the same rule was in place for the Ball State students (but was not used in South Carolina). The Ball State students at the remote sites responded in a manner similar to the students two years ago, with 81.3% saying that the rule was a good one because of the class size. However, in the studio, only 57.1% said that they agreed with this rule in 2004, possibly due to the small number in the studio (n=7), as one or two students were not happy that they could not get immediate responses from the instructor like they could in a traditional class. (They had been told that they would be treated like the remote-site students, having to wait for a designated time to ask questions.) Since phone calls that came from the remote sites would make a buzzing noise, the studio students were asked if they were bothered by these call-ins. Findings indicated that, in 2002, 66.7% of the campus students said that it never bothered them, and 30.6% said that it sometimes bothered them. In 2004, 85.7% of the campus students stated that they were never bothered by the call-ins, with 14.3% saying that it sometimes bothered them. One assumption may be that with students taking more and more television courses, they have become used to the call-ins. The size of the classes meant that attendance took longer. The students were asked whether it was still appropriate to take attendance in these large classes. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 3. Table 3
11
In the studio class, in 2002, 76.7% said that attendance should be taken, while 56.0% of the remote-site students felt that taking attendance was appropriate. In 2004, the percentages declined: 42.9% of the studio students said that attendance should be taken, with 32.4% of the remote-site students agreeing. Another change was the way in which the educational leadership students were tested. two options that did not require students to come to campus.
There were
We could use the usual pencil and paper
examination and mail them to the remote sites where a proctor would supervise the exams and return them by mail, or we could put the exams on the Internet and students could take them by computer. In 2002, both methods of testing were used.
The students in the school nance class were given the
written exams, and the students in the principalship class were tested by computer.
When the students
were asked whether they preferred the way they were examined or whether they would prefer the alternate method, students in both classes preferred the way they were tested, even though they were tested in dierent ways. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 4. Table 4
For the studio class taking a paper test ( nance class), 100% said that they would prefer a paper test; for the o-campus students taking a paper test, 79.5% said that they liked that method. For the studio classes that completed exams on computer (principalship class), 68.2% said that they would prefer the computer for taking exams; for the o-campus students taking the computer test, 91.9% said that they would prefer that method. This seems to suggest that either way is acceptable to students. Since access to computers was the same for all students and since paper tests could have been used for all students, it seems that students simply preferred what was given to them. In 2004, all students were tested using written tests, and they were asked whether they would prefer taking their exams that way or whether they would prefer tests on a computer. For the studio students, 69.0% said that they would prefer the way they had been testedby written exams. For those at the remote sites, 66.9% said that they would have preferred to have been tested by computer rather than by written exams. We also surveyed the students about technology problems. Students attending class in the studio were not required to use telephones or to ask questions, and they did not need to utilize the television technology to view or hear the professor.
If any studio students had been adverse to technology, it would not have
12
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
aected their class. For o-campus students, however, bad weather could cause major problems with both the telephones and television technology. When asked about problems with the audio and/or video, 59.7% of the 2004 o-site students said that the system worked all the time, 38.1% said that it sometimes did not work but was not a problem, and 1.4% said that it did not work a lot of the time and was a problem for them. While these gures were a slight improvement over 2002, it should be remembered that one of the sites changed from Ball State to South Carolina. Still, it was reassuring to know that nearly 98% felt that they did not have a real problem with the television technology. Students at the remote sites could call in for attendance or questions/answers on a phone system by pushing a button on a special phone at their site. This phone system worked all the time for 66.9% of the students in 2004, did not work sometimes but was not a problem for 27.3%, and did not work a lot of the time and was a problem for 2.9% of the students.
As noted earlier, students were given a regular phone
number to call into the television studio director's o ce and report problems with their special phones or problems with the television system. The director then noti ed us during the class and noted whether this was an isolated case or whether there were other sites that were having problems. Although 46.8% of the students did call into the studio to report technical problems, previously mentioned ndings indicate that their outages were not considered a problem for most of them. O-campus students were asked if they ever had to order tapes/videostreaming of the presentations because of technical problems. The responses (2004) indicated that 10.1% ordered one tape or videostreaming, 2.9% ordered more than one tape/videostreaming, and 86.3% did not have to order any recordings of the classes. Again, it appears that technical problems, though present at times, were not a major problem for the vast majority of the students, and there were provisions made for those who did have problems. Previous researchers have sometimes stated that females had more problems with technology than males, and we wanted to see if females tended to take the on-campus class or the o-campus class or whether there was any dierence in their choices. We also wanted to know what percentage of the students were classroom teachers and how many students taking these administrative courses were already school administrators. Finally, since recruitment of students is important to a department's survival, we wanted to know if we had students in our classes who were actually in programs at other universities and took our courses for convenience. Questions were asked to gather student information about gender and position. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 5. Table 5
In 2004, the studio class was 35.7% female, while the o-campus students were 51.8% female.
In the
studio class in 2004, 71.4% of the students were classroom teachers, and 14.3% were school administrators. At the remote sites in 2004, 79.1% were teachers, with 18.0% stating that they were administrators. In 2002 we noted that females did select the on-campus class more than the o-campus sites. This was reversed in
13
2004, so no conclusions can be made about selection of sites by gender. The reasons the students chose a particular method of course delivery was also an area of inquiry. The studio students were asked if they would have preferred to have taken the course o campus instead of coming to the studio.
Although in 2004, 11.9% said that this was sometimes true, 85.7% stated that it
was never true (a change from 30.6% and 69.4% in 2002, but similar if added together). The students who completed the course o campus did not have to pay student fees (recreation, library use, sports and musical tickets, etc.)
and only paid tuition for the three-hour graduate course.
Students on campus had to pay
the full tuition and fees amount. When we asked the o-campus students the advantage of taking a course on television, 93.5% said that it was for convenience. An important question for the o-campus students was the following: Considering the advantages and the disadvantages of a television course, would you take another one if it was something that you needed and it was at a convenient site? Responses indicated that 97.8% would take another televised course. Clearly, the advantages outweighed the disadvantages for these students. Conclusions Distance education experience was more evident in the 2004 survey. The no-call-in rule was considered reasonable by the students, and most of the on-campus students were not bothered by the phones. Taking attendance took quite a bit of class time, and students at both sites wished that taking attendance could be reduced or eliminated. There were problems with the technology, but these problems were not major for most students. Students who had no prior degrees from these two universities took the television courses, pointing out potential recruitment bene ts of this method of instruction. When asked the reason that ocampus students completed the course by television, the overwhelming reason was the convenience of driving to a nearby site instead of traveling to campus. The results were positive for our o-campus students and technology-based leadership development. The o-campus students received the same instruction as campus students for a lower cost, with no major technological problems, and at a convenient location. The on-campus students seemed to accept the various technological requirements necessary for our o-campus students.
For school district leaders considering
technology-based leadership development, the results are encouraging. References Jones, D. R., & Pritchard, A. L. (1999). Realizing the virtual university. Educational Technology, 39(5), 56-59. Kelly, M. (1990). Course creation issues in distance education. In Education at a distance: From issues to practice (pp. 77-99). Malabar, FL: Krieger. Lamb, A. C., & Smith, W. L. (2000). Ten facts of life for distance learning courses. Tech Trends, 44(1), 12-15. Sharp, W. L., & Cox, E. P. (2003).
Distance learning: A comparison of classroom students with o-
campus television students. The Journal of Technology Studies, 29(1), 29-34. Sinn, J. W. (2004). Electronic course delivery in higher education: Promise and challenge. The Journal of Technology Studies, 30(1), 24-28. Souder, W. E. (1993).
The eectiveness of traditional vs.
satellite delivery in three management of
technology master's degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7(1), 37-53. Stammen, R., & Schmidt, M. (2001). Basic understanding for developing distance education for online instruction. NASSP Bulletin, 85(628), 47-50. Swan, M. K., & Jackman, D. H. (2000). Comparing the success of students enrolled in distance education courses vs. face-to-face classrooms. The Journal of Technology Studies, 26(1), 58-63. Weigel, T. (2000). E-Learning: The tradeo between richness and research in higher education. Change, 33(5), 10-15.
14
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
1.3 Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning
22
1.3.1 What to Do?
Figure 1.1: Perpetual Motion Machine, Created by Karl Leitzel, Penn State World Campus
Eective online instructors challenge their students' thinking and foster active, constructive participation in learning.
1.3.2 How to Do It? •
Emphasize the importance of learning by playing an active role in the learning process, not from direct instruction or lecture as in a traditional classroom.
• •
Provide opportunities for the students to critically critique and/or re ect upon certain course topics. Encourage your students to use the Internet for researching on course topics; however, remind them to be critical about the information they will share with peers. (For more information, see Intellectual Property Guidelines module
•
23 )
Encourage your students to be proactive in their learning by doing the following:
· · · ·
Regularly logging into course site Submitting assignments on time Completing quizzes within required timeframe Reading messages posted and replying within required timeframe
This content is available online at
15
· •
Cooperating with teammates, etc.
Provide opportunities for your students to be actively involved in information seeking and problem solving.
• •
Provide opportunities for your students to interact, to collaborate, or to review a peer's work. Encourage your students to participate in online discussions actively by:
·
Designing thought-provoking discussion questions: see Crafting Questions for Online Discussions
24
from ITS
· ·
Encouraging students to respond to questions at a deeper level Using discussion forums eectively by posting messages that weave several strands of conversation into a summarization that may prompt people to pursue the topic further" (Berge, 1995)
· •
Pointing out opposing perspectives, dierent directions, or con icting opinions" (Berge, 1995)
Use dierent discussion formats listed below to cultivate students' critical thinking (MacKnight 2000, p40.):
· · · ·
Small group discussions Buzz group: two people discussing for a short period of time Case discussions using real-world problems for analysis and suggested solutions Debating teams wherein students present ideas, defend positions, and argue against opposition's reasoning
· · •
Jigsaw groups where subgroups discuss various parts of a topic and report to the others Role play mocking real settings
For more information about facilitating online discussions, please see Ten Tips for Generating Engaged Online Discussions
•
25 by Donna Reiss.
For more information about self-regulated learning components, please go to Encourage Students to Regulate Their Own Learning Module
26
1.3.3 Why Do It? It is critical to understand the pedagogical potential of online learning for providing active and dynamic learning opportunities for learners.
Faculty can employ strategies and activities that
will engage students in `producing learning' (Barr & Tagg, 1995) for active learning (Vonderwell & Turner, 2005, p.66).
"Learning occurs in a social context through collaborating, negotiating, debating, peer reviewing, and mentoring; Collaboration requires a level of re ection that promotes knowledge construction and a deep understanding of the subject matter (Grabinger & Dunlap, 2000).
1.3.4 References Berge, Z.L. (1995). Facilitating Computer Conferencing: Recommendations From the Field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22-30. Grabinger, R.S. & Dunlap, J.C. (2000). Rich environments for active learning: A de nition. In Squires, D., Conole, G. & Jacobs, G. (Eds.). The changing face of learning technology (pp.8-38). Cardi, Wales, UK, University of Wales. MacKnight, C.B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. EduCause Quarterly, 4, 38-41
http://tlt.its.psu.edu/suggestions/online_questions/ http://www.wordsworth2.net/activelearning/ecacdiscustips.htm "Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Encourage Students to Regulate Their Own Learning"
16
CHAPTER 1.
Vonderwell, S. & Turner, S. (2005).
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
Active learning and preservice teachers' experiences in an online
course: A case study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 65-84
Chapter 2
Mentorship and Leadership Practices 2.1 A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs
Note:
1
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Purpose of Study This paper studies the need for leadership development programs to integrate elements of social and political acumen. In the course of the study, the role of mentorship was identi ed as an essential element of any leadership program.
2.1.1 De nition of Dynamic Educational Leadership As de ned in this study, the essence of dynamic leadership is to support and facilitate positive initiatives and change. It is the dynamic leader who creates an environment for change that enables and supports progress and evolution. Because the leader's role is one that encompasses human relationships and exists within an organizational structure, this study has identi ed social and political acumen as important elements that support the essence of dynamic leadership. Review of the Literature Review of the literature on educational leadership supports this de nition of dynamic leadership and the need for the leader to understand and integrate social and political acumen in order to achieve dynamic leadership. Today, the dynamic educational leader is responsible for more than meeting expected standards.
As
a dynamic leader, the principal is accountable for ensuring that eective teaching and learning occur in a learning community (Robertson & Webber, 2002; Shellard, 2003). To ensure that this happens, the dynamic
1
This content is available online at
18
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
educational leader must possess the skills and knowledge that support the evolution and growth of this learning community (Czaja, Livingston Prouty & Lowe, 1998; Mitchell & Sackney, 2001). For educational leaders to be dynamic, therefore, they need to be able to support and implement change that enhances eective teaching and learning and has ongoing bene t for the student (Lieberman & Miller, 1999). Dynamic educational leaders need to ensure that there is a structure in place that supports eective teaching and learning, and allows productive change to occur (Dimmock, 1996; Tomlinson & Allan, 2000). This structure must involve the engagement of students, sta, and parents within that community (Lambert, 2003).
In order for educational leaders to be able to support and enhance these structures in a dynamic
manner, they require particular skills and knowledge (Reynolds & Stoll, 1996). These skills need to include the abilities:
• • • • • •
to build a sense of community (Deal & Peterson, 1999), to create a sense of ownership (Kouzes & Posner 1999), to establish shared vision and values (Sergiovanni, 2000), to provide insights, identify strengths and areas for growth (Reiss, 2007), to empower, enable, and build capacity (Lambert, 1998, 2003), to implement strategies that share knowledge with others to ensure evolution of the system (Luna & Cullen, 1995).
The knowledge of the leader requires:
• • • • •
understanding good pedagogy (Tomlinson & Allan, 2000), being familiar with local and global in uences (Courchene, 2001), recognizing innovations that positively impact teaching and learning (Manzer, 1994), identifying the elements that support eective leadership (Fullan, 2003, 2006; Goleman et al, 2002), comprehending the strategies that build leadership capacity (Lambert, 2003) and leadership density (Chenoweth & Everhart, 2002).
Many elements impact the culture of the teacher and learner. These involve in uences at a local level that include students, sta, and parents. Yet they also involve in uences at a more global level that re ect the needs of society. It is essential that leaders understand the necessity to understand and think proactively as a leader (Gardner, 2007). In addition, culture is subject to change due to political and social in uences (Manzer, 1994). In fact, there is a direct connection between the identi ed needs and changes in society and the expectations of the educational leader (Evans, 2000). The primary responsibility of educational leaders, therefore, is to ensure that their learning communities are functioning eectively (Shellard, 2003; Robertson & Webber, 2002) within the local and global spheres (Manzer, 1994). Whereas the expectation of the educational leader is clear, the attitudes held about educational leaders are not always unambiguous. The structure of our society involves formal and informal leaders. Aristotle's (322 BC/1986) discussion of the need for society to function with leaders is still valid. Although society recognizes this, there is at the same time an attitude of cynicism and skepticism regarding leaders' motives. In addition, increased democratization has increased society's expectations of educational leaders (Manzer, 1994). The role of accountability has increased at local and more global levels. There is an expectation that parents need to be able to exercise their rights as primary educators of their children and to play a signi cant role in the educational decision-making process (Devereaux, 2000). At the same time, there is a public expectation that the costs involved in education are an investment and that bene ts and pro ts for society must result (Mandel, 2000). Diverse in uences have impacted the pro le of the dynamic educational leader and resulted in the leader needing to be more than an instructional leader of a community of learners (Dufour, 2002). These in uences include new understandings about teaching and learning, as well as societal and political elements. Educational leaders need to stay informed about the political structure and expectations of education (Roher & Wormwell, 2000). If educational leaders are to function in a dynamic manner, they need to be able to meet the needs of their culture and, at the same time, work within the organizational structure at all levels (McBride & Shields, 1997).
19
All of this has implications for leadership development programs. It is important that such programs recognize the complex elements involved in dynamic educational leadership. Plans for leadership development, therefore, need to include the diverse elements that in uence and compose the pro le of the educational leader.
Extending and evolving leaders' knowledge about pedagogy must be an essential part of leader-
ship development. In addition, leadership development needs to increase leaders' understanding of societal in uences and the impact they have on how leaders ful ll their roles and responsibilities. Educational leaders need to understand the heightened political reality in which they function. Concerns regarding education are often the center of attention for the media and politicians and they are a focus of government planning and budgeting.
This attention to education has meant that education and the
educational leader are forefront in the public eye. Consequently, educational leaders need to understand the political context if they are to function eectively (Kneebone & McKenzie, 1996). Indeed, the political context of education is unavoidable. Government, at a local and more global level, envisions education as a platform to achieve its goals. This results in education being shaped and in uenced by social and political factors. Leaders, therefore, need to have the skills and knowledge to understand the societal and political in uences on the structure within which they work. They need to be con dent about their ability to meet the needs of the individual student and at the same time meet the social and political expectations of their educational structures. Indeed, a school leader lives in a shbowl (Figure 1).
Figure 2.1
Figure 1. Fishbowl Existence of the Educational Leader Role of Social Acumen An important element of the dynamic leader's ability to build productive relationships is the possession of social acumen that supports eective communication and relationships. Indeed, there is a close connection between eective communication skills and productive relationships (Gladwell, 2002; Villiani, 2006). It is essential, therefore, that leaders develop skillful communication if they are to be dynamic leaders. These skills
20
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
require the leader to understand the signi cance of making connections (Wheatley, 2000). It is also essential that the leader understand how to support a strong culture (Deal & Peterson, 1999; Hesselbein, 2002), facilitate eective team dynamic (Lambert, 1998), and build a shared vision (Sergiovanni, 2000). In addition, the dynamic leader needs to hone the con ict-management skills that ensure functioning relationships (Fisher & Ury, 1991; Stone, Patton, & Heen, 1999). Particularly, the eective use of one-on-one communications, dialogue, group interaction, and the written word is essential for the dynamic educational leader. The success and failure of leaders can directly relate to problems with communication skills (Spady & Schwahn, 2001).
These skills, however, include more than verbal and written communication.
Body
language, eye contact, interpretation of body posture and even clothing can make a dierence to the delivery and interpretation of communication (Dyer & Carothers, 2000). Dynamic leaders need to be able to communicate that they are operating with a shared vision and values (Aristotle 322 BC/1986; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1986).
It is not enough to have a shared vision; the
leader must also be able to articulate this shared vision. By communicating a sense of shared vision and values, the leader is able to create a sense of shared ownership. This common base strengthens relationships and contributes to a positive culture that is productive and this will support dynamic leadership. In particular, the leader's communication of values and vision needs to be transparent, authentic, and consistent with decisions and action (Evans, 2000; Leithwood, 2002). Successful leadership involves establishing a sense of shared values. It is important, therefore, that leaders are able to communicate the value base from which they operate and understand the value base of others (Lambert, 2003). The dynamic leader is able to take this shared value base and use it as a means to bring about change and contribute positively to society. Role of Political Acumen Much educational leadership supports the need for dynamic leaders to know how to use the structure within which they operated (Bolman & Deal, 2002; Deal & Peterson, 1999; Fullan, 2000, 2006). In this study I refer to this knowledge and skill as political acumen. Aristotle (322 BC/1986) de ned politics as the interactions of a group of human beings who strive to attain certain standards.
Because educational leaders need to interrelate with many dierent people
at many dierent levels, their work by necessity involves politics.
In fact, there is a distinctive political
element of educational leaders' roles because they are working with individuals and groups within local and global spheres that involve organizational structures (Bolman & Deal, 2002). By knowing the role of this organizational structure, dynamic educational leaders can understand and use the power of relationships to in uence, persuade, and impact action. Due to the fact that educational leaders are an integral part of the social organization, they are therefore an integral part of the political process (Manzer, 1994). The dynamic leader, who strives to attain progress through high standards, needs to understand and embrace this political dimension of leadership. Making Connections Ignoring the political aspects of leadership is unproductive and damages the potential of the leader's role. Consequently, it is important that educational leaders understand such factors and possess the knowledge and ability to work eectively within these political parameters. The political acumen to build a network at micro and macro levels will support dynamic leaders in eectively ful lling their roles. Educational leaders must therefore understand the iterative and interactive role that they must play in their connections with the elements that make up the organizational structures at local and global levels.
In particular, these
connections depend on productive relationships. The skills involved in political acumen will support dynamic educational leaders in maintaining productive relationships that sustain the systemic structure within which they operate. Through understanding how connections function within the structure of the system, dynamic leaders are able to sustain the system (Senge et al., 1999). This requires leaders to be politically aware at all levels and to understand the relevance of relationships within the structure.
In fact, dynamic leaders also need organizational skills to make the
necessary changes to sustain relationships and the system. Understanding the structure within which educational leaders exist will support leaders in ful lling their roles and responsibilities in a dynamic manner.
Such understanding brings insight and a greater level of
21
awareness regarding the in uences on the leaders' positions.
The ability to make connections within the
structure in which leaders work will enhance relationships that support a productive network and allow leaders to function at a more optimum level of capacity. Research Method In this study I aimed to understand the nature of dynamic educational leadership and the role of social and political acumen in supporting dynamic leadership. A further aim of the study was to make deductions from this understanding of leadership in relation to planning and implementing leadership development programs. In order to achieve this aim, an attempt has been made in the research component to examine the role of social and political acumen in the educational leadership of a speci c group of school principals. The focus of the research study, therefore, was to explore an identi ed group of dynamic principals' experiences as leaders and explore the structure of the consciousness of their experiences. Because the study involved human exploration, the exibility of qualitative research techniques (Cresswell, 1998) supported the investigation.
Qualitative techniques in collecting and analyzing the data from the research provided the
ability to guide the investigation and interpret the data to support the purpose of this study. For this reason, the analysis of the data collected from this group of principals, involved mostly qualitative techniques that were supported by some quantitative analysis. Analysis of the data aimed at identifying an understanding of the role of social and political acumen in the reality of dynamic educational leaders ful lling their roles and responsibilities. In addition, the research aimed at identifying the extent to which social and political acumen were essential invariant elements of these principals' leadership. The research component provided the participants the opportunity to provide their views about what characteristics of leadership support dynamic leadership.
In addition, the participants
were able to provide their views on appropriate leadership development activities. In the analysis of the research data, therefore, the invariant elements and structure within which these principals functioned were identi ed. The analysis also included an assessment of how these elements re ected this group of principals' development and exercise of social and political acumen and the research participants' views on leadership development in general and their leadership development in particular. The quantitative component of the analysis investigated whether there was any relationship between these leaders' understanding of the signi cance of the role of social and political acumen in eective leadership and their exercise of social and political acumen. In addition, the analysis investigated the relevance of these principals' experiences in leadership development and their exercise of social and political acumen. Selection of the Participants Two school districts from Alberta, Canada that included schools in rural and urban areas agreed to participate in the research and collection of data. After ful lling each school district's research application process, I requested nominations for identi ed dynamic leaders from the three hundred school communities in these two districts. School stas and parents from the two selected school districts were invited to nominate a principal who ful lled one or more of the following descriptors of a dynamic leader. These criteria included:
• • •
Principals who had successfully implemented a change or initiative. Principals whose style of leadership had increased the capacity of those with whom they work. Principals whose communication and interpersonal skills had improved the culture of the school environment.
• •
Principals who had eectively created an environment in which others were successful. Principals who were dynamic for other reasons.
Survey I communicated with the thirty- ve nominees, explained the purpose of my research, and requested that they respond to a survey.
The questions in the survey focused on their leadership experience, their
understanding of the role of social and political acumen in their leadership, their ideas about the role of social and political acumen in leadership in general, and their participation in leadership development. The questions were grouped according to subject of content. scale.
Responses to the survey involved a Likert
A pretest to test for internal consistency was carried out with ve principals from another school
district. The pretest indicated the need to group questions under number and then letter, rather than in
22
CHAPTER 2.
a long series of numbers.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Also, the pretest indicated the need to use bold lettering for emphasis.
These
revisions were included in the nal survey that was distributed to the thirty- ve nominated principals. Follow-up communication with the nominated principals was used to ensure maximum level of participation. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was used in completing the report on the data from the surveys. Face-to-Face Interviews Eight nominated leaders from each of the school districts were randomly selected for face-to-face interviews. Two additional senior high principals were randomly chosen from the group of junior high and senior high principals to provide a better balance of elementary, junior high, and senior high principals' involvement in the interview part of the research. The nal total of 10 principals represented:
• • • • •
three senior high school principals, two junior high school principals, ve elementary school principals, ve male principals, ve female principals.
Focus Group The ten principals who participated in the face-to-face interviews were invited to participate in the focus group, which in the end was composed of ve of these principals. I provided supper for the focus group and we ate as we talked. This helped to provide a convivial atmosphere for our meeting. Topics for the focus group involved discussion statements about the role of social and political acumen in leadership and further development of the questions included in the survey and the face-to-face interviews. The focus group questions made a speci c connection to each principal's individual experiences. Questions also probed how leadership development programs might support leaders in their exercise of social and political acumen. There was also an opportunity, however, for open discussion about their perceptions of what social and political acumen contribute to dynamic leadership and leadership in general. The focus-group session lasted 1 hour and 45 minutes, and it was taped and transcribed. Observational notes were made immediately after the focus group and summaries and charts were made from the transcript and the observation notes. As the moderator of the focus group, I had the opportunity to help guide the discussion. Krueger (1988) described this role as facilitating multiple interactions amongst the participants in the group. Through open-ended questions, individuals in the group were encouraged to communicate their opinions about their own exercise of social and political acumen. These questions also led to discussion about the role of social and political acumen in general in educational leadership. Artifacts In addition, artifacts regarding leadership, leadership requirements, and leadership development were gathered and analyzed from the two selected school districts.
These included information for potential
administrators; professional development plans for educational leaders, and the sta ng descriptors and criteria for administrative applications.
Content analysis of the artifacts was made through categorizing,
coding, and identifying speci c characteristics (Cresswell, 1998). Results from the Research Three hundred schools from two school districts were involved in the research study. Nomination forms were sent to the sta and school council of each school. From these schools, a total of 35 principals were nominated as dynamic leaders. These nominated principals were then sent a letter explaining the research study and their nomination. They also received a letter of informed consent that asked them to agree to participate in the study and respond to the survey. Thirty surveys were returned completed. From the 35 principals nominated, every fourth one was requested to participate in a face-to-face interview. This group of eight consisted of ve elementary principals, two junior high principals, and one senior high principal. From the group of junior high and senior high principals remaining, two were randomly chosen to increase representation beyond the elementary level.
This resulted in two additional senior high principals being
included in the group. All 10 principals agreed to participate in face-to-face interviews, and the 10 principals interviewed were invited to participate in a focus group. All were willing to participate, but because of time commitments, only 5 of the 10 principals nally participated in the focus group. In addition, artifacts from
23
the two school districts that related to the principal's role were reviewed in relation to the exercise of social and political acumen. Summary of Artifacts The leadership artifacts from the school districts involved in the research study were reviewed for content that related to leaders' social and political acumen. This included information that related to an application for leadership development programs, the content of leadership development programs, an application for school administration, and the criteria for the pro le of the school principal. From the analysis a commonality identi ed in all of the districts' artifacts was a focus on the need for the educational leader to be an instructional leader. These artifacts did not refer speci cally to social and political acumen, nor did they identify the need for leaders to possess social and political acumen. They did, however, refer to some of the skills and attributes that this study has identi ed as elements of social and political acumen. The artifacts indicated that the principal competencies needed to include more than instructional leadership. The competencies outlined in these school districts' artifacts recognized the need for principals as leaders to:
2.1.2 foster learning, 2.1.3 engage people, 2.1.4 resolve issues, 2.1.5 manage con ict, 2.1.6 organize work, 2.1.7 possess critical inquiry, 2.1.8 communicate eectively, 2.1.9 promote cooperation between school and community, 2.1.10 build vision and shared commitments, 2.1.11 optimize resources, 2.1.12 facilitate change, 2.1.13 optimize systemic thinking. All of these elements re ected the de nitions in this study for leaders' exercise of social and political acumen. That is, leaders must have the ability to function with eective interpersonal and communication skills, as well as the ability to know how to function within the micro and macro structures within which they exist. There were also speci c references in the artifacts to systems thinking and operating within the district's governance model.
There was not, however, a signi cant focus on the leader's development of political
acumen. It is interesting to note that a review of the districts' artifacts had a more direct focus on the need for leaders' personal attributes to re ect social acumen and a lesser focus on the attributes that this study connects with political acumen. Some of the attributes included:
• • • •
professional knowledge, critical thinking, team orientation, community orientation,
24
CHAPTER 2.
•
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
personal qualities (integrity, respect for others, collaboration, courage, intuition, creativeness, risk taking),
• • • •
responsibility for personal learning, problem-solving abilities, con ict-management abilities, system orientation.
Summary of Survey Results
2.1.14 Although the study was in general a qualitative study, the use of quantitative data supported the overall ndings of the research. The quantitative element of the research involved analysis of a survey that included a number of multiple-choice sections involving a Likert scale. The data from these questions were analyzed through use of Open O ce and R[U+2011]Language, Version 1.7.1. Quantitative analysis was also used to identify these principals' opinions about the role of leadership development in their exercise of social and political acumen. Pearson Chi-square test was used to determine whether there was a relationship between the success of a group of identi ed dynamic principals and their exercise of social and political acumen. The Pearson Chi-square test was used because it determines whether there was a relationship other than chance. In fact, this test tells the strength of the association between two variables, as well as the probability of any association being due to chance factors (Neuman, 2000). The results from the survey did indicate that there was a connection beyond that of chance in the principals' responses regarding the connection between their exercise of their skills involving social and political acumen and their belief that eective leaders needed to possess these skills. Some of the results of the Chi-square data included:
2.1.15 cultural leadership:p-value = 0.0423 2.1.16 instructional leadership:p-value = 0.0234 2.1.17 understanding political dimensions beyond the school: p-value = 0.012 •
political acumen:p-value = 0.0137
The data analysis of the survey indicated that communication skills, interpersonal skills, and social acumen were most highly regarded by the principals as contributors to their leadership and necessary to educational leadership in general. The data did not indicate any speci c skill that these principals thought was necessary for leadership but that they did not possess. Indeed, the skills that the principals identi ed as necessary for leadership were also the skills that these principals believed they possessed at varying levels. The skills that the principals identi ed as important for eective leadership were all skills involving social and political acumen. The data therefore reinforced this study's premise that social and political acumen are integral to leadership development programs. In addition, the data supported the idea that leadership development is important for leaders and has the potential to support leaders' exercise of social and political acumen. An implication for leadership development is the need to ensure that the skills identi ed as necessary by these principals should be part of leadership programs; this is discussed in the implications section of this study. Summary of Face-to-Face Interviews All of the transcripts clearly re ected the principals' articulation of their commitment to ful ll their role in an eective way. They also re ected a group of people who had a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities as leaders. These principals were able to talk about the challenges of their positions but also
25
the joy and satisfaction that their leadership roles gave them. There was a clear indication that social and political acumen are integral to leadership. In addition, it was evident that these principals believed that leadership development plays an important role in supporting leaders and should involve the development of social and political acumen. In particular, the transcripts indicated that mentors played a signi cant role in the lives of all these principals and should be a part of leadership development programs. Summary of the Focus Group It was exciting to watch the dynamic of the focus group. The participants were obviously building on each other's comments. There was a sense of the concepts and ideas evolving as the discussion progressed. This group pro led as a highly committed and enthusiastic group of leaders, and their comments re ected a high level of involvement in their own growth as leaders and their sense of responsibility to support and mentor other leaders. In addition, there was clear evidence of a common belief that their rst responsibility was to their own community but that they also needed social and political acumen to be systemically aligned. All of the members talked about the need to be able to take risks as leaders, but these risks need to be intelligent risks. They agreed that the eective exercise of social and political acumen by the leader would support success in this area. In particular, they emphasized the need for leadership development to recognize the intertwining nature of the exercise of social and political acumen. All of the participants in the focus group talked about the need to be able to ful ll the role and responsibilities of leader and agreed that the eective exercise of social and political acumen supported being a successful leader. They discussed the fact that social and political acumen have become a greater necessity for the eective leader.
Indeed, the entire group was committed to the idea that leadership development
can support a leader's development of social and political acumen.
There was agreement that leadership
development should give leaders a heads up on the expectations of leadership so that the leader understands how to develop social and political acumen. Also, however, all ve of the participants expressed concerns that leadership development should authentically meet the needs of potential and seasoned leaders and that it should be ongoing. They also agreed that leadership development programs should recognize talent and develop talent and that there needed to be a process for self-re ection. In addition, all members of the focus group believed that the role of mentor was key to the success of leaders and that mentors should be trained to support leaders in their development and exercise of social and political acumen. There was a general concern that there should be enough time allocated for the mentorship relationship and that this should be a structured part of leadership programs. This re ects Young, Sheets and Knight's work of 2005 when they emphasize the need for principals and mentors to have time to observe, question and re ect. There was also a consensus in the group that leaders' exercise of social and political acumen can be supported through formal and informal networking with colleagues.
The entire group agreed that such
networking should also be part of the structure of leadership development programs. The focus group participants' willingness to share experiences, opinions, and ideas meant that the discussion was rich and productive. Members of the group often initiated questions or probed other members for more details. This meant that the ow of discussion did not require or closely follow the focus group interview questions at all times. On the other hand, it also meant that there was a natural dynamic within the group that allowed the members to share their personal experiences. Indeed, the focus group further developed the information gained from the survey and the face-to-face interviews. Throughout the focus group discussion there was a high level of synergy. The fact that there were only ve participants in the focus group encouraged all members to participate. At the same time, this limited number may have contributed to the commonality of opinion and may not have nurtured the expression of more diverse opinions and ideas. Nevertheless, there were numerous insightful comments about the role of the leader:
•
All of the experiences I have had in life and the people that I crossed paths with have made a dierence to how I lead.
•
Principals should be asked what are the areas of growth they need to focus on and these should be included in the leadership development program.
26
CHAPTER 2.
•
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
If you can't rise to the challenge of exercising social and political acumen, then you're not ready to be a principal.
•
You have to be able to function with people because the system is made up of people, and social and political acumen will help this.
•
I have worked in a remote community where social acumen was more important.
Then I moved to
a larger urban district where I was closer to central o ce, and it meant the need for more political acumen.
• •
It is a concern that if once you are a leader you do not participate in leadership development. A real growth for me was the timing of nishing my master's degree. . . . I could count on one of my strong mentors. I would get constructive criticism or feedback that wouldn't veil it in soft terms.
•
It is worth investing time and energy into leadership development programs and they should share the internal expertise.
Summary of the Triangulation of Data All of the principals recognized the importance of the exercise of social acumen in eective leadership and, at the same time, displayed a high level of con dence in their ability to successfully exercise social acumen.
The triangulation of data indicated that these principals had mixed feelings about the role of
political acumen in educational leadership and did not exhibit a high level of con dence in their exercise of political acumen. Common in all of the research data was a clear indication that these principals were committed to ful lling their roles and responsibilities and that they enjoyed their positions as leaders. Implications for Leadership Development Programs Leadership development programs need to be planned and implemented to support dynamic leadership by providing leaders with opportunities to develop and hone the skills connected with the characteristics, attitudes, and actions associated with the nature of dynamic leadership (Figure 2).
The evolving nature
of dynamic leadership makes it essential that leadership development programs be constantly revised and updated.
In this way, leadership development can keep pace with the evolving nature of the educational
leaders' roles and responsibilities. It is also important that educational leaders' participation in leadership programs is ongoing and that they meet their immediate and future needs to support the skills and knowledge required by dynamic educational leaders.
27
Figure 2.2
2.1.17.1 Figure 2. Identi ed Components Required in Leadership Development Role of Mentors Other relevant information from the research component was the fact that the role of the mentor was regarded as an essential part of leaders being able to operate eectively. In fact, in all areas of the research, mentors were identi ed as contributing to leadership capacity.
Eight of the 30 principals referred to the
importance of the role of mentors in the open-ended questions. There was no question in the face-to-face interview relating to mentors, and as the interviewer I did not prompt or request a comment on mentors. Nevertheless, all 10 of the principals participating in the face-to-face interviews emphasized the role of mentors in their lives. In the focus group, I did discuss the feedback from the face-to-face interviews in order to discuss in depth the focus group's perception of the role of mentors.
All members of the focus group
agreed that the role of mentors had great signi cance in their lives and that it is essential for leaders to have mentors in order to be able to build their capacity in exercising social and political acumen. The data from the face-to-face interviews and focus group also indicated that the role of the mentor was seen as an important factor contributing to and ensuring leadership density. This was regarded as important in an environment that has had a high turn over of administrators and few veteran administrators. The participants in the face-to-face interviews and focus group were concerned about the lack of validation
28
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
for informal mentors and the need for time to be designated to ensure that the mentor-mentoree relationship was successful (Figure 3). In addition, the focus group data indicated a need for adequate preparation and training of mentors. These factors need to be integrated when planning leadership development programs. ***SORRY, THIS MEDIA TYPE IS NOT SUPPORTED.*** Figure 3. Impact of role of mentor. The data from the research component were very much aligned with this study's conceptual and theoretical framework and the information cited from the leadership literature. From these data came very speci c recommendations regarding the skills and activities required to support the role of social and political acumen in dynamic educational leadership. The required skills for dynamic educational leadership identi ed in the research component include:
2.1.18 interpersonal relationships, 2.1.19 communication skills, 2.1.20 ability to share and enable a common vision, 2.1.21 ability to share and realize common values, 2.1.22 knowledge regarding the learning process, 2.1.23 ability to empower others, 2.1.24 ability to create a team, 2.1.25 ability to create a network, 2.1.26 understanding of the elements of the structure, 2.1.27 ability to work within the structure, 2.1.28 ability to see the big picture. The suggested leadership development activities identi ed in the research data (Figure 4) include:
2.1.29 practicum, 2.1.30 informal and formal networking opportunities, 2.1.31 sessions addressing self-identi ed needs, 2.1.32 book groups, 2.1.33 formal mentorship, 2.1.34 ongoing leadership development, 2.1.35 time for self-re ection. 2.1.36 The data also indicate that leadership development programs need to: • • • • • •
Build knowledge and hone skills related to social and political acumen. Support the role of mentors. Integrate postgraduate activities. Provide opportunities to build knowledge of self and others. Build knowledge of the elements of leadership. Involve the participants in the planning and implementation of leadership development.
29
As indicated, the data from the research component has signi cance for planning any leadership development program that will support the exercise of social and political acumen and therefore contribute to dynamic leadership. Concluding Comments This study supports the need for educational leaders' professional development to include elements of social and political acumen. The research data re ected the need for the educational leader to be able to exercise social and political acumen in order to function as a dynamic leader. Indeed, it is the combination of social and political acumen that enables leaders to function at a higher dynamic level. This study also stresses the necessity of ensuring that leaders understand the potential of leadership programs in supporting them and that they need to become engaged in the leadership development process. Leadership development, therefore, needs to be planned with the input from the participants, there needs to be opportunities for choice in development activities, and there needs to be guidance by the leadership development planners to ensure that the identi ed necessary aspects of leadership development are included. In particular, the data indicated the need for leadership development programs to involve the role of mentors and the integration of postgraduate activities to ensure that leadership development activities are eective, meaningful, and relevant for the participants. Leadership development should not involve knee-jerk planning that responds only to an immediate need. Rather, the research supported the idea that those developing leadership programs need to understand not only the needs of current reality, but also the needs of the future (Reiss, 2007; Stein, Schwan Smith, & Silver, 1999). In addition, leadership development program planners need to understand the backgrounds and abilities of those participating in these programs. To plan and implement eective leadership development, therefore, the planner needs to focus on the purpose of leadership development that will involve the short term and the long term (Guskey, 2000). In addition, the planners of leadership development need to understand and focus on the backgrounds, abilities, and requirements of the participants involved.
30
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Figure 2.3
Figure 4. Implications of Data for Leadership Development . Most importantly, leadership development programs will better engage the participants when these programs are planned in a consultative and collaborative manner with the participants. Components of leadership development programs need to support the exercise of social and political acumen; therefore, these components need to include knowledge and skill building to enhance the participants' social and political
31
acumen. There also needs to be a clear connection between the leadership development activities that enhance leaders' exercise of social and political acumen and the aim to support dynamic leadership meeting current needs. This study does not attempt to defend the concept of leadership; rather, it recognizes the reality of our world that needs leaders in order to function and evolve. Also recognized is the responsibility of individuals who assume leadership positions to ful ll their roles in a dynamic manner. introduce and/or facilitate initiatives and make changes that bring bene t.
This requires the leader to Certainly, the understanding
of what is bene cial is related to context and can change according to developments in societal ethos. In any case, it is the responsibility of the leader to develop an awareness and understanding of self, hone the necessary skills and knowledge related to leadership, and strive to ful ll the leadership role to make a dierence that is positive for the current reality. The dynamic leader will exercise social and political acumen to meet the needs of the present and support the direction of the future. As such the dynamic leader who exercises social and political acumen to make a positive dierence to education will have contributed to their immediate community and to the evolution of humanity. References Aristotle. (1986). Aristotle's politics (H. G. Apostle & L. P. Gerson, Trans.). Grinnell, IA: Peripatetic Press. (Original work published 322 BC) Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2002). Reframing the path to school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Chenoweth, T. G., & Everhart, R. B. (2002). Navigating comprehensive school change. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. Courchene, T. J. (2001). A state of minds. Montreal: Institute of Research on Public Policy. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among ve traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Czaja, for
teacher
tional
M.,
Livingston
leadership:
Journal:
Prouty,
A
Continuous
study
J., of
&
Lowe,
twenty-four
Improvement
Monitor,
J.
(1998).
professional 1(3).
Mentoring development
Retrieved
2
and
the
schools.
September
4,
context Interna-
2000,
from
http://llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No.3/czaja.html
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Devereaux,
L. (2000).
Principal training:
The missing link for successful school councils.
ternational Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning,
5.
Retrieved September 20,
2001,
Infrom
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/∼iejll Dimmock, C. (1996). Dilemmas for school leaders and administrators in restructuring. In K. Leithwood, J. Chapman, D Corson, P. Hallinger, & A. Hart (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 135[U+2011]170). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Dufour, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 12[U+2011]15. Dyer, K. M., & Carothers, J. (2000). The intuitive principal. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Evans, R. C. (2000). The authentic leader. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 287-309). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes. New York: Penguin. Fullan, M. (2000). Leadership for the twenty- rst century: Breaking the bonds of dependency. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 156-164). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2003). Change forces with a vengeance. London: Routledge Falmer. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround Leadership. Jossey-Bass. Gardner, H. (2007). Five Minds for the Future. Harvard Business School Press. Gladwell, M. (2002). The tipping point. Boston: Little, Brown. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Revitalizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
2
http://llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No.3/czaja.html
32
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Hesselbein, F. (2002). The key to cultural transformation. In F. Hesselbein & R. Johnston (Eds.)., A leader to leader guide on leading change (pp. 1-7). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kneebone, R. D., & McKenzie, K. J. (1996). Swallowing frogs and herding cats: The conjunctural forces behind the Alberta budget cuts.
Calgary: University of Calgary.
Dept.
of Economics, 1996.
Discussion
papers series no 96-03. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1999). Encouraging the heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus group. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Leithwood, K. (2002). Introduction. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 815[U+2011]821). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers: Transforming their world and their work. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Luna, G., & Cullen, D. L. (1995). Empowering the faculty: Mentoring redirected and renewed. ERIC Digests.
Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.
(ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED399888) Mandel, D. R. (2000).
Recognizing and encouraging exemplary leadership in America's schools:
A
proposal to establish a system of advanced certi cation for administrators. Issues and Insights: American Association of School Administrators.
Arlington, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Leadership,
pp. 2-11. Retrieved November 7, 2001, from http://www.aasa.org/issues_and_insights Manzer, R. (1994). Public schools and political ideas. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. McBride, S., & Shields, J. (1997). Dismantling a nation. Halifax, NS: Fernwood. Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2001). Building capacity for a learning community. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba. Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Reiss, K. (2007). Leadership Coaching for Educators. Corwin Press. Reynolds, D., & Stoll, L. (1996). Merging school eectiveness and school improvement: the knowledge bases. In D. Reynolds, R. Bollen, B. Creemers, D. Hopkins, L. Stoll, & N. Lagerweij (Eds.), Making good schools (pp. 94[U+2011]112). London: Routledge. Robertson, J. M., & Webber, C. F. (2000). Cross-cultural leadership development. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 3(4), 315-330. Robertson, J. M., & Webber, C. F. (2002).
Boundary breaking leadership:
A must for tomorrow's
learning communities. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 519[U+2011]553). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Roher, E. M., & Wormwell, S. A. (2000). An educator's guide to the role of the principal. Aurora, ON: Aurora Professional Press. Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change. New York: Doubleday. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shellard, E. (2003). De ning the principalship: A principal's instructional and managerial responsibilities should complement and support each other. Principal, 82(4), 56[U+2011]60. Spady, W., & Schwahn, C. (2001). Leading when everyone goes back to zero. Principal Leadership, 2(4), 10[U+2011]16. Stein, M. K., Schwan Smith, M., & Silver, E. A. (1999). The development of professional developers. Harvard Educational Review, 237-269. Stone, D., Patton, B., & Heen, S. (1999). Di cult conversations. New York: Penguin. Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000). Leadership for dierentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
33
Villiani, S. (2006). Mentoring and Induction Programs that Support New Principals. Corwin Press. Wheatley, M. (2000). Good-bye command and control. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 339-348). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Young, P.G.; Sheets, J.M. & Knight, D.D. (2005). Mentoring Principals. Corwin Press.
2.2 Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning 3
Teachers
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
2.2.1 Introduction Croasmum, Hampton, and Hermann (2000) documented that mentor programs have been developed throughout the nation's schools in an eort to address the attrition rate of rst-year teachers in American schools. The e cacy of these mentoring programs is still under investigation. Gold (1999) documented that the teacher attrition rate for beginning teachers in his school district was 18% when they did not have an assigned mentor and only 5% when they had a school district assigned mentor. Evertson and Smithey (2000) reported that pairing mentors who had undergone training to be a mentor with beginning teachers yielded beginning teachers with higher-level teaching skills. Beginning teachers who were not paired with mentors lacked these higher-level teaching skills. Darling-Hammond (2003), in an examination of the eectiveness of mentoring programs, wrote that beginning teacher retention rates were increased. Recent research into teacher induction, of which mentor programs are the primary method of teacher induction (Fideler & Haselkorn, 1999), has documented its e cacy in (a) making the transition of beginning teachers easier, (b) reducing teacher turnover, (c) and increasing work satisfaction (Andrews & Quinn, 2005; Archer, 2003; Bullard, 1998; Feinman-Nemser, 2003; Fuller, 2003; Holloway, 2001). It is clear that beginning teachers need time to become pro cient teachers. Researchers (e.g., Claycomb & Hawley, 2000) have reported that 3 to 7 years of experience in teaching is needed before teachers attain a level of pro ciency. It is the rst years of teaching that are the years where beginning teachers gain the most pro ciency. Rivkin, Hanushek, and Kain (2005) documented that beginning teachers make important gains in teaching quality in the rst year and smaller gains over the next few career years (p. 449). What exactly is meant by mentoring? Mentoring can be said to occur when a senior person (the mentor in terms of age and experience) provides information, advice, and emotional support to a junior person (i.e., the mentee) in a relationship lasting over an extended period of time and marked by a substantial emotional commitment by both parties (Bowen, 1985). Several characteristics appear to be present in eective mentors. These components include: (a) a generosity of time; (b) a willingness to learn; (c) a complete trust; (d) an ability to praise and encourage; and (e) an openness to recognize the limitations of others (Madison, Watson, & Knight, 1994).
More recently, Brown, Hargrove, Hill, and Katz (2003) remarked that quality
mentors are approachable, able to listen, maintain a high degree of integrity, and have sincerity. Mentors also display a willingness to spend time with their protégés while being enthusiastic and positive about their
3
This content is available online at
34
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
role. Other characteristics included being exible, tactful, experienced in teaching, being trustworthy, and able to maintain con dentiality between themselves and the mentee (Brown et al., 2003). Mentors need to be trained in the roles and responsibilities of being mentors, rather than being assigned that role without being trained (Holloway, 2001). Five stages have been documented in the process for developing a mentor teacher program (Sindelar, 1992). The ve stages include: (a) establish a rationale; (b) select mentors and protégés; (c) train mentors; (d) monitor the mentor process; and (e) evaluate and revise the program (pp. 13-17). Sindelar wrote that school districts might want to examine the process and customize it to t their own needs based on their own resources. More recently, best practices have been developed regarding mentoring programs. Regarding as best practices for mentoring programs are: (a) selecting mentors with the same certi cation and in close proximity to their mentees (Conway, 2003; Serpell & Bozeman, 1999), (b) providing mentors and mentees schedules that allow common planning time and opportunities to observe each other (Andrews & Quinn, 2005; Conway, 2003; Gilbert, 2005; Mills, Moore, & Keane, 2001; Villani, 2002), (c) reduced workloads for mentees (Feinman-Nemser, 2003; Moskowitz & Stephens, 1997; Renard, 2003; Serpell & Bozeman, 1999), and (d) providing orientations for both mentors and mentees (Odell, 1990; Serpell & Bozeman) (cited in Flynn & Nolan, 2008, pp. 173-174).
2.2.2 Statement of the Problem Several challenges in mentorship programs that need to be addressed were determined from an extensive review of the research literature. Davis (2001) wrote that de nite criteria must be present for the selection of eective mentors. Another challenge is the retention rate in the profession (Krantrowitz & Wingert, 2000). An estimated 2.2 million teachers will be needed in the next decade to teach over 48.1 million students (Protheroe, Lewis, & Paik, 2002). This demand for teachers, along with an increased need for accountability and an assumption that teacher quality is high on the list of variables in uencing student achievement, have presented school administration and policy-makers with a formidable challenge (Protheroe et al., 2002). Consistent with the national problems of teacher attrition, the teacher attrition rate and the expected student population growth rate in South Texas have forced an abundance of teaching vacancies for the upcoming school years (Sanchez, 2003). According to Sanchez (2003), student education is aected by the high teacher turnover rate and unstable educational programs that resulted from teacher loss. In developing a mentoring practice of support, Scherer (1999) thought the needs of the novice teacher should be examined so that quality assistance could be provided.
The cost of high attrition in teachers is directly re ected
in lower levels of student achievement, the allocation of resources to recruitment and training rather than to instruction, increased behavioral concerns associated with lack of continuity, and unstable educational programs (Croasmum et al., 2000; State of South Dakota, 2000). As a result, many school districts have implemented teacher-mentoring programs. School districts and individual campuses throughout Texas provide mentorship programs for rst-year teachers. Although mentorship programs are provided, the incidence and the in uence of the experiences of what/when vary by districts and by campuses. The initial purpose of the programs was to provide new teachers with the skills and knowledge to be successful and remain active in the profession.
Mentoring
programs would be examined periodically to assess whether or not the needs of beginning teachers were satisfactorily met. Needs of beginning teachers and successful teacher mentoring programs in South Texas have not been assessed as well as other regions (Sanchez, 2003).
2.2.3 Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to examine, in the South Texas region, the views of mentors of rst-year teachers regarding the teacher mentoring programs in their school districts.
In particular, two areas of
emphasis were investigated: (a) the characteristics or practices associated with teacher mentoring programs in South Texas secondary schools; and (b) the needs of beginning teachers in relation to mentoring programs in South Texas.
35
2.2.4 Research Questions The following questions guided the study: 1. What teacher involvement/support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to be successful in preparing rst-year teachers? 2. What sta development training factors are perceived as necessary for the instruction of mentors? 3. What administrative support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to in preparing rst-year teachers successfully? 4. What resource materials factors are perceived as necessary for the success of mentors in preparing rst-year teachers?
2.2.5 Method Sample The target sample for this study was mentors of rst-year secondary teachers in South Texas public secondary schools. A systematic sample population was used in the study, with every fourth campus listed in the Region One directory selected. Responding to the Mentor Survey were 46 participants, all of whom were mentor teachers. Of this sample of 46 mentors, 18 (39.1%) were male and 28 (60.9%) were female. Thirty-one of the participants were Hispanic (67.4%), with 13 participants were White (28.3%). One participant was African-American and another participant was of Other ethnic membership. Twenty- ve mentor teachers indicated they were responsible for high school grade levels (54.3%), with 21 participants stating their responsibilities were at the middle school grade levels (45.7%). Concerning teacher preparation programs, 33 mentor teachers reported a traditional teacher preparation program (71.7%), with12 (26.1%) stating an alternative certi cation program and 1 participant reporting a De ciency Plan. Mentor teachers were queried regarding the subject area in which they taught. Seven participants responded math (15.2%), 8 teachers reported science (17.4%), 10 teachers indicated English (21.7%), 7 teachers stated social studies (15.2%), and 14 teachers responded elective (30.4%) as their subject area. Instrumentation A self-administered survey instrument created by the senior researcher was used to collect data.
The
instrument was developed by reviewing the extant research literature and then creating a matrix of key terms associated with successful teacher mentoring programs. Mentor teacher responses to the 27 survey questions were measured on a Likert-format scale with a range of scores of 4 (absolutely essential), 3 (mostly essential), 2 (somewhat essential), 1 (not essential) and d (uncertain) to the retention of beginning teachers. For the variable of teacher involvement/support, the following factors were examined:
(a) Positive role
models; (b) Collaboration with rst year teachers; (c) Lessons and materials; (d) Active participation with the mentor; (e) Meetings regarding student discipline; (f ) Communication through newsletter, memos, and emails; (g) Support from other teachers who serve as informal mentors' (h) A climate that encourages seeking assistance; (i) Year round support that started before school year; and, (j) Professional materials (articles or newsletters) to help grow professionally. Concerning the variable of sta development, the following factors were investigated: (a) Classroom management included in sta development; (b) Working within a team for collaboration and support; (c) Review assessment practices; (d) Review motivational strategies; (e) Training on dealing with di cult students; (f ) Received sta development on teaching strategies; (g) Involved in sta development activities designed for rst-year teachers; (h) Sta development in how to work with or conference with parents; (i) Assistance in developing my professional goals; and, (j) Provided orientation to include procedures for doing tasks and guidelines. In this study, the variable of administrative support consisted of the following factors:
(a) Monitor
the rst-year teacher; (b) Frequent walk throughs are accomplished; (c) Assist with hallway monitoring; (d) Assist with student discipline; (e) Allow time for mentee to do classroom observations; (f ) Carefully select mentors and match mentor/mentee grade levels and subject area; (g) Assign fewer professional responsibilities to mentees; (h) Mentees are given the opportunity to observe the practices of highly eective,
36
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
experienced teachers to learn from them; (i) Mentees received helpful support from central o ce administrators; and, (j) Mentees must have an experienced teacher or administrator to observe. Regarding the variable of resources/materials, the following factors were investigated: (a) Technology training to incorporate into lessons; (b) Assistance in the creation of student learner lessons that engage students; (c) Teaching supplies that aid for hands on lessons are available; (d) Review the teacher handbook of all district/campus policies; (e) Information about what to expect from mentoring program; (f ) Provide printed materials about employment and school regulations; (g) Received important resource/materials to begin my teaching experience; (h) Have been part of an induction program that has well de ned goals about what it is intended to do; (i) My mentee and I have coordinated schedules so we can meet regularly; and (j) Have had help creating a portfolio for my professional growth. Along with the 27 closed-ended questions, respondents were asked four open-ended questions.
These
questions were designed to evaluate support provided in the teacher-mentoring program, the most di cult duty of the program, and what areas they would have appreciated more support in the teacher-mentoring program. In this qualitative portion of the study, data were collected through open-ended questions from the survey instruments that were distributed to the rst-year teachers. Validity.
To ascertain the validity of the Likert-format questionnaire items, the survey was initially
reviewed by experts (n = 17). This group consisted of the dissertation chair, (n = 1), dissertation committee members (n = 2), a human resource director (n = 1), secondary school principals (n = 3), and secondary veteran teachers (n = 10). Each expert evaluated the instrument for content, clarity, and appropriateness (Patton, 2001). Amendments were made in wording and arrangement and construction of response options, as recommended by committee members. Reliability. The most frequent method for improving reliability for surveys is to work towards re ning questions, clarity, and instrument design. Good development procedures should result in a reasonably reliable survey instrument (Creswell, 2003). To ensure reliability of responses to the scale items, a reliability analysis was conducted. For the 27 survey questions measured on the factors being viewed as essential or not, the Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .86, with the range of corrected item-total correlations ranging from a low of .14 to a high of .67. Concerning the six survey items that comprised teacher involvement/support, Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .66.
For the six items that constituted the sta development cluster,
Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .77. The internal consistency of the administrative support factor that was comprised of seven items was .75. Finally, the last factor, resource materials, had a Cronbach's coe cient alpha of .65. As such, all four factors yielded su ciently high reliability for research purposes. Procedures The list of practicing rst-year teachers and their mentors, obtained from the Education Service Center, Region One, Edinburg, Texas, was used to create a database in which every fourth secondary campus was selected as the sample for the study. A self-administered survey instrument was mailed out to the mentors of all rst-year middle school and high school teachers identi ed in the sample, with the permission of the district's school superintendent.
A pre-contact post card was sent to the identi ed mentors in the
districts. A pre-contact involves the researchers identifying themselves, discussing the purpose of the study, and requesting cooperation (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003). A follow-up contact was sent out to non-respondents a few days after the deadline. The response time for the survey was a 30-day window. A few days after the time limit speci ed, non-respondents were contacted by mailing a follow-up letter along with a copy of the questionnaire and another self-addressed envelope (Heberlein & Baumgartner, 1981). All participants were sent notes thanking them for their participation in the study.
2.2.6 Results Research Question One What teacher involvement/support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to achieve success in training rst-year teachers? Teacher involvement/support items were 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as shown in Table 1. A teacher-mentoring program that has well-de ned goals was believed to be absolutely essential by 95.7% (n = 44) of mentor teachers. The following factor, creation of a climate that encourages teachers to seek assistance when needed,
37
was given as absolutely essential by 91.3% (n = 42) of mentor teachers. On item 2, creating a professional portfolio that demonstrates growth as a teacher, 30.4% (n = 14) of mentors believed this factor to be absolutely essential. Table 1 Mentor Responses to Teacher Involvement/Support Items by Percentages
Absolutely
1.
A
teacher-
mentoring
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
95.7
2.2
2.2
0.0
30.4
41.3
26.1
2.2
73.9
21.7
4.3
0.0
91.3
8.7
0.0
0.0
43.5
41.3
13.0
2.2
82.6
13.0
4.3
0.0
Essential
pro-
gram that has well de ned goals. 2.
Creating
a
professional
portfolio
that
demonstrates professional
growth
as a teacher. 3. Discussing with peers skills necessary to be successful in the teaching profession. 4.
Creation
of
a climate that encourages
teachers
to seek assistance when needed. 5.
Being
of
a
part
support
group made up of other
beginning
teachers. 6.
Having a men-
tor
who
provides
support in coaching
with
needed
strategies for student success. Research Question Two What sta development training factors are perceived as necessary for the instruction of mentors? Sta development training factors were given in survey items 7 through 12 as shown in Table 2. Mentor teachers rated the highest percentage of responses to item 10 to be absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Sta development that provided strategies and activities to better serve students in populations was regarded to be absolutely essential by 60.9% (n = 28) of mentor teachers. Mentor teachers rated social functions to help beginning teachers build relationships with colleagues to be absolutely essential by 26.1% (n = 12). This item was the lowest rated item of the sta development survey factors that were absolutely essential to the retention of beginning teachers.
38
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Table 2 Mentor Responses to Sta Development Items by Percentages
Absolutely
7.
Sta
devel-
opment
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
56.5
41.3
2.2
0.0
56.6
39.1
4.3
0.0
26.1
28.3
41.3
4.3
60.9
23.9
15.2
0.0
54.3
37.0
8.7
0.0
that
included
instruc-
tional
strategies
that
in uenced
student outcomes. 8.
Quality
sta
development
that
addressed instructional strategies. 9. Social functions to help beginning teachers
build
relationships
with
colleagues. 10.
Sta
velopment
dethat
provided
strate-
gies and activities to
better
serve
students in special populations. 11.
Workshops
or
conferences
that
provided
professional velopment teacher's
dein
area
of
education.
continued on next page
Essential
39
12.
Provided
30.4
50.0
17.4
2.2
with federal, state and icy
local changes
polin
education. Research Question Three What administrative support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to successfully train rst-year teachers? Administrator support factors were given in survey items 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19, as shown in Table 3. Mentor teachers responded evenly to items 16 and 17 by 52.2% (n = 24) perceiving as absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Mentoring program was explained of my duties and responsibilities and con dentiality laws between teachers and students were explained were deemed to be absolutely essential by 52.2% (n = 24) of mentor teachers. Item 18, time was provided at the end of each grading period to evaluate the teacher mentoring program, was deemed absolutely essential by 30.4% (n = 14) of mentor teachers. Table 3 Mentor Responses to Administrative Support Items by Percentages
Absolutely
13.
Allowed time
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
50.0
32.6
15.2
0.0
47.8
37.0
13.0
2.2
to visit as a team (mentors, mentees, administrators) to re ect and evaluate on the school year. 14.
Given
opportunity year
to
ratively
the this
collaboanalyze
what was observed in the classrooms of
experienced
teachers.
continued on next page
Essential
40
CHAPTER 2.
15.
Planning was
provided
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
47.8
39.1
4.3
6.5
52.2
37.0
8.7
2.2
52.2
26.1
17.4
2.2
30.4
39.1
21.7
4.3
43.5
34.8
17.4
2.2
that
focused on teacher expectations
for
mentor training. 16.
Mentoring
program
was
ex-
plained of my duties and responsibilities in the program. 17. ity
Con dentiallaws
between
teachers
and
students
were
explained. 18.
Time
provided end
of
grading to
at
was the each
period
evaluate
the
teacher-mentoring program. 19.
Teaching
assignments,
re-
sponsibilities teacher were
and
duties based
teacher
on
experi-
ence. Research Question Four What resource materials factors are perceived as necessary for the success of mentors in training rst-year teachers? Survey items 20 through 27, as shown in Table 4, comprised the resource materials factors. Orientation on PDAS was provided by the district to rst-year teachers on the method of evaluation was seen as absolutely essential to 82.6% (n = 38) of mentor teachers. Next, requirements for a teacher certi cate as an educator has been ful lled were given as absolutely essential by 73.9% (n = 34) of mentor teachers.
Technology
(e.g., computers, TV/VCR, overhead projectors) was provided to assist in implementing technology into the classroom was deemed as absolutely essential by 71.7% (n = 33) of mentor teachers. Mentors rated item 25 the least essential. An Educational Organization informed me of my rights as an educator and oered legal support was believed to be absolutely essential by 37% (n = 17) of mentor teachers. Table 4 Mentor Responses to Resource Materials Items by Percentages
41
Absolutely
20.
Requirements
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
73.9
21.7
2.2
0.0
47.8
39.1
8.7
2.2
58.7
21.7
13.0
4.3
71.7
23.9
2.2
2.2
for a teacher certi cate as an educator
have
been
ful lled. 21.
Information
was
provided
the
school
trict
by dis-
about
the
teacher-mentoring program. 22.
The
dis-
trict
provided
nancial
or
com-
pensatory for
time
mentors
ticipating
par-
in
the
teacher-mentoring program. 23.
Technol-
ogy
(computers,
TV/VCR, head was
over-
projectors) provided
assist
in
menting nology
to
impletech-
into
the
classroom.
continued on next page
Essential
42
CHAPTER 2.
24.
Regular com-
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
56.5
34.8
2.2
4.3
37.0
41.3
15.2
0.0
63.0
32.6
0.0
4.3
munications about the
district
campus through such
vehicles
as
ters,
and
occurred newslet-
memos
or
e-mails. 25.
An
Edu-
cational Organization informed me of
my
an
rights
educator
oered
legal
as and
sup-
port. 26.
The district
provided
a
cur-
riculum guide with clear and
objectives timelines
required to teach.
2.2.7 Mentor Teacher Responses to Open-Ended When asked to respond to the following statement, My school has been most supportive of me this year in the following areas, mentor teachers gave the following answers: I was given the time needed to evaluate the new teacher. The new teacher was assigned fewer students in the classroom with fewer responsibilities. I was selected to be a mentor based on proximity, class subject, and given time to spend with the new teacher. I was given a schedule that allowed the new teacher to have the same conference period to work together on planning and to provide the needed support for the new teacher. I was given the time to observe and give feedback to the new teacher. We had excellent communication between the mentor, mentee and administrator to work on issues and nd solutions. I was given praise and appreciation for what I did as a mentor. According to mentors, their school was most supportive in giving them time to evaluate the new teacher. Mentors reported they were selected to the program based on criteria of proximity, class subject and allowed time to visit with the new teacher. Mentors also felt appreciated for the work they provided to new teachers. They had excellent communications with the new teacher, and administrators to work on issues and nding solutions. Concerning the question, What has been the most di cult part of your duty in the teacher-mentoring program?, mentor teachers responded that: Con icting schedules with mentee, and administrators providing information on how I would be compensated. At times I felt little support from my administrator since they were more concerned about TAKS scores. I was not given any guidelines or training for what I was to do or what was expected of me. I was given too much paperwork on the program and was provided sta development for the mentor and mentee that was not bene cial.
43
Mentors commented that the most di cult duty of the teacher-mentoring program was con icting schedules between the mentor and the mentee. It made meeting time di cult for both. Mentors stated that they did not know how they would be compensated for their time and felt little support from administrators because they were more concerned with TAKS scores.
Other mentors also reported they were not given
guidelines, training, or expectations of what the program was about. Regarding the question, In what areas would you have appreciated more support from your school for the teacher-mentoring program?, mentors commented: More scheduled formal meetings with new teacher to review classroom management, grading polices and procedures, and time for planning lessons would have been appreciated. Increase in bene ts for the mentor and better coordination for planning from the certi cation program would have helped. More instruction on curriculum alignment, observation time to evaluate the new teacher, and more time for the new teacher to observe the mentor were needed. Communication between mentor, mentee, and administrators needed to occur. Expectations of my responsibilities as a mentor should be explained. Mentors would have felt more appreciated from their school if administrators had scheduled more formal meetings. They would have liked more time to review classroom management, grading policies and procedures, and more time for planning eective lessons. Mentors responded that better communication between the new teacher, administrators, and the mentor was needed for the teacher-mentoring program. Finally, mentors were encouraged to contribute additional comments on the current teacher-mentoring program at your school. The following additional comments were made: There was a time when mentors had the time to help the new teachers. a few years to improve.
New teachers were allowed
Now with the state measures school accountability through TAKS scores, it has
become di cult to help new teachers with no experience. New teachers who have low TAKS scores from their students are at risk of not getting their contract renewed.
The state testing has hurt our schools.
Schools do not have the time to nurture a new teacher. I have trained over 24 student teachers in my 27 years of teaching experience. My administrators are highly competent and allow me to take charge of new teachers. I was allowed to train new teachers on PDAS evaluation with my administrators providing support. There was a lack of administrative support, resource materials, and no curriculum guide or explanation of what was expected of me as a mentor. District administrators should meet regularly with mentor and mentee to discuss progress, setbacks, and concerns. Alternative certi cation program was confusing with multiple requirements and too much paperwork. Mentors added that state testing had harmed their schools. Administrators are too concerned with state exam scores and have little time to support new teachers. According to mentors, new teachers are at risk of not getting their contracts renewed if their students have low TAKS scores. Other mentors added comments and stated that there was a lack of administrative support, resource materials, and no curriculum guide or explanations of what was expected of the mentor. Mentors reported that district administrators should meet regularly with mentors and mentees to discuss progress, setbacks, and concerns.
2.2.8 Discussion Mentor teachers responded to questions regarding four factors: teacher involvement/support; sta development; administrator support; and resource materials. On the factor of teacher involvement/support, almost all of the mentor teachers believed a teacher-mentoring program with well-de ned goals was absolutely essential to retain beginning teachers. On the factor of sta development, slightly more than half of the mentor teachers considered that sta development that provided strategies to serve students in special populations better was absolutely essential to the retention of beginning teachers. Concerning administrator support, slightly more than half of the mentor teachers believed that mentors needed to have their duties and responsibilities in the mentoring program to be absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Regarding resource materials, almost three-fourths of the mentor teachers deemed that requirements for a
44
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
teacher certi cate as an educator had to have been completed to be absolutely essential to retain beginning teachers. Concerning the open-ended questions, mentor teachers commented that they were given time to evaluate the new teacher, and their selection to be a mentor was based on criteria such as proximity and class subject.
The most di cult part of their duty was con icting schedules with mentee, little support from
administration, and no guidelines or training in what they were expected to do. Mentors would have felt more appreciated with more scheduled meeting time with the new teacher and an increase of bene ts for their work. They would have liked more instruction on curriculum alignment and observation time with the new teacher. The additional comments made by mentors consisted of the need for more time for the new teacher to grow professionally with less emphasis on TAKS scores. They also stated that standardized state testing was hurting schools because too much time was being spent on student test scores. Implications of our ndings are that school districts need to prepare mentor teachers for their role in the teacher-mentoring program.
According to this research study, and the studies of other researchers,
mentors must be provided with certain criteria for a teacher-mentoring program to be successful. Mentors responded that it was absolutely essential a teacher-mentoring program have well-de ned goals. First-year teachers must feel encouraged to seek assistance when needed, in an accepting school climate. Explanation of duties and responsibilities assigned to mentors must be reviewed. According to mentors, time must be given to allow observations of the mentor and mentee giving instruction along with administrators respecting the con dentially between the mentor and the rst-year teacher.
Mentors responded that orientation on
PDAS, training on technology implementation into the classroom, and requirements for a teacher certi cation ful lled are absolutely essential for the retention of rst-year teachers. The incidence and in uence of the factors given in the study are factors in a successful teacher-mentoring program, which relate to the retention of rst-year teachers.
2.2.9 References Andrews, B. D., & Quinn, R. J. (2005).
The eects of mentoring on rst-year teachers' perceptions of
support received. The Clearing House, 78(3), 110-116. Andrews, S., Gilbert, L., & Martin, E. (2007). The rst years of teaching: Disparities in perceptions of support. Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 4-13. Archer, J. (2003). Increasing the odds. Education Week, 22(17), 52-55. Berry, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002, December). Assessing and supporting new teachers: Lessons from the southeast. Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Teaching Quality. Retrieved May 18, 2006, from
4
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/Induction.pdf
Black, S. (2001). A lifeboat for new teachers: Without mentors and other support, new teachers are left to sink or swim. American School Board Journal. [online]. http://www.asbj.com/current/research.html
5
Bowen, D. (1985). Were men meant to mentor women? Training and Development Journal, 39(1), 30-34. Brown, T., Hargrove, S., Hill, R., & Katz, L. (2003). Promoting quality teachers through a supportive mentoring environment for pre-service and rst-year teachers. Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the Association for Teacher Educators (Santa Fe, NM, August 9-13, 2003). ED 480 857. Bullard, C. (1998). Quali ed teachers for all California students: Current issues in recruitment, preparation, and professional development. Sacramento: California Research Bureau. Certo, J. L., & Fox, J. E. (2002). Retaining quality teachers. High School Journal, 86(1), 57-75. Claycomb, C., & Hawley, W. D. (2000). Recruiting and retaining eective teachers for urban schools: Developing a strategic plan for action. National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. Washington, DC. Croasmum, ning
out?
J.,
Hampton,
University
of
D.,
North
&
Hermann,
Carolina
at
S.
Chapel
(2000). Hill
http:www.horizon.unc.edu/projects/issues/papers/hampton.asp/
4 5
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/Induction.pdf http://www.asbj.com/current/research.html
Teacher
(on-line).
attrition:
Accessed:
Is
time
November
run2000.
45
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-13. Davis, O. L., Jr. (2001). A view of authentic mentorship. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17(1), 1-4. Evertson, C., & Smithey, M. (2000). Mentoring eects on protégés' classroom practice: An experimental eld study. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 294-304. Feinman-Nemser, S. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25-29. Fideler, E., & Haselkorn, D. (1999). Learning the ropes: Urban teacher induction programs and practices in the United States. Belmont, MA: Recruiting New Teachers. Flynn, G. V., & Nolan, B. (2008). The rise and fall of a successful mentor program: What lessons can be learned? The Clearing House, 81(4), 173-179. Fuller, E. (2003).
Beginning teacher retention rates for TxBESS and Non-TxBESS teachers.
Paper
presented for the State Board for Educator Certi cation, Austin, TX. Fulton, K., Yoon, I., & Lee, C. (2005, August). Induction into learning communities. Retrieved May 15,
6
2006, from http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_Induction_Paper_2005.pdf
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research; An introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Gold, Y. (1999). Beginning teacher support. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 458-594). New York: Macmillan. Heberlein, T. A., & Baumgartener, R. (1981). Is a questionnaire necessary in a second mailing? Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 102-108. Hirsch, E. (2006). Recruiting and retaining teachers in Mobile, Alabama: Educators on what it will take to sta all classrooms with quality teachers. Chapel
Hill,
NC:
Center
for
Teaching
Quality.
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/al_recruitretain_mobile.pdf
7
Retrieved
May
21,
2006,
from
Holloway, J. H. (2001). Who is teaching our children? Educational Leadership, 58, 1-3. Holloway, J. (2001). The bene ts of mentoring. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 85-86. Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? A Research Report. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy and Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Washington, DC. Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003).
The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.
Educational
Leadership, 60(8), 30-33. Johnson, S. M., Berg, J. H., & Donaldson, M. L. (2005, August). Who stays in teaching and why: A review of the literature on teacher retention. Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003).
8
Pursuing a sense of success: New teachers explain their
career decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 581-617. Krantrowitz, B., & Wingert, P. (2000).
Provide teacher mentoring at its best.
9 www.leadershiphelp.com/10
The Master Teacher.
Retrieved on September 5, 2007 from http://
Madison, J., Watson, K., & Knight, B. (1994). Mentors and preceptors in the nursing profession. Contemporary Nurse, 3(3), 121-126. Markow, D., & Martin, S. (2005). The MetLife survey of the American teacher: Transitions and the role of supportive relationships: A survey of teachers, principals, and students. Retrieved May 20, 2006, from http://www.metlife.com/WPSAssets/ 34996838801118758796V1FATS_2004.pdf
6 7 8 9 10
http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_Induction_Paper_2005.pdf http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/al_recruitretain_mobile.pdf http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf http://www.leadershiphelp.com/ http://www.leadershiphelp.com/
46
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to America's children. Retrieved May 12, 2006, from http://www.nctaf.org/
11
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Protheroe, N., Lewis, A., & Paik, S. (2002, Winter). Promoting quality teaching. ERS Spectrum, 20(1), 3-9. Provasnik, S., & Dorfman, S. (2005). Mobility in the teacher workforce (NCES 2005-114). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing O ce. Reaves, B. (2002, January). Texas schools face continued shortage of certi ed teachers. Paper prepared at the meeting of the Institute for School-University Partnerships, Byran/College Station, TX. Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (1998).
Teachers, schools and academic achievement.
National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper Number 6691. Sanchez, S. (2003). Characteristics associated with successful mentoring and induction programs in South Texas. Ed.D. dissertation, Texas A&M UniversityKingsville, United StatesTexas. Retrieved September 23, 2004 from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. (Publication No. AAT 3099255). Scherer, M. (Ed). (1999). A better beginning: Supporting and mentoring new teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Sindelar, N. (1992). Development of a teacher mentorship program: High professionalism and low cost. ERS Spectrum, 10(2), 13-17. Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the eects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714. State of South Dakota (2000).
Administrative memorandum.
Department of Education and Cultural
12
Aairs, p. 16. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from http://www.leadershiphelp.com Stedman, J. B. (2004).
K-12 Teacher quality:
Issues and legislative action.
Congressional Research
Service. The Library of Congress. Washington, DC. Weiss, E. M. (1999). Perceived workplace conditions and rst-year teachers' morale, career choice commitment, and planned retention: A secondary analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(8), 861-879.
11 12
http://www.nctaf.org/ http://www.leadershiphelp.com/
Chapter 3
The Role of the Principal 3.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field
:
1
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of the
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration
3.1.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field: An Antidote to an Ailing Internship Experience by Theodore Creighton The eld of education leadership has long been criticized for the ways in which men and women are prepared for school leadership positions.
In 1960, The American Association of School Administrators
(AASA) characterized the preparation of superintendents and principals as a dismal montage.
Later,
Farquhar and Piele (1972) described university-based preparation programs as dysfunctional structural incrementalism. In 1990, Pitner discussed the zombie programs in education leadership. As recently as 1999, McCarthy addressed the issue of change in education administration by stating, Congeniality and complacency are woven into education administration programs, and the majority of faculty do not perceive a need for radical change that would bring about a transformation in education leadership.
Now, forty
years after AASA's alert, Murphy (2001) points to the profession's continued focus on technical knowledge, placing the university in the center of the eld.
He posits, Trying to link theory and practice in school
administration has been, for the last 30 years, a little like attempting to start a car with a dead battery: The odds are fairly long that the engine will ever turn over. Murphy identi es the central problem as our fascination with building an academic infrastructure of school administration, which has produced serious distortions, in what is primarily an applied eld. The traditional internship presently serves as the vehicle for aspiring principals to practice their problem-solving and instructional leadership skills. Though there has been emphasis from the professional organizations (AASA, NAESP, NASSP, NCPEA, UCEA) for extending the internship experience over more time (e.g., one-year) and weaving the internship throughout preparation coursework, the internship still remains a weak experience with a minimal practice eld at best. For some
1
This content is available online at
48
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
time, I have argued for the implementation of a leadership practice eld in our preparation programs. The conceptual notion at work here is that of creating a bridge between the performance eld (working in the system) and a practice eld (working on the system).
This model is based on the work of Daniel
Kim, a colleague of Peter Senge (The Fifth Discipline) and cofounder of the MIT Organizational Learning Center, where he is currently director of the Learning Laboratory Research Project.
Te central idea is
that a leadership practice eld provides an environment in which a prospective leader can experiment with alternative strategies and policies, test assumptions, and practice working through the complex issues of school administration in a constructive and productive manner.
2
3.2 The Long View
:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of Pro-
fessors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a signi cant contribution to the scholarship and practice in educational administration.
In addition to publication in the Connexions Con-
tent Commons, this module is published in the International Journal of Educational Leadership
3 and available as a Print on Demand copy.
Preparation.
2 3
This content is available online at
49
Figure 3.1
50
.
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
..............................................................CONTENT.............................................................. .
4
Prologue
Martha McCarthy
CREDITING THE PAST
5
The Discipline of Education Administration: Crediting the Past Rosemary Papa
6
The Standards Movements in Educational Administration: A Quest for Respect John Hoyle
7
Re ections:Crediting the Past Betty Alford
CHALLENGING THE PRESENT Drama in Education administration: A Farce or a Morality Play?
8
Charles Achilles Educational Leadership for Sale: Social justice, the ISLLC Standards, and the Corporate Assault on Public Schools
9
Fenwick W.English
CREATING THE FUTURE Strengthening Research on the Preparation of School Leaders Joseph Murphy
10
11
The Future is Now
Robert Beach and James Berry Taking Back Our Profession: Revisited
12
Theodore Creighton and Michelle Young
13
Epilogue: The Intersection of Past, Present and Future James Smith About the Authors
14
15
3.3 The Principalship: Manager to Leader
3.3.1 Bureaucratic Manager Schools have traditionally been managed by a bureaucratic management style principal.
In this method
principals rely on a rational set of structuring guidelines, such as rules and procedures, hierarchy, and a clear division of labor (Allen 1998). Principals using this style receive lots of credit for an e ciently run school. Over time this style of management eventually back res as creative teachers and students become unsettled. These types of principals tend to be control freaks who nd it di cult to let go of the detail and are particularly threatened by the idea of empowering other leaders for fear of diminishing their own power base.
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
These principals soon forget that schools exist for students and not for administrators (Prideaux,
http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/3prologuesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/4papasmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/5hoylesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/6alfordsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/7achillessmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/8englishsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/9murphysmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/10beachberrysmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/11creitheonsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/12epiloguesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/authors.pdf This content is available online at
51
2001). As new decision making models emerge with research backing their success, the role of the principal begins to change.
3.3.2 Changing from Manager to Leader Principals are no longer strictly managers; they are expected to be leaders.
Leaders that can take their
school to a higher level of academic achievement, where all students are successful learners and all teachers engage their students in learning. To become such a leader, principals need to leave behind their bureaucratic management styles and rede ne themselves as a moral leader. Principals that are leaders not just managers will be able to move their school forward. These new principals allow teachers to be leaders in developing better curriculums to reach the needs of all students. For a principal to maintain this type of leadership, he will need to learn how to serve his sta not just manage it. Principals are beginning to value the important role that teachers play in the success of their school. Recognizing their value, principals are beginning to work with teachers to achieve goals that will contribute to the schools success. Principals are looking for a leadership style that welcomes the cooperation of others and values their input. One such leadership style is that of a servant leader. In servant leadership one serves the needs of their sta (Sergiovanni, 2000).
By serving one's sta instead of serving one's own needs, a
principal is able to create change within the school. Principals can practice servant leadership in the three ways that Sergiovanni (2000) describes: purposing, empowerment, and leadership by outrage.
3.3.3 Purposing In purposing it is the principal's responsibility to develop a set of core values that serves the school and present these values to the school (Sergiovanni, 2000). The principal receives input from other sta members so that everyone shares in the development of these values. Principals can receive input from sta members by meeting with them in a variety of ways:
as departments, as individuals, and as a whole.
In these
meetings, principals should work to establish dialogue, stressing the point that we are in this together and their opinions are valued. In these meetings the principal and sta can address the problems of the school that need immediate attention, identify ways of improving the school, and ways to head o future problems. Ultimately the goal will be to create a set of core values to serve as their purpose.
When developing
these values do not forget to incorporate academics, moral and character values, history, tradition, and the community. By establishing the purpose for the school, standards are being set to help guide the school's vision. Equally as important as setting the purpose for the school, the principal is creating a collaborative group that will be a valuable part of school decision making.
3.3.4 Empowerment "Empowerment is exactly what happens in a collaborative group, in terms of how everybody's opinion is valued and everybody is allowed to express themselves and be heard"(McMahon, 2001, p. 5). As a servant leader a principal constantly incorporates ways to empower their teachers.
Some of these ways include
freeing people to "do their thing," delegating with full responsibility, oering and receiving feedback, and the encouragement of self-evaluation (McMahon, 2001).
The more a principal uses these strategies the
more individuals become empowered and develop leadership qualities. This development becomes vital to improving the school. With additional leaders to make right decisions in the interest of the school, the core values will become the school norm. For example, imagine the simple task of coming to school. Each teacher leaves from a dierent house and drives down dierent roads. In time they arrive at school. Think of this in terms of reaching the shared goals of the school. Each teacher may be at dierent starting points (homes) and may take dierent paths (roads) to reach the goals, but each one has a vision of where to head (school) and arrives there. Imagine the power of having all of these people working to achieve the same goal, working to change the school, and working to make the core values a normal part of the school's culture. This is why the empowerment of a
52
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
sta becomes so valuable to a principal. A principal should allow his sta to make their own decisions for reaching the schools goals, as long as they stay within the standards of the school's core values.
3.3.5 Dependency Unfortunately in a principal's attempt to empower his sta, he will have teachers who think negatively. Some teachers do not want to be involved, accept responsibility, or practice self-management. These teachers have become dependent on the administrative sta to tell them what to do and how to do it.
How did they
get this way? They learned it from a bureaucratic managing principal. "When a principal-rather than the school community members- consistently solves problems, makes decisions, and gives answers, dependency behaviors on the part of sta actually increases" (Lambert, 2003, p.
48).
Remember the simple event
of coming to school, how getting everyone working towards a common goal is so powerful. principal unfortunately obtains just the opposite, never achieving such power.
A controlling
Suppose the day before
school started the principal visits each sta member's house and give them speci c directions on how to get to school. He even tells them what time to leave, how fast to drive and what car to drive. Can you imagine how insigni cant the sta feels after this is done? Right away the principal is showing his sta that he has no con dence in their ability to make decisions. As a principal continue to control every aspect of the sta 's job they become dependent on the principal to tell them what to do and when to do it. All self-initiative is taken away.
3.3.6 Breaking the Dependency In reality, a principal never controls how sta members come to work, just as a principal should not control every aspect of the teacher's job. "Directive or command-and control behavior may get the immediate task done, but it undermines the growth and development of those who are subjected to it, diminishing teacher leadership and the leadership capacity of the school" (Lambert, 2003, p. 44). A principal never gives up complete control, but needs to be acutely aware of ways that they increase dependency. As the leader, the principal needs to break this dependency. To do this he should continue working to empower the sta, ". . . releasing the full potential of [his] employees in order for them to take on greater responsibility and authority in the decision-making process and providing the resources for this process to occur" (Cartwright, 2002, p.6). The principal can ask individuals to take on the responsibility of researching problems and coming up with possible solutions.
People nd ".
.
.
that challenge,signi cance, and the
need to solve problems are important attributes of work that [they] nd interesting, enjoyable, and, in a word, motivating" (Owens, 2004, p. 330). When teachers become a signi cant part of the solution, their motivation and enthusiasm rises. They regain their self-initiative and are less dependent.
3.3.7 Building Leaders As teachers become less dependant they are no longer approaching the principal with problems that need to be solved, but rather they are presenting him with solutions to problems they are experiencing. They are asking for support and guidance rather than answers. A principal needs to continue to serve his sta and build servant leaders among them.
Spears list ten characteristics of a servant leader: listening, em-
pathy,healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and building community.
These characteristics are what a principal will try to build in his sta.
"Servant leaders will listen to what is being said and what is not being said"(Spears, 2002, p. 5). A servant leader is not only aware of what is happening around them, but is also self-aware. Servant leaders should rely on persuasion, rather than on one's positional authority to make decisions (Spears, 2002). A servant leader needs to have vision and have a grasp of the "big picture". All of these things help prevent a school from being stagnant and keeps it moving forward.
Even with well-established core values, a school may
need to revisit and possibly update the core values in order for the vision to continue moving forward. A principal needs to be aware of the importance of foresight to head o possible problems.
The principal
should introduce the idea of stewardship to his leaders to reinforce the commitment of serving others and
53
helping others to grow. Together a principal and his leaders can work to build community within the school by developing unity among the sta.
3.3.8 Leadership by Outrage With more and more leaders in the school,norms are established. One of the greatest norms is the response when the core values of the school are ignored. When this happens, the response of the school leaders and the whole school community is one of outrage. If no one shows that falling short of the school's expectations bothers them then the school, by default, lowers its values. This "leadership by outrage" stops the lowering of values and keeps the school moving forward.
3.3.9 Conclusion Setting the purpose of the school, empowering the sta to carry out that purpose, and being outraged when that purpose is ignored should set the basis of a principals leadership style. The link between servant leadership and moral authority is a tight one. Moral authority relies heavily on persuasion. At the root of persuasion are ideas, values, substance, and content, which together de ne group purpose and core values. Servant leadership is practiced by serving others, but its ultimate purpose is to place one self, and others for whom one has responsibility, in the service of ideals (Sergiovanni, 2000). This ideal of serving the core values of the school is what leads a school. The administrators are rst to embrace the ideal, then the teachers, and eventually the students. When the whole school community starts serving the core values the school's climate changes. Students begin to care about their education, and higher expectations are set and met. Teachers believe in students and work to provide them with the best learning environment possible.
Principals that follow servant leadership over a bureaucratic style of
management will lead schools to achieve their fullest potential.
3.3.10 References Allen,
G.
(1998)
Supervision:
Management
modern.
Retrieved
June
20,
2005,
from
16
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/1overview/management_history/mgmt_history.htm Cartwright, R. (2002) Empowerment. Oxford, United Kingdom: Capstone Publishing Ltd.
Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership Capacity for Lasting School Improvement. Alexandria, VA: Assoc. for Supervision and Curriculum Development McMahon, K. N. (2001). An Interview with Helen S. Astin. In Developing Non-hierarchical Leadership on Campus (p. 8). Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Owens, R. G. (2004). Organizational Behavior in Education. (8th ed.) Boston: Pearson Education Prideaux, R. (2001).
The Eective and Democratic School Principal.
Retrieved June 14, 2005, from
http://www.cybertext.net.au/tct/papers/week4/printable/prideaux%20-%20printable.htm
17
Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005).The principalship: A re ective practice perspective 5th ed. Needham Heights, Maryland: Allyn and Bacon. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). Leadership as Stewardship. In The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Spears, L. C. (2002). Tracing the Past, Present, and Future of Servant-Leadership. In Focus On Leadership: Servant-leadership for the Twenty- rst Century (pp. 1-10). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
16 17
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/1overview/management_history/mgmt_history.htm http://www.cybertext.net.au/tct/papers/week4/printable/prideaux%20-%20printable.htm
54
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.4 Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: 18
Continuous Learning for Professional Roles
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
3.4.1 Introduction Leadership in school organizations mattersjust as it does in most private or public enterprise. Educational administration is not just a bureaucratic function and a left over convention of post-modern management theory; rather, it is an evolving professional discipline with distinct elements of practice linked to the outcomes of education, i.e. student learning. Recent bodies of research and meta-analyses of that research identify speci c ways in which leadership in K-12 education can be linked with student achievement at both the school and district levels (Marzano, Waters, and Mc Nulty, 2005 & Marzano & Waters, 2007). As the eld engages with the evidence that leadership not only matters, but constitutes a professional practice (Elmore, 2000), state and federal policy makers are beginning to respond. The recognition of leadership as a distinct and important element of educational reform and adaptation has become a highly noted and actively addressed issue in K-12 education renewal and reform work at the state, university, and local levels. This focus has led to a rethinking of traditional means and processes for recruiting, training, developing, and supporting school leaders for K-12 careers in educational administration. It has also led to a rethinking about leadership as an essential element of a vital educational system and the link between organizational outcomes and leadership capacity distributed across roles and responsibilities in K-12 organizations (Lambert, 2003). This paper examines how changing assumptions about K-12 educational leadership are playing out in state level policies and practices shaping the training, development, and credentialing of K-12 school leaders. New trends are emerging in K-12 administrator certi cation and endorsement systems nationwide, and these trends have implications for those institutions that provide both initial training and ongoing professional development for school leaders.
Signi cantly, many of these trends focus upon improving the quality of
educational administration training at the pre-service level at the university and include post-university professional development throughout one's career as a practicing school administrator.
3.4.2 The Evolution of Administrator Certi cation By 1701, the General Court of Massachusetts decreed that every grammar-school master to be approved by the minister of the town, and the ministers of the two next adjacent towns or any town of them, by certi cate under their hand (Cole, 1957, p. 72). Woellner (1949) stated there were two main areas of competence that were implied by certi cation: academic preparation and professional preparation (p. 251). A framework was established early on by government in relation to standards of quality for teachers. In so doing, it reinforced a responsibility that the state had in governing American education. A system of licensing quali ed educators to teach, and later administer, schools can be traced to the simple need to ensure competent teachers and administrators. The certi cated educational administrator was a slowly evolving state expectation for those who would lead and manage K-12 schools and school districts. The issue of administrator certi cation was closely linked
18
This content is available online at
55
to the rise of university preparation programs. Columbia University became the rst program of study in educational administration at the beginning of the twentieth century. States, in establishing a credentialing system for principals and superintendents in the early 1900's, turned to the newly emerging discipline of educational administration to deliver the training component required of the certi cation system. By the close of the 20th century, over 500 colleges and universities oered a course of study in the eld of educational administration (Levine, 2005).
3.4.3 Requiring Professional Training in Educational Administration Over the course of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, states gradually assumed responsibility for standards of quality for teachers and administrators.
It was during the 20th century, however, that administrator
certi cation became a requirement in all fty states. For a brief amount of time in the 1990s principals and superintendents had to present state approved certi cates in all 50 states that showed evidence of pre-service university training before they could be hired in local public schools. The certi cation of school administrators became a state monitored standard of quality that emanated from the people through its state departments of education. What was once a local need to ensure mastery of academic knowledge and professional ability in teaching became a comprehensive system of review that grew with each state's widening responsibility to educate its citizens and insure educational quality. Local communities were not equipped to handle the bureaucratic oversight of a credentialing system. Departments of education centralized certi cation under the state umbrella at about the same time programs in educational administration began to proliferate in order to support the state credentialing system. Administrator certi cation had a very slow trajectory of growth and acceptance during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In 1854, only Pennsylvania required superintendents to have a certi cate of quali cation.
By 1900, it was still the only state with such a requirement.
From 1900 to 1957, however, 45
states issued certi cates for superintendents, 46 for high school principals, and 45 for elementary principals (Howsam & Morphet, 1958, p. 79). As states embraced their responsibility to establish standards of quality through certi cation of school administrators, programs of preparation were established within universities. Universities were the logical source of training to ensure that the quality standards established by the states were met through the educational administration curriculum. Columbia University began oering courses within its teacher training program in 1899 (Teachers College Record, 1919, p. 276). Prior to that time, educational administration was considered part of teaching and incorporated into a general responsibility for managing the aairs of schooling. Thus, at the beginning of the 20th century, the eld of educational administration existed as an idea that took shape as a specialized program of study. From this beginning educational administration evolved and grew into a professional eld of study that shaped how principals and superintendents approached the task of leading America's schools. Establishing a program of preparation through the university was a logical, and practically speaking, the only viable approach to training educational administrators as an extension of state certi cation. Educational administration followed the same path many other professions took to gain academic and professional credibility by becoming a university-based program. Howsam and Morphet (1958) indicated that by the late 1950's, state certi cation regulations generally called for a person to have a teaching certi cate, experience in teaching or other educational work, and college courses in educational administration and supervision before he can qualify for an administrative certi cate (p. 81). University preparation and increased credit requirements for state certi cation accelerated during the 1940's and 1950's spurred by the post war generation that emphasized education. By 1957, the bachelor's degree had become the minimum accepted level for an administrative certi cate, and only a few states accept it as adequate. Most states are requiring the master's degree for the superintendent and approximately half are requiring it for the high school and elementary school principal (Howsam & Mophet, 1958, p.
88).
The rise of the professional educational administrator can be linked to the intent of the state to create the conditions for quality in the leadership capacity of educators who became principals of schools and superintendents of K-12 school districts. As more universities oered educational administration, the curriculum evolved and expanded to include in-depth study of organization, nance, instruction, personnel, school law, and content related to leading
56
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
and managing schools. Courses in knowing how to perform the roles of principal and superintendent were lled with practical knowledge and necessary skills which were then sanctioned by state certi cation. Michigan, as the last state to adopt administrator certi cation in the United States in 1991, was the high water mark for the singular pursuit of certi cated administrators as an indicator of quality for educational leadership. It was about this time, however, that educational administration certi cation, within the context of educational reform across the U.S., was assailed as a state supported barrier keeping otherwise quali ed and successful leaders from serving as reformers in the nation's schools. Michigan became the last state to adopt administrator certi cation in 1991 and, within ve years, it had repealed the requirement of state certi cation for principals and superintendents. The e cacy of a closed credentialing system that focused primarily upon the pre-service training of principals and superintendents was described by Levine (2005) as an unworkable training model in need of reform. Thus, the stage was set for rethinking school administrator preparation.
3.4.4 Preparation in Educational Administration: New Expectations and Pressures At the beginning of the twenty- rst century, the issue of certi cation by university preparation programs in educational administration was being questioned in regard to its overall relevance to the job of leading complex educational organizations. Howsam and Morphet (1958) wrote that states had come to rely completely upon evidence of satisfactory institutional preparation as the basis for granting administrative certi cates (p. 86). Although the university-based program of study was the foundation for educational leadership training in the United States for over one hundred years, the issue of a relevant knowledge base that could be transmitted to aspiring, as well as experienced administrators, challenged university programs of preparation to look at course content and curriculum delivery. As educational administration entered its second one hundred years as a professional eld there was a decided shift in thinking about the long term career value of educational administration training with a pre-service focus. A pre-service emphasis in training through university programs in educational administration (typically at the Master's degree level) was never considered the comprehensive answer for preparing and continuing the professional development of school leaders. With a national baby boom bubble of retirees in the rst decade of the twenty- rst century from K-12 administration came unprecedented rates of turnover in building and district level leadership positions. This turnover, and an increasing desire to reform education through the board room, created opportunities for political agendas favoring the recruitment of school leaders from business, military, and other elds. The eld of educational administration was confronted with the challenge of adapting a knowledge base for aspiring educational leaders who came from both truncated career paths within education and from alternative degree and experience backgrounds outside education. As the ratio of experienced to inexperienced school administrators and educators tipped, the ranks of school leaders became more diverse and the more traditional systems of internships, mentoring, and coaching on the job began to falter. This, coupled with pressure for change in how school leaders performed their roles, created a void in the ways and means for the profession to continue maturing beyond the foundation laid down by university preparation programs. School leaders emerged from their university degree preparation only partly prepared to assume their new roles in K-12 administration and with signi cant need for ongoing focused professional development to deal with the demands of their jobs.
The jobs were becoming more
complex and the stakes for meeting those challenges driven by new state and federal accountability systems. University preparation programs could only reach so far into school leaders' actual performance and were on their own to apply a body of knowledge, theory, and practice in a constant state of ux.
3.4.5 Changing the Paradigm of Preparation The need for training educators for lifetime roles as educational leaders has, thus, evolved beyond an emphasis on merely preparing educators to assume roles in school administration to one of transmitting an evolving and maturing knowledge base in educational administration practice.
This required a model and process
for preparation and ongoing development that began with a solid foundation of research backed knowledge
57
skills, competencies, and dispositions (Waters & Grubb, 2004) and builds on that foundation in ways that enhance the performance of educational leaders over a career. Educational leaders, however, were assuming roles in schools that did not always conform to the traditional educational administration curriculum. School administration and leadership were no longer uniformly de ned sets of responsibilities designed for a stable context; rather, they were an amalgam of dynamic and rapidly changing roles for a system under stress and under signi cant pressure for fundamental change. As a result, there were two main areas that the eld of educational administration began to address to improve educational leadership training. First, university-based preparation did not fully address meaningful ongoing professional growth over the course of a career even when school leaders pursued post-masters level graduate work.
University-
based educational administration programs, in the United States, were primarily designed for pre-service introduction and academic overview of knowledge, skills, competencies, and dispositions needed by those who aspired to move into, or advance to, a new administrative role in K-12 education. As such, university preparation programs were organized around core elements of general school administration at the building or district level but not tailored to given contexts, not agile at addressing current issues, and not designed to follow, assist, and continue to develop school leaders in the course of actual professional practice in given school leadership roles. Second, states continued to rely on universities as the primary provider and venue for credentialing school leaders; yet, they were also concerned about standards of practice, quality of performance, improving competency, increasing eectiveness, and stimulating continuous growth and adaptation among school leaders once they entered the eld. These concerns rose directly out of the needs of school districts facing unprecedented challenges and high-stakes accountability. University-based courseware and programs were well suited for preparing individuals (especially trained educators) for speci c levels and functions of school administration, but they were not designed to address the myriad ways in which school administrators with varied backgrounds and career paths must adapt to and address increasingly unstable conditions in the speci c contexts and circumstances they administer. State level initiatives targeted at improving school leader eectiveness in the eld were beginning to look beyond the universities for school administrator continuing education. The traditional university graduate programs in educational administration assume a grounding in teaching and learning and do not adapt easily to alternatively degreed and/or experienced individuals who were making a career shift into school administration.
These and other factors, such as high turn-over in ad-
ministrator positions and new research ndings linking principal and superintendent leadership to student achievement (Marzano, Waters, & Mc Nulty, 2005; Reeves, 2006; Marzano & Waters, 2007), increasingly demanded more pre- and post-credentialing options for training, updating, coaching, and mentoring school leaders. The expansion of public school alternatives (charters) and a range of pressures for change, adaptation, and reform in the public school system began to stimulate a rethinking of school leader recruitment, training, development, and credentialing at the local, state, and federal policy levels (e.g. NCLB). The eld of educational administration recognizes the importance of ongoing career training postmaster's, post-specialist, and post-doctoral in considering the education of our nation's school leaders. Local boards and legislators look both within and beyond the ranks of traditionally prepared educators and educational leaders for the leadership needed to reform schools with poor student achievement track records. New technologies and new research are reshaping the practice of school leadership, and state credentialing systems are beginning to respond with both higher standards for initial certi cation and additional requirements beyond initial certi cation based on evidence of continued learning and, in some cases, actual performance in the job.
3.4.6 Rede ning Leadership Roles As these responses take shape and translate into statutory changes in state credentialing systems, common themes begin to emerge.
States are beginning to expand the professional development requirements for
school leaders, at all levels, so that training is ongoing and continues throughout a career; thus supporting change and adaptation as the American education system evolves.
Additionally, the eld of educational
administration in the twenty- rst century is beginning to recognize the critical role of the teacher as leader giving rise to teacher leadership as part of the continuum of recognized school leadership roles. Educational
58
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
administrationand especially the core of instructional leadershipconsists of training and skill development around a knowledge base that has relevance for all educational professionals involved in decision-making for the improvement of educational outcomes.
Therefore, a dynamic knowledge base must be learned and
mastered by those wishing to enter the profession as leaders and by the teacher leaders who will play a critical role in any reform and improvement eort. The notion that a leader from another profession could assume the role of an educational leader without a thorough grounding in the educational administration knowledge base was, and continues to be, a faulty assumption. The information age has re-connected teacher leadership to the teacher's historical professional role as a leader by providing teachers with access to better technologies, better strategies, better understanding of the teaching and learning process, and better understanding of the educational organization. The reform movement of the past forty years has broadened the role of the teacher to encompass instructional improvement at both the classroom and school levels. Building and district administrators are no longer viewed as the sole authority and source of leadership and direction in schools; rather, they are considered the shapers of focus and the developers of capacity. They are expected to function as learning-leaders (Reeves, 2005) who build a culture that supports inquiry discovery, professionalism, and collegiality all in the service of student learning and unprecedented expectations for universal pro ciency in core learning competencies. The concept of distributed leadership (Spillane, Halverson, and Diamond, 2004) has gained acceptance as a practice that is stretched over the social and situational contexts of the school (p. 5). As such, a model of school leadership training must encompass teachers, aspiring principals and superintendents, as well as those transitioning into education from business, the military and other professions.
3.4.7 Emerging Continuous Models of Leadership Development and Credentialing On the heels of the charter movement, state policy makers became more ambivalent about school administrator preparation, licensure, and career paths. Pressures to open school leader positions to non-educators and alternatively degreed and experienced candidates led to changes in state credentialing statutes to open up the system. Shortly after 1990, a number of states altered or even eliminated their administrator licensing and certi cation requirements.
By 2001, ve states had dropped the licensure requirement altogether for
superintendents and two had repealed the requirement for building administrators to be state certi ed as well (National Task Force on School Leadership, 2002).
During the same time period, another seventeen
states amended their certi cation requirements to open the door for alternative preparation and experience in lieu of degrees in education and education administration. The Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law helped accelerate reform of state credentialing systems because of the pressure to improve standardized test results. While some states implemented minimal or relaxed administrator certi cation, other states began a round of state licensure amendments that included expanded continuing education requirements, new or revised professional preparation and practice standards for internships and/or mentoring (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2001). By the fall of 2006, twelve states were classi ed as, mandating a two or three-tiered process that requires. . .provisional or initial certi cation...another level or two in order to also receive advanced certi cation (Illinois Commission on School Leader Preparation, August 2006). As the trend continued, a few of the advanced certi cation systems even required performance based evaluations (Alabama, Arizona, Illinois, and Ohio) while eight of the advanced certi cation states required school leaders to develop a portfolio to qualify for either a continuing or advanced certi cation.
As a
nal indicator in the trend to create advanced or enhanced state credentialing systems, four states (Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Virginia) instituted an endorsement for teacher leaders as well (IL-SAELP Report, 2006). Running parallel to the growing legislative support for two-tiered state credentialing systems was another trend: revisiting the ways school leaders were recruited, trained, developed, and sustained or supported over an entire career in K-12 administration. In 1987, the National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration (NCEEA) published its recommendations for credentialing systems to address the dierence
59
between entry-level preparation for successful performance in the eld of educational leadership and posttraining of practicing school administrators (IL-SAELP Report, 2006).
This led many states to adopt
credentialing requirements in two phases or tiers, the second of which was linked to evidence of continued education and (in a few cases) growth in areas of research supported and standards-based practice. These two-tiered or advanced systems spawned a greater interest in state policy initiatives that picked up where the traditional university preparation programs left o, i.e. intentional systems of continuing education coupled with systematic accrual of performance evidence. To implement these advanced systems of school leader licensure and credentialing, states turned to funding and research partners for help in establishing policies, programs and processes whereby emerging, developing, and practicing school leaders could be engaged in a more intentional and coherent continuum of professional training, development, and application experiences that yielded stronger performance results.
In the early 2000's, the Gates Foundation funded a major initiative for training
school leaders to utilize information technologies more eectively in carrying out their leadership roles (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/UnitedStates/Education/Grants/Grant-6958.htm).
The Broad Founda-
tion initiated a national program to recruit, develop, and place tested school leaders in some of the nation's most challenged urban school districts. Around the same time, the Wallace Foundation began its State Action Educational Leadership Project (SAELP) working with state departments of education, major research and school administrator preparation university programs, and independent researchers to impact state policy and practice for developing and supporting school leaders with high-yield leadership practices (including data-informed decision making) at the building level. Future work will focus on district level leaders. Under Bill Gates' leadership, Microsoft also stepped directly into the work of reshaping state level systems for school leadership development with its Partners in Learning initiative utilizing leadership practices that correlated with raising student achievement and/or emulated proven leadership strategies from the private sector (MI-LIFE Project, Michigan Department of Education, 2007). These and other similar public/private partnerships surfaced around the countrysome aimed at creating a national model for redesigning the way the educational system recruits, trains, continually develops, and supports school leaders at all levels from the teacher ranks to the superintendent and board levels. Other, more modest eorts are emerging at the state, regional, and local level to help practicing school leaders create more coherence between the requirements of federal and state accountability systems and the systems and processes that are shaping local schools. These emergent school leader development projects have some important common elements that distinguish them from the historical model of (1) preparation through university programs (i.e. MA, EdS, EdD, and PhD); (2) permanent certi cation through state credentialing systems, and (3) varied state continuing education requirements resulting in disconnected, widely varied, and inconsistently accessed professional development experiences and opportunities thereafter. Some of the new elements are:
•
Increased partnerships and coordination between universities, regional service centers, departments of education, local districts, regional laboratories, and private foundations and corporations (DarlingHammond, et al, 2007).
•
Stronger coherence and coordination around state leader preparation and practice standards, national accreditation standards, and research ndings (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2007).
•
Greater emphasis placed on identifying and recruiting potentially stronger and more eective leaders (Knapp, et al, 2006).
•
Greater emphasis placed on the importance of leadership at all levels (teacher leaders, school leaders, district leaders, and state leaders) coupled with an emphasis of continuous evolution and development of leadership capacity (Knapp, et al, 2006 and Lambert, 2003).
•
Stronger focus on instructional leadership and leadership for change, improvement, and reform (Leithwood, et al, 2004).
•
Stronger use of both informal and formal internship and mentoring features as speci c components of both initial preparation and continuing education programs (IL-SAELP Report, 2006).
•
Emphasis on acquisition and continued enhancement of knowledge, skills, competencies, and practices
60
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
(Grogan & Andrews, 2003).
•
A greater emphasis on and stronger allocation of resources for applying the major ndings of research that connects school leadership (teacher, principal, and superintendent) with positive changes in student success (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Marzano and Grubb, 2004; Reeves, 2006).
In a special report prepared by the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute and commissioned by the Wallace Foundation in 2007, the authors (Darling-Hammond, et al) identi ed ve ndings associated with exemplary leadership development programs: (1) There are important common features for both pre-service and in-service programs; (2) People who participate in exemplary programs are better prepared and engage more consistently in eective practices; (3) Leadership, partnerships, and nancial support are all critical for building exemplary programs; (4) Designing and delivering eective programs requires creative and exible funding strategies; and (5) Both state and district policies in uence program design and impact. The authors of this same study (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2007) go on to include the following in their list of policy implications: Durable partnerships between districts and universities, as well as state supports, facilitate consistent, coherent professional development. . .where links are weak and where professional development is not coordinated with preparation, the eects on leaders' attitudes and behaviorno matter how eective the programare more likely to fade with time, particularly in challenging school contexts (Executive Summary, p 21). The assumption for expanding and improving educational administration professional development was that universities would just expand their role past the initial credentialing and deliver additional tier credentialing requirements through the traditionally structured and delivered degree and certi cation system , e.g.
courses and credit hours.
Perhaps the assumption was also, that universities would partner with
local districts and state departments to deliver academies and like experiences for continued professional development. These assumptions make sense, as far as they go. But noticeably absent in such premises is the natural role and untapped capacity associated with an educational administration training model that shapes pre-service credentialing programs with continued or advanced credentialing programs that are not university-based. Michigan's new certi cation and endorsement statute, for example, clearly recognizes the importance of an agile and responsive, yet coherent and intentional continuum of recruitment, training, development, and learning-in-practice experiences that accommodate a variety of career paths to positions of school leadership. Moreover, the new Michigan credentialing system is grounded in the standards of practice that form the basis for university preparation programs and the foundation for the state's school improvement system (the Michigan School Improvement Framework). Between the standards that guide their initial certi cation and the state accountability standards for leading their schools and school districts, school leaders in Michigan now have a credentialing system that will follow teachers, principals, and superintendents throughout a career in school administration and assist them in applying and re ning leadership practices that translate to improved results for their schools and the students they serve.
3.4.8 Summary Educational administration has struggled to nd legitimacy and relevancy as a eld for most of the last one hundred years. The problem was that relevancy was debated around the limits of a university-based pre-service curriculum.
It was within the roles of teacher, principal, and superintendent that the skills,
abilities, and knowledge, were acknowledged and practiced.
That is, the profession long recognized a set
of skills and competencies for educational leadership that integrated knowledge utilized in performing one's role after graduating with a degree from the university. During the latest reform movement the importance of highly trained and competent educational leaders became all too evident to the school districts seeking higher levels of student performance. School districts quickly recognized that training for improved student learning was a necessary requirement for educational leaders charged with making educational improvement. Appropriate training throughout one's career is the missing component of educational administration that, in fact, complements the university-based pre-service
61
program of preparation. The eld of educational administration must recognize that educational leadership preparation spans a career. The dynamic environment associated with leading an educational organization demands a lifetime of learning. More importantly, all educators must recognize this environment as a demanding venue that requires professional development over the course of a career. One can no longer expect a school administrator to know or understand all of the complexity associated with leading an educational organization upon completion of a university-based preparation program in educational administration. Educational administration has become a profession of complexity that requires depth of study and continuous learning throughout one's professional career.
3.4.9 References Broad
Foundation.The
broad
residency
in
19
urban
education.
Retrieved
September
5,
2008
from
http://www.broadresidency.org/index.php
Cole, N. M. (Winter, 1957). The licensing of schoolmasters in colonial Massachusetts. History of Education Journal, 8(2), 68-74. Darling-Hammond, L. Lapointe, M., Meyerson, D. & Orr, M. (2007).
Preparing school leaders for a
changing world. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. Elmore, R. (2000).
Building a new structure for school leadership.
Washington, CC: Albert Shanker
Institute. Gates
Foundation.
U.S.
partners
in
learning.
http://www.microsoft.com/Education/PiLUS.mspx
Retrieved
20 .
September
5,
2008
from
Gousha, R. P., LoPresti, P. L., & Jones, A. H. (1988). Report on the rst annual survey certi cation and employment standards for educational administrators. In D. E. Gri ths, R. T Stout, & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Leaders for America's schools (pp. 200-206). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Grogan, M. & Andrews, R. (2003).
De ning preparation and professional development in the future.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 38 (2), 233-256. Howsam, R. B. & Morphet, E. L. (March, 1958). Certi cation of educational administrators, The Journal of Teacher Education, IX(1), 75-96. IL-SAELP ti cation
(Illinois
structure
State
to
Action
improve
for
Educational
student
www.coe.ilstu.edu/eafdept/centerforedpolicy
21 .
Leadership
achievement.
Project.
Retrieved
Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S., and Wahlstrom, K. (2004).
An
March
advanced
10,
2008
cerfrom
How leadership in uences stu-
dent learning. A Report Commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Levine, A. Educating school leaders. Washington, D.C. EducationSchools Project. Retrieved September
22 .
5, 2008 from http://www.edschools.org/reports_leaders.htm Marzano, fect
of
the
R.
J.,
&
Waters,
superintendent
T.
leadership
(2007). on
School
student
district
achievement.
leadership A
that
working
works: paper
The
available
efat
http://www.mcrel.org/topics/Leadership. Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School Leadership That Works: From Research to Results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. NCSL Task Force on School Leadership (2002).
The role of school leadership in improving student
achievement. Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures.
19 20 21 22
http://www.broadresidency.org/index.php http://www.microsoft.com/Education/PiLUS.mspx http://www.coe.ilstu.edu/eafdept/centerforedpolicy http://www.edschools.org/reports_leaders.htm
62
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2001). Recognizing and encouraging exemplary leadership in America's schools: A proposal to establish a system of advanced certi cation for administrators. Arlington, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration. Reeves, D. (2006). The learning leader. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., and Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. Wallace Foundation. State Action for Educational Leadership Project. Retrieved, September, 5, 2008
23
from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/GrantsPrograms/FocusAreasPrograms/EducationLeadership/SaelpProgram.htm . Waters, T. & Grubb, S. (2004). The leadership we need: Using research to strengthen the use of standards for administrator preparation and licensure programs. Aurora, CO: McRel. Woellner, R. C. (June, 1949). Teacher certi cation. Review of Educational Research, 19(3), 250-253. Russell, J. E. (January, 1919). Teachers College Record, XX(1), 276.
3.5 Reality Check: 21st Century
Note:
Designing a New Leadership Program for the
24
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. School improvement cannot occur without good leadership, and leadership knowledge and skills cannot be developed without sound school leadership preparation programs.Today, the best school leaders have cultivated their craft through many years of experience, dependent upon trial and error and self-re ection, and professional development.
However, this method does not meet the need to produce the quantity of
quality school leaders needed to turn around poor and failing schools and school districts. A report by the Southern Regional Education Board (2006) stated, Given the urgency for increased student achievement, it would seem that redesigning principal preparation programs around leadership practices that have a high impact on students' learning would be a high priority at every university. Yet, it is not (p. 2). The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (U.S. Department of Education, 2000) and research substantiates both a scant supply of talented candidates to lead schools and the importance of these individuals in improving student achievement (Mazzeo, 2003). For the past decade, university school leadership preparation programs have been under vigorous scrutiny by such researchers as Levine (2005) and Murphy (1992). For example, Levine (2005) claimed the quality of most preparation programs for school leaders ranges from inadequate to appalling (p.24). In the Accidental Principal, Hess and Kelly (2005) stated that when the contents of 31 programs across the United States were studied, researchers concluded that principals are not mastering the skills necessary to lead school improvement and increase student achievement in the 21st Century. The Research Base of School Leadership Preparation Programs Recent research has focused on the need to redesign principal preparation programs to select the best and brightest teacher leaders, provide skills to lead teachers in increasing student achievement, and meet
23 24
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/GrantsPrograms/FocusAreasPrograms/EducationLeadership/SaelpProgram.htm This content is available online at
63
the challenges of standards-based accountability (Grogan & Andrews 2002; Portin, Knapp, Murphy & Beck, 2003) According to Murphy (1992), the most potent forces for leadership development occur in the context of ongoing eld work rather than formal classroom settings. When colleges teach subject matter in isolation of eld experience, this knowledge has little or no transference to practice (Murphy, 1992). Consequently, the concern of school leaders and researchers is that the knowledge graduate candidates learn in university classrooms is inapplicable to real-life situations and challenges for school improvement. In order to design an exemplary program, distributed and shared leadership must be practiced at all levelsstate, university, and district. Shared/distributed leadership is neither a top-down nor a total grass roots model.
A shared decision making model is the best for total commitment and sustainability.
This
has prompted the use and development of partnerships, especially at the university/district level. Successful partnerships have been developed in places such as East Tennessee State University (West, 2003), University of Kentucky (Browne-Ferrigno, 2004) and other universities across the country. During district partnership sessions, East Tennessee based its program on themes rather than distinct subjects (West, 2003). The University of Kentucky Partnership identi ed the lack of knowledge and dispositions for instructional leadership as one of the main needs of preparation and professional development programs (Browne-Ferrigno, 2004). The goal of this paper is to discuss the lessons learned and challenges faced in developing a partnership program at Southeastern Louisiana University in hopes of helping others in their quest to improve school leadership preparation program. Louisiana's Redesign of School Leadership Preparation Programs In 2001, the state of Louisiana formed a partnership with the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) that has been instrumental in the development of school leader preparation programs.
Support in new
program development and teaching strategies have been oered to help university/district partnerships. In spring 2005 the Southeastern Louisiana Partnership began the recruitment, selection, and implementation process for the new school leader preparation program and professional development of sitting school leaders. This article focuses on the LEAD Southeastern Louisiana Partnership; LEAD is an acronym for Leading, Engaging, Assessing, and Developing (School Leaders) in Southeastern Louisiana. A knowledge and skills base for school leadership preparation has been developed and is constantly being reviewed and renewed with the assistance of such groups as the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) and the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). Two major problems with respect to principal preparation exist: (1) How to bring this new knowledge base to school leaders in the eld through professional development, and (2) How to design and implement leadership preparation programs to eectively teach these skills. The focus here is on the latter, concerned especially with examining the creation and implementation of the new research-based program at Southeastern Louisiana University.
The creation process began in 2001,
implementation with the rst cohort of students in fall 2005, and the collection of the rst assessments and surveys in May 2006.
An example of the design and implementation process of a new school leader
preparation program and the challenges of the change process are presented in this article. Until 2005, the plans had only been on paper, and now the reality check is in the implementation. Leadership Development Framework Leadership occurs at all levels of the learning community. In England, Southworth and Doughty (2006) describe the leadership development framework of the National College for School Leadership as ve stages of leadership from the teacher stage to consultant stage. The ve stages are: (1) Leading from the Middle, (2) National Professional Quali cation for Headship, (3) Early Headship, (4) Advanced Leadership, and (5) Consultant Leadership. Although not as highly developed as England's program, the new program in Louisiana and at Southeastern Louisiana University has recognized three stages where leaders can bene t from knowledge and skill development: teacher leader, school building leader, and district leader. Each stage of educational development trains school leaders during real eld-based experience with district and university mentors. The goal is to prepare exemplary people who can make immediate use of their newly learned skills in the school in which they are leading or in a new leadership position. The state of Louisiana, the university, and school districts are working together to align every aspect of the process. Endorsements, certi cations, and/or degrees result at the successful completion of each level, with ongoing support and training guidance from the LEAD Southeastern Louisiana Partnership and the state. The purpose of LEAD
64
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
is to recruit and select exemplary educational leaders at all levels of leadership identi ed in our state. Three
1
core programs (described in full at the state's website, www.leadlouisian.net ) are designed to prepare teacher leaders, entry-level principals, and superintendents. Teacher Leader Endorsement This endorsement re ects the theory of shared and distributed leadership and is designed to assist teachers improve eectiveness in raising student achievement and leading faculty teams.
The goal is to create a
leadership team of two to four teacher leaders with in each school in our service area. At the completion of the program each teacher leader has the option of continuing in the degree program or assuming the role of leading school-based teams. The requirements include a teaching certi cate, 3 years successful teaching experience, and completion of a state-approved Teacher Leader Institute which incorporates: 1. A minimum of 6 graduate hours (90 contact hours). 2. A combination of face-to-face and eld-based professional development activities that may include the use of a cohort approach. 3. Support from and mentoring by current outstanding administrators serving as mentors and facilitators. 4. An electronic component (online or compressed video) to ensure each participant's access to key resources and to build a statewide network of quali ed administrator candidates that may include the development of cohorts. 5. The development and presentation of a culminating portfolio that provides evidence that knowledge gained and skills acquired are aligned with national and state leader standards. Educational Leader Certi cate Level 1 and 2 The Educator Leader Certi cate Levels 1 and 2 are mandated for all who aspire to school and district leadership positions, assistant principal, and principal and includes on-the-job training and mentoring from an advanced school leader. Components of the certi cate include the completion of a competency-based graduate degree preparation program in the area of educational leadership from a regionally accredited institution of higher education; a passing score (168 recommended)on the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA); upon employment, enrollment in a 2-year Educational Leader Induction Program, which must be completed within 3 years. At the successful culmination of this induction, a Level 2 Certi cate is awarded. Educational Leader Certi cate Level 3 Educational Leader Certi cate Level 3 is inclusive of Levels 1 and 2 and is requisite of those who aspire to become a superintendent and may be enhanced by an earned doctorate degree (Ed.D.) from the new Consortium for School Leadership, a joint program from Southeastern Louisiana University and University of Louisiana at Lafayette. To earn this certi cate, students must have 5 years successful experience at the level of principal or above; a passing score (154 recommended) on the School Superintendent Assessment (SSA); and a passing score on the School Leadership Licensure Assessment, which is a new certi cation test from the Educational Testing Service School Leader Portfolio Assessment. To renew any certi cation, each educator must complete a minimum of 150 Continuous Learning Units of Professional Development over a 5-year period that is consistent with Individual Professional Growth Plan and that includes updating the educational leader portfolio. How to Design a School Leader Preparation Program The new school leadership program at Southeastern Louisiana University incorporates the Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC)standards and draws from the best practices of both the transformational and shared instructional leadership models in order to develop the leadership skills of aspiring school leaders (Marks & Printy, 2003). The new preparation program combines the two models of leadership into an integrated approach. Furthermore, the new program blends the critical mass of technical, human, and educational forces, as recommended by Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003), into the professional content (the what) and theory (the why) with practical skills (the how and when) through case studies, simulations, and extensive eld-based experiences. Following the creation of a partnership with the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) in 2003, the state of Louisiana mandated that all universities redesign preparation programs for school leaders be based on
65
the new standards, which are re ected in the state certi cation guidelines. In addition, all university degree programs are required to be National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) certi ed. The LEAD Southeastern Partnership diers from the other Louisiana university/district partnerships in that it is composed of urban, suburban, and rural school districts with dramatic demographic dierences. Leadership is context-speci c, as the National College for School Leadership in England discovered (Southworth & Doughtly, 2006). The program requires diverse eld experience throughout order to qualify graduates to work in a variety of settings. The plan provides professional development for existing school leaders and improving conditions at low performing schools to increase student achievement. Located on the northern shore of Lake Ponchatrain, Louisiana, populations within the partnership districts have grown since the natural disaster of Hurricane Katrina and thus the need for highly quali ed school leaders is of foremost importance. Current issues of culture, diversity, social justice, and various socio-economic groups are prevalent in this area of the Deep South and add to the many challenges faced in this era of high-stakes testing and high expectations. The partnership has attempted to design a leadership preparation program that will foster conditions of success for leadership in a variety of schools. LEAD Southeastern Louisiana has allied with other leadership preparation programs, professional organizations, and related educational groups around the country to maintain a current knowledge base of best practices in principal preparation, related policy issues, and licensure and professional development for school leaders. These schools and organizations include LEAD Fairfax in Virginia, the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), The Gallup Organization, and the SREB. In 1975, Hills (cited in Murphy, 1992) stated that the educational administrator of the future should understand and be able to use the skills of developmental psychology, socialization, cultural variation, teaching and learning, instructional methods and materials, and curriculum development.
Murphy (1992) recom-
mended that the preparation program should becomprised of the creation of learning communities that incorporate the understandings of the human condition; the infusion of content from a greater variety of areas, especially the humanities; and the use of instructional approaches that promote cooperative eort, dialog and re ection (p. 146). According to Murphy, the goals for training school leaders should concentrate on the development of model educators. Each school leader is able to articulate and model the use of (1) an explicit set of values and beliefs, including a strong sense of social justice, to guide their actions; (2) developmental psychology, socialization, cultural variation, and instructional and curricular methods and materials; (3) problem solving and inquiry skills; and (4) shared leadership. Murphy (1992) has encouraged universities to use dierent training models that are thematic-integrated seminars incorporating the capacity to learn. Candidates should seek knowledge as a tool rooted in action and guided by cognition. Reading material should be the most current gathered from original sources. Creating the Plan for School Leadership Preparation During the early stages of the redesign eort, EDL faculty conducted semi-structured informal interviews with area principals. Many of the interviews took place at current practicum sites. The interviews were for the purpose of soliciting speci c input from principals, such as sequencing, scheduling, and delivery of courses, the cohort concept, and the groups' perceptions regarding needed content, skills and eld-based activities prior to assuming an educational administrator role. Principals were asked in which management/leadership areas they felt most prepared as they assumed their rst administrative job and in which areas they felt the least prepared. The purpose was to seek input on the sequencing of courses, scheduling and delivery of courses, the cohort concept, and their perceived needs regarding needed content and activities prior to assuming a school leadership role. Following this, an advisory council was formed and this group conducted focus group interviews within their districts. All levels of input were acquired and critiqued by the advisory council to decide which to include in the plan. The draft of the new program and its rationale was presented by a team EDL faculty and district leaders, followed by small-group activities through which participants helped to incorporate standards into speci c seminars and helped develop competency-based activities.
(See Appendices A, B,
and C for interview questions and additional responses.) Southeastern Louisiana University professor David Stader (2003) constructed and eld tested the Belief
66
CHAPTER 3.
Matrix instrument.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
It was designed to guide discussions of the importance of understanding beliefs in
decision-making and in formulating a shared school vision throughout the program. Candidates completed surveys regarding their perceptions of self e cacy in school leadership by using the instrument in guiding the clari cation and articulation of their beliefs.
The results of the study revealed that continued use of
the instrument could be of bene t to the students and program. Continued research is being conducted on the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003) eectiveness of eld based skill development and impact on PK-12 student achievement. The external critique of the plan for redesign of the school leader preparation program was administered by consultants from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto, Canada. They also met with university and district school leaders and attended focus group presentations, and made two recommendations: One, begin the graduate studies with instruction and eld based work in leading teacher teams in how to review research data as a means of examining school context and selecting research based strategies for school improvement.
Two, introduce the methods for facilitating a high performance
learning culture and integrate these methods throughout the remaining seminars (Hill-Winstead & Stader, 2004). After 5 years of collaborative research and examination of best leadership practices, the new school leadership preparation program was approved for implementation in fall 2005. Master of Education Degree in School Leadership Recruitment and Selection The rst step of the LEAD program was to recruit experienced teachers. District leaders were requested to nominate exemplary teachers with a minimum of 3 years of teaching experience whom they viewed as possessing leadership capabilities as future school administrators. These teachers were invited to apply for admission to the university and enroll in the rst seminar. During this semester, each candidate completes an application portfolio consisting of letters of recommendation, writing samples, artifacts with corresponding assessments from the rst seminar, Graduate Record Exam Scores, transcripts, and teaching and leadership experiences. As part of our partnership with the Gallup Organization, each candidate also is assessed for leadership dispositions online called Principal Insight. The selection process culminates with a formal group and individual interview scored according to a rubric and the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003). The interviewers are a team of district and university leaders who make the nal selections after analyzing the participant pro les. Structure of Seminars As an integral part of the program is a series of seminars with embedded eld-based experiences, culminating in a full internship so that graduates may immediately enter the principalship as turn around change agents. Field-based experiences are planned by university professors with the students and their clinical supervisors/mentors in order to design relevant activities that help the aspiring school leaders develop leadership skills that produce improved teaching and learning. Through the seminar and eld experience, each student maintains a re ective journal. In addition, re ections are self analyzed using the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003) which has proven successful for the purposes of de ning one's growth and development of skills and dispositions. Finally,rigorous, ongoing assessment is conducted throughout the seminars. For example, students are required to lead a team of faculty members in several activities, which are observed and assessed by the university instructors of record and/or district mentor, using a preset rubric for each. Who developed the rubric and what are some key items on it? Face-to-face class sessions are team taught with other professors and school district leaders. Students proceed through the program as a cohort, sentence is too longmake it two sentences) mirroring the type of learning community that they need to form in their schools as leader. The cohort model facilitates the building of group and individual knowledge and the solving of problems from multiple viewpoints. Thematic seminarsinclude research-based best practices from the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), ELCCStandards, action research, portfolio development, and technology utilization.
The tradi-
tional knowledge base of leadership/management that features educational theory, history, management, school/community relations, human resource management, nance and law are integrated throughout the program.
The curriculum spirals with reviewed concepts, new concepts, discovery, and re ection.
Each
seminar is infused with case study analysis and simulation exercises of technical leadership, instructional
67
leadership, and professional development for school improvement. The seminars build skills gradually, from observing, participating, leading small teams to whole faculty, and nally to leading district teams. Seminar I: Facilitating a high performance learning community. This establishes the foundation of aligning core beliefs with strategic structures and mission and vision of establishing distributed accountability. Along with these skills, candidates are taught to lead teacher teams in discussing school improvement.
They
begin by deciding what kinds of data are needed to depict a clear picture of the school's present level of achievement, collecting the data, and nally planning activities for school improvement. data is readily available from standardized methods of collection.
Some of the
The teams decide what other data is
needed to examine school practices, what students are taught, how they are taught and what is expected of them. The team analyzes data and studies research about teaching methods that have proven successful for students.
This provides an initial plan for school improvement so they will have the skills needed to
exercise the best practices of making data-driven decisions and building a vision. At this point, training in technologyis infused to introduce integration of technology with teaching and learning, as well as to assist with the establishment of a student's electronic portfolio. After successfully completing the rst seminar, participants receive their Teacher Leader endorsement from the Louisiana Department of Education. This is a new certi cate endorsement awarded by the state. Seminar II: Organizational management and legal issues.
The focus here is on the legal and scal is-
sues of organizing the learning environment, building and leading eective teams, and coaching for school improvement. At this point and throughout the program, candidates are required to complete eld-based activities at a variety of school levels and central o ce settings. Through these activities, the candidates lay a foundation for the practices of collaboration and shared decision-making by leading teams through problem-solving, consensus-building, and information-sharing. They are also expected to demonstrate e cient and eective use of time, space, people, and resources to maximize student learning.
Through case
studies, students utilize federal regulations, state laws, and local policies to inform decision-making; through simulations, they make ethical decisionsin various school management situations. Seminar III: Human resources and school-community relations. Here participants explore communication with the learning community, sta ng and induction, and needs-based professional development of teachers. Developing eective interpersonal relationships with faculty, sta, and community is the focus of the course, which lays the foundational skills needed for best practices such as developing relationships and communicating eectively.
Throughout this seminar, students complete eld-based activities of human resource
management, including recruitment, selection, induction, and professional development. Seminar IV: School leader as instructional facilitator.
This program strand concentrates on leading
improvement in literacy and numeracy instruction, as well as methods of dierentiating instruction to meet the needs of all students.
The instructional program is explored through an analysis and evaluation of
curriculum, student assessment, and instruction.
Emphasis is placed on the supervision of the teaching
and learning process as it relates to continuous school improvement. The candidates learn how standards, teaching, and learning are dynamic structures in constant ux; thus, the best practices of mapping and monitoring the curriculum are continuously practiced. Seminar V: School leader as change agent.
School improvement with an emphasis on the importance
of change and the best practices of action research and data analysis is the objective of this course. Each candidate concentrates on leading change by understanding self and others, directing sta in the creation of professional development, and working with others in creating a personalized learning environment. Students make nal preparations for the action research project to be completed by the end of the nal semester prior to graduation. Seminar VI: The internship. The nal seminar is a full internship, with candidates participating in the beginning and ending activities of the school year, totaling 150 hours of eld-based experience.
During
this time, the action research project is completed, in which the students and their respective stakeholders collaborate on a selected topic for school improvement. More advanced technology training is included in this seminar; it is designed primarily to provide guidance in the re nement of the candidates' electronic portfolios and to support their action research projects. Leadership projects and artifacts are maintained in an electronic portfolio that demonstrates individual growth. The prospective leaders work to re ne their
68
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
electronic portfolios for the nal defense in their educational leadership master's degree program.
3.5.1 Selection and Assignment of Field Sites Recent research (e.g., Bottoms, 2004; Davis, 2005) supports the use of practicing administrators in the eld as role models to mentor and help close the gaps among leadership knowledge, theory, and practice. Mentored experiences over an extended period of time provide the opportunity for greater understanding on the part of those mentored and are designed to demonstrate the application of the knowledge and skills emphasized in each instructional seminar. In the School Leader Preparation program, worksites include public and private educational units. Those schools and systems used in the preparation of candidates are diverse in community type, school type, enrollment, grade con guration, race, income level, academic performance scores and/or performance designations. According to Bottoms (2004), educational administration programs need to select knowledgeable, experienced administrators to serve as coaches and mentors. In the program, potential mentors are nominated by their supervisors and/or superintendents. Each mentor is selected based on leadership experience, certi cation type and area, professional activities, personal qualities, successful use of technology, commitment to mentoring interns, and successful participation in a mentor training seminar. The mentor training seminar provides information on tools and strategies to support and supervise eld-based administrative experiences and consists of a program overview, coaching techniques, shared decision-making activities, and assessment and evaluation procedures for assessing program candidates.
3.5.2 Assessment of Candidates Assessment of program participants is accumulated as artifacts in an electronic portfolio platform of PASSPORT, developed by the Louisiana Department of Education.
Artifacts are documents that provide evi-
dence of a standards-based leadership experience and include traditional written narratives and tests, selfassessments, and eld-based observation assessments. Periodically throughout the six semesters of the program, candidates must successfully pass through a series of portals or gates in order to continue to the next program component. They are required to submit a minimum of two artifacts per seminar for their portfolio. These documents are evaluated using standards-based rubrics developed by university faculty and advisory council members. Students are required to cite the relevant standards for school leaders with respect to the evidence submitted. In addition, each portfolio artifact is accompanied by a re ective summary describing how it documents mastery of the related standard. The portfolio documents become part of the formative and summative evaluation process. In addition to traditional methods (e.g., written work, tests) for evaluating and monitoring student progress, the acquisition of skills associated with each seminar is documented by the artifacts and evaluated through the use of rubrics. As students progress through the program, each portfolio entry is evaluated by the professor of record. As part of the summative program assessment, artifacts are formally presented for defense before a committee of graduate faculty members and eld administrators serving as mentors.
3.5.3 Methods for Evaluating and Modifying Program Components Program evaluation regarding the eectiveness of curriculum and eld activities in meeting the needs of their respective school districts is being conducted through surveys completed by program participants, mentors and/or clinical supervisors, and university faculty. Over time, school leadership success factors (e.g., professional development opportunities, student discipline, and teacher satisfaction) that are not measured by traditional accountability reports, notably standardized test scores, are examined to determine the longitudinal impact of the school leadership preparation program and its prospective leaders. For each eld-based project completed and implemented by candidates, a self-developed survey is distributed to stakeholders (e.g., teachers, parents, students [as appropriate], administrators) to determine their level of satisfaction with the overall performance of the candidates during that seminar.
Additionally, follow-up surveys are
69
distributed to school and district administrators to determine their perceptions of the preparedness and eectiveness of program participants involved in eld experiences and internships at their respective sites. Each candidate is surveyed at the end of Seminars II and V to determine individual levels of satisfaction with the program and the quality of instruction. These evaluations are used to provide the data necessary to monitor, evaluate, and modify the program as needed. The data are collected through the PASS-PORT electronic assessment system. Other data, such as student opinions of teaching and exit surveys are used to provide additional information regarding the quality of the program. Analysis of the results is conducted by the university sta and members of the advisory council, who then carry on the processes of program evaluation, formal discussion and dialogue, and collaborative decision making before making recommendations for program improvement. Approved changes are then systematically studied to measure their eects on the program and, consequently, on the leaders being produced by this program. Results from Surveys and Assessments The rst two cohorts completed surveys, some individually and some in focus groups. Mentors and eld site school principals completed an open-ended evaluation of the program. Superintendents wrote letters of opinion. Professors completed an electronic evaluation. Cohort Surveys and Assessments When asked if the rst 6 hours met their expectations, students asked for more eld experiences and less lecture (face-to-face) time, additional assessment during the semester, and extra eld time with their mentors. They felt a lack of district and school recognition, support, and approval. Some felt afraid to talk to their site principal, even when they had a school leader mentor from another site. Some reported that other teachers who had completed another graduate program complained about the attention and release time for cohort members. They reported the need for more communication with mentors and release time for eld experience. The artifacts generated by each student in their electronic portfolios have been, on the whole, judged to be of high quality. (See Appendix D.) Evaluations from Mentors and Field Site School Principals When asked about their impression of the program, school leaders notedthat they really appreciated the attention and skill development for aspiring school leaders and wished that their preparation program had been this intense. They expressed a concern for time spent away from the classroom to conduct eld experience. A need for a thorough mentor preparation workshop was noted. Several respondents expressed appreciation for the advanced learning they received as a result of site visits by the university mentor: as in, You have made me think of my school and student achievement in new ways I never thought of before. I have learned so much from this experience. One principal took the opposite point of view by criticizing the program when he said, I will encourage any of my teachers who want to get a master of education degree in school leadership to go to Mississippi. They don't have this crazy program there. Teachers should be able to get a degree without all of this interference from the university. I don't have time to deal with this. Clarify what this quote means Letters from Superintendents Superintendents expressed concerns of sustainability and wondered if their district could continue the leadership program if funds were reduced.
Others did not want their teachers out of the classroom and
thus were opposed to release time. Some expressed concern about nominating teachers for the leadership program, resulting in perceived favoritism and complaints. One superintendent said, I am proceeding with caution about this dierent way of preparing school leaders. I need to know more. She continued to explain that she had not been active in the design of the program, and had sent a representative in her place. Now, during implementation, she felt like she needed to be more involved in the decision making process. Survey of Professor Views Some professors believed that the new program could make a real impact on PK-12 student achievement and school leadership. A few felt that the most of the workload for design and implementation was being placed on junior faculty, without compensation for tenure and promotion. Other professors were very concerned about the amount of eld work and didn't know how they were going to have time to travel to districts. These professors were concerned about their subject area being covered thoroughly due to the lack
70
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
of real lecture time. Lecturing about subjects such as law, nance, history of education, and other subjects were a very important missing ingredient of the new program. Since the content and method of delivery of many parts of the program had been mandated through the process of state approval and strict curriculum alignment to standards, some professors believed that their academic freedom had been curtailed.
Still,
others believed that their academic freedoms had been breeched due to the. Reality Check: Lessons Learned and Challenges Faced Change is di cult, especially in the implementation stages.
Even though partnerships were formed
to create shared and distributed leadership for the development of the new preparation and development program, at this time some resistance to change is being experienced. Perhaps those who chose not to be involved in the design process may become involved now as the program is modi ed as an outcome of the program evaluations. Not surprisingly, this new process of preparing school leaders through eld experience was a major paradigm shift for area school leaders, especially superintendents. Assurances that this was a partnership and paradigm shift were di cult to accept by many area leaders. In addition, school district leaders were reluctant to nominate exemplary teachers for the program fearing accusations of favoritism from teachers. The shift to the new paradigm at the university level was met with the challenge to include more people in the process. Field experiences are a challenge to manage. Some clinical supervisors and mentors have to experience additional professional development in order to provide appropriate guidance to candidates.
During the
implementation of the program, the university initially struggled with providing appropriate training of mentors as well as university sta. With training and additional support from SREB programs, such as the Training Mentors for School Improvement module, this process was better facilitated. Future plans include addressing the challenges of diversity and social justice, moving away from the status quo, and nding new solutions to unanticipated problems. Murphy (1992) has stated that school leaders were often former teachers residing within a 25 to 50 mile radius of the school they now lead. Additionally, most schools seem to promote from within with little regard to skill. If a broader pool of leaders could be tapped, the educational and skill level may increase. It is hoped that a more national and global leadership community may be developed using the technology of distance learning and capstone experiences. In this way, professors, administrators, and administrative candidates could share and bene t from appropriate eld experiences and unfamiliar perspectives in their region or state. The authors believe that the new program of leadership development and preparation will be successful, even though the program is in its infancy. However, according to a study conducted by Davis (2005), leadership programs that were concept-driven, cohort-based, and eld-based scored higher on the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA), received higher performance ratings by supervisors, and were perceived by teachers as being more eective. It is hoped that this new leadership program will train new leaders to make a notable dierence in school improvement and student achievement in Southeastern Louisiana University's service area. Conclusion The recent focus on the importance of school leadership and its eects on school improvement has put school leader preparation programs under scrutiny and prompted them to redesign.
Even though new
research is being conducted, the task of preparing educational administrators has suered from a lack of clarity and paucity of systematic scholarly inquiry. This examination of Southeastern Louisiana University' new program contributes to the knowledge base for school leadership preparation because it is a leader in the arena of state, university, and school district(s) collaboration to educate all students eectively and equitably. A deeper understanding about the impact of school leadership as a means for promoting social justice and democracy especially in the Deep South are needed. The ongoing outcomes of Southeastern Louisiana University's school leader preparation program may provide better understandings of how to integrate powerful transformative and instructional learning experiences into preparation program design, content, and eld experience to develop leadership capacity. There is much to be learned as these new leadership preparation programs unfold throughout the nation. It is hoped that an ever-evolving research base will help all
71
institutions of school leadership preparation and professional development to learn from each other. References Bottoms, G., & O'Neill, K. (April, 2001).
Preparing a new breed of principals:
It's time for ac-
tion. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board. (01V17) Monograph retrieved April 2, 2006 from http://www.sreb.org/main/Leadership/pubs/01V17_Time_for_Action.pdf. Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2004). Principals excellence program: Developing eective school leaders through unique university-district partnership. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, 5 (2), 24-36. Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Stanford, CA: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute in conjunction with the nance project commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Fry, B., O'Neill, K. & Bottoms, G. (2006). Schools can't wait: Accelerating the redesign of university principal preparation programs. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board. Grogan, M. & Andrews, R. (2002). De ning preparation and professional development for the future. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 233-256. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Re ections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351. Hess,
F.
(No.3).
M.,
&
Hoover
Kelly,
P.
Institution,
M.
(2005,
Leland
Summer).
Stanford
The
Junior
accidental
University.
principal.
Retrieved
Education
May
17,
2006,
Next. from
http://www.educationnext.org/20053/34.html Hill-Winstead, M. F. & Stader, D. (2004, April). Responding to the challenge of reforming leadership preparation programs: A standards based preparation pyramid. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. King, D. (2002). The changing shape of leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 61-63. Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 37-40. Leithwood, K. (2005). Educational leadership (Rev. ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and Education, Laboratory for Student Success. Retrieved April 18, 2006, from www.temple.edu/lss/pdf/Leithwood.pdf. Levine, A. (March, 2005). Educating school leaders. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.
1
Louisiana
cation
Educational
Structure.
Leaders
Retrieved
Network.
May
(2005)
24,
2006
from
Educational
Leadership
Certi -
http://www.leadlouisiana.net/site100-
01/1001669/docs/ed_leadership_certi cation_structure.pdf. Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397. Mazzeo, C. (September 12, 2003).
Issue brief of the Educational Policy Studies Division, National
Governors Association Center for Best Practices. Washington, DC: Wallace Foundation, National Governors' Association. Murphy, J. (1992). The landscape of principal preparation: Reframing the education of school administrators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press. Portin, B. S., Knapp, M., Murphy, J., & Beck, L. (2003). Self-re ective renewal in schools. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2001). The principalship: A re ective practice perspective. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Southworth, G. & Doughty, J. (2006). A ne British blend. Educational Leadership, 63(8), 51. Stader, D. (April, 2003). A framework for re ection and clarifying dispositions. Paper presented at the Louisiana Association of Professors of Educational Administration.
Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond,
Louisiana. U.S. 2001.
Department Washington,
of DC:
Education. O ce
of
(2002,
January
Elementary
and
8).
Secondary
No
Child
Left
Education.
Behind
[Online].
Act
of
Available:
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf. Waters, thirty rora,
J.
years CO:
of
T.,
Marzano,
research
Mid-continent
tells
R. us
Research
J.,
&
about for
McNulty,
B.
A.
the
of
leadership
eect
Education
and
(2003).
Learning.
on
Balanced
leadership:
student
achievement.
Retrieved
April
2,
2006,
What Aufrom
72
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
www.mcrel.org/topics/productDetail.asp?topicsID=7&productID=144. West, R. F. (November 7, 2003). Integrating the SREB modules into the principal preparation program at East Tennessee State University: A progress report. Paper prepared for the University Continuing Education
25 Convention, Learning for Leadership and Leadership for Learning. Portland, OR.
Association
Appendix A Beginning Principals FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW It may have seemed like you were thrown to the wolves when you became principals. Tell us what we need to teach new and aspiring principals. 1. What did you need to be successful? 2. What content in college classes did you need to use? 3. How should we address this content? 4. What types of eld activities do candidates need? 5. How can we best prepare candidates to pass the licensure test? 6. What type of support do you need from the university? Appendix B Survey of Region 2 Superintendents and Administrators in Louisiana The task before us: A RIGOROUS SELECTION SYSTEM A rigorous system that chooses only the best candidates for principal preparation will encourage more talented educators to seek out leadership programs, National Governors Association. How can universities and school systems work together to tap or select the right individuals for leadership preparation? Here are some ideas gathered from brainstorming sessions at the SREB Leadership Initiative summer conference. Please check the ideas that you will support for recruitment and selection in your district. WHAT SHOULD WE CONSIDER? _ Demonstrates success in raising achievement for all students _ Shows leadership in coaching other teachers to raise student achievement _ Recommended by high-performing principals _ Implemented innovative learning strategies in their classrooms _ Challenges all students through rigorous, standards-based teaching _ Integrates technology into daily teaching _ Good communications, human relations and organizational skills _ Ability to motivate _ National Board certi ed _ won awards and recognition _ earned a master's degree in a content area _ Active in professional organizations _ Provide professional development for other teachers _ Worked collaboratively on teaching/learning issues _ Written successful grant proposals focused on student achievement _ Works successfully on teaching teams _ Can analyze research and apply it to practice _ Uses student data and work samples to make instructional decisions _ Shows leadership in the larger community _ Articulates and implement a vision _ Committed to continuous improvement HOW SHOULD WE SCREEN POTENTIAL CANDIDATES? _ Joint screening by university and school system leaders _ Nomination by principals, peers and parents
25
http://www.ucea.edu/
73
_ Assessment tools like Myers-Briggs, leadership style inventories, 360-degree competency-based instruments _ Self-assessment _ Portfolios documenting teaching and leadership skills _ Screening protocols based on the SREB leadership success factors _ Direct interviews and conversations with peers _ Observations and videos of classroom and peer teaching _ Simulations and role plays _ Biographical sketches _ Demonstration of eective oral and written communications skills _ Candidate analysis of case studies _ Willingness to work in high-need schools _ Mini-courses that expose potential candidates to the challenges of leadership _ Gateway internships to gauge leadership potential _ List other ideas
3.5.4 Block 1- Organizational Management 1. Bring the school vision to life by using it to guide shared-decision making about students and the instructional programs enhancing sta/ school and community relations. 2. Monitor
and
evaluate
school
operations
and
use
feedback
appropriately
to
enhance
eective-
ness/manage scal resources/time management. 3. Apply laws, policies, regulations and procedures fairly, consistently, wisely and compassionately that promotes positive school environment. Additional Activities: must have the ability to organize, oversee, and promote special education.
3.5.5 Block 2 - Building Management 1. Maintain open communication with the school community, and eectively convey high expectations for student learning to the community. 2. Work collaboratively with the school community to develop and maintain a shared school vision. 3. Use research and data from multiple sources to design and implement professional dev. act. 4. Provide incentives for learning and growth and encourage participation in professional dev. activities at national/ state and parish levels. 5. To eectively use teacher evaluation. Additional Activities:
•
· · ·
Scenarios to role play. Attend two similar parental involvement activities and compare. Add: Con ict Resolution .
Concerns: 1. $$ - new limitations on funds. 2. Assessments: individual or group?
74
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.5.6 Block 3- Community Relations 1. Write a mission statement. 2. Communicate mission statement to school community. 3. Understand techniques/strategies for shared decision making and team building. 4. Identify organizational structure and team members and the role of each. 5. Develop an instrument to survey the school community foster and strengthen the vision.
3.5.7 Block 4 - School Leader as Instructional Facilitator 1. Analyze test scores individual, grade level, school wide, district wide. 2. Observe, assess and evaluate instruction. 3. Analysis of lesson plans. 4. Knowledge in curriculum development by grade level and subject area. 5. Implement and follow through with the evaluative process. Concerns: Time/ support from the university
3.5.8 Block 5 - School Leader as Change Agent 1. Strategies for monitoring progress. 2. Methods of data collection. 3. Research, measurement, and assessment strategies. 4. Technological use. 5. Security and allocating resources. 6. Interview process for new teachers (design the school process0. Include interpretation of SAM. 7. Question: Timeline for cohorts.
3.5.9 Block 6 - Internship 1. Each system will be responsible for their own interns. 2. Concern over the number of contact hours: 2/6 hours. 3. Dierent setting important. 4. Involved in the opening and closing of schools. 5. Financing the interns? 6. How much involved in personal? Legal Question. Appendix D FOCUS QUESTIONS AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS COHORTS 1 and 2 This is the protocol for your focus group discussion. None of your professors will be present. This ensures that your discussion and responses will be private. You will need to select a facilitator and a recorder. Discuss each question and provide your input. Thank you for your participation. Did the rst seminar meet your expectations?
• • • • •
need more practical, real-life eld experience need less lecture-type presentation of information more hands-on we liked our mentors and appreciated eld experiences, especially shadowing can SLU do more to encourage district participation? more feedback from instructors throughout the semester
75
What does a Teacher Leader need?
• • • • •
district recognition, support and approval district communication with principals principal support and encouragement (afraid to talk to their site principal) greater communication time o from teaching position (release time)
What would you like to learn in Seminar 2?
• •
focus on legal issues what is coaching?
What would you like to learn in remaining seminars?
• •
what I need to know to be an eective, licensed administrator we are concerned about being prepared for the position of administrator our degree will imply knowledge that we must have
What other comments do you have?
• • • •
additional assessment during the semester extra eld time with their mentors lack of district and school recognition, support, and approval other teachers who had completed another graduate program complained about the attention and release time
3.6
THE
CULTURE
ASSESSMENT
AND
AUDIT:
STRATEGIC
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
Note:
A
LEADERSHIP PLANNING
TOOL
IN
FOR
DIVERSE
26
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Schools and colleges around the world must be culturally competent in order to prepare students to succeed in an increasingly diverse and globally interconnected environment. Generally de ned, culturally competent educational organizations value diversity in both theory and practice and make teaching and learning relevant and meaningful to students of various cultures (Klotz, 2006).Educational leaders must be equipped with the necessary tools to assess how well policies, programs, and practices align with the needs of diverse groups and prepare people to interact globally.The culture audit is a valuable organizational assessment tool to guide strategic planning for diversity and global competence. Potential domains of focus and data collection strategies for schools and colleges are illustrated here.
26
Cultural competence assessment strategies could
This content is available online at
76
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
be included in graduate educational leadership programs to better prepare educational administrators to eectively manage diverse schools and colleges. What is a Culture Audit? Researchers agree that school culture is an important, yet often overlooked, component of school improvement (Freiberg, 1998; Peterson & Deal, 1998). Wagner and Madsen-Copas (2002) stress the value of culture audits in determining the quality and health of school cultures and recommends using a ve step auditing process that includes: interviews, observations, surveys, checklists, and presentations to community stakeholders. The concept of school culture is further complicated by the multiplicity of racial/ethnic cultures that are typically represented in schools and colleges. For this reason, organizational culture assessments are essential to ensuring the development of cultural competence in schools (Lindsey, Robins, & Terrell, 2003). Culture audits examine how diverse cultural perspectives are re ected in the values and behaviors manifested in the overall school culture (National Center for Cultural Competence, 2005). Just as a nancial audit reveals strengths and gaps in nancial procedures and practices to inform strategic plans for nancial improvement, a culture audit focuses on how well an organization incorporates perspectives of diverse groups to inform comprehensive school improvement. Primary Domains of Analysis in School and College Settings Practicing educational leaders frequently want to know what a culture audit really looks like.
While
auditing formats may vary depending on the speci c school, college, or district, there are some key areas that can be examined to determine strengths and needs. To help educational leaders visualize how a culture audit might look, the diagram below re ects ten potential domains of focus for conducting culture audits in schools and colleges. The domains are not meant to be exhaustive and may be expanded or reduced to accommodate the needs and interests of the individual organization.
77
Based on professional experience, research, and literature on organizational cultural competence and pro ciency (Bustamante, 2005), examples of culturally competent practices are listed under each domain to provide a better sense of the kind of factors that can be observed in a culture audit. 1. Vision/Mission
• •
Stated commitment to diversity. Integrated global perspectives.
1. Curriculum
• • •
Literature selections re ect a variety of cultural perspectives. Integration of world views, geography, and history. Linguistic and content objectives are addressed for second language learners.
1. Students
78
CHAPTER 3.
• •
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Balanced racial/ethnic representation in advanced placement, honors, gifted programs. Regular meetings held with randomly selected groups to obtain feedback and consider student voice in decision-making.
• • • •
Variety of student leadership development opportunities for all students. Observed inter-racial/inter-ethnic social integration among students. Support programs to promote achievement and retention of lower achieving groups. Student-initiated community service.
1. Teachers/faculty
• • •
Conscious recruitment of diverse groups. Mentoring and support programs for new teachers. Vertical and horizontal teacher teaming according to individual strengths, leadership abilities, and interests.
• • •
Conscious integration eorts to diverse teacher teams. Professional development that addresses race, culture, and language opportunities and challenges. Focused, long term professional development.
1. Teaching and learning
• • • • • •
Dierentiated instruction. Researched strategies that account for various learning styles. Technology integration. Connections to student culture and prior knowledge. Second language learning and teaching strategies. Service learning.
1. Communities
• •
Outreach to various local community constituency groups. Inclusion of all potential stakeholder groups in community-building forums through use of parent liaisons.
• • •
Parent involvement programs for all culture groups. Established national and global ties through partnerships with similar organizations. Realization and utilization of the electronic community for relationship building and sourcing best practices.
1. Con ict resolution
• • •
Recognition of the inevitability of intercultural con ict. Peer mediation and proactive approaches to con ict resolution. Practices to ensure classroom and school safety for all.
1. Evaluation and Assessments
79
• • • •
Authentic student assessments to complement standardized tests. Formative and summative program evaluations. 360 degree teacher and administrator evaluations. Ongoing organizational assessments aimed at continual improvement.
1. Sta
• • • •
Opportunities for sta input into policies and procedures. Professional development opportunities on attitudes and behaviors toward diversity. Recognition of informal leadership roles. Focus on sta growth and integration.
1. Events/celebrations/traditions
• • • •
Examination of organizational traditions to check for exclusive/inclusive practices. Diverse representation at events and celebrations. Celebrations that re ect various cultures and introduce the community to new cultures. Integration of experienced and entry-level personnel in change management.
Data Collection Approaches In conducting a culture audit, data collection methods would ideally include mixed methods that combine traditional quantitative and qualitative methodology. Some suggestions for data collection include:
•
Document Analysis of internal/external communications, written curriculum, policies, newsletters, websites, correspondence, brochures, etc.
•
Statistical analysis of demographic and achievement data (existing) to ID gaps and need areas.
•
Checklists
•
Focus Groups and Interviews with various stakeholder groups (include students).
•
Structured Observations of meetings, gatherings, artifacts, décor, social events, to check out actual behavior.
•
Diagrams of informal leaders (teachers, students, sta members) group interactions.
•
Surveys combined with other methods to triangulate perceptional data.
Data collection may be periodic or ongoing and may be incorporated into already existing assessments (e.g., school climate surveys, community meetings, etc.). Culture audits do not require extensive time or resources. They require the consideration of culture as a factor in student achievement and overall school improvement. Educational leaders and organizations must make a paradigm shift in order to develop culturally competent and pro cient policies, programs, and practices. The paradigm shift involves recognition of the role of culture in human existence and its in uence on organizational and individual values, attitudes, and behaviors. Culture audits help make cultural factors in schools more tangible so that appropriate and eective school improvements can be more appropriately targeted.
80
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Click Here to access The School-wide Cultural Competence Observation Checklist (Bustamante and Nelson, 2007; all rights reserved)
27
References Bustamante, R.M. (2005). Essential features of cultural pro ciency in American international schools in Latin America: A Delphi study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of San Diego. Freiberg, H.J. (1998). Measuring school climate: let me count the ways. Educational Leadership, 56(1), 22-26. Klotz, M.B. (2006).
Culturally competent schools: Guidelines for secondary school principals.
NASP
Journal, March, 11-14. National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). Lindsey, R., Robins, K., & Terrell, R., (2003). Cultural Pro ciency: A Manual for School Leaders (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. National Center for Cultural Competence (2005). Cultural and linguistic competence: De nitions, frameworks, and implications. Retrieved from www.nccccurricula.info/culturalcompetence.html. Peterson, K.D. & Deal, T.E. (1998). How leaders in uence culture of schools. Educational Leadership, 56(1), 28-30. Wagner, C. & Madsen-Copas, P. (2002).An audit of the culture starts with two handy tools. Journal of Sta Development, Summer, 42-53. National Sta Development Council. Rebecca McBride Bustamante is an Assistant Professor in the Educational Leadership Department at Sam Houston State University in Texas, USA. [email protected]
28
3.7 A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés
Note:
29
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Introduction Much has been written about the importance of mentoring for newcomers to school leadership positions (Daresh & Playko, 1992, 1994).
However, a review of the literature on mentoring reveals that much of
the written discussion is from the mentor's point of view or for the bene t of the mentor. Research exists on what makes a good mentor (Galbraith, 2001; Johnson, 2006), the stages and phases of the mentoring relationship (Chao, Walz & Gardner, 1997; Kram, 1985; Mertz, 2004), and successful mentoring programs (Kochan, 2002; Sprague & Hostinsky, 2002). There appears to be less emphasis placed on helping a protégé prepare for a mentoring relationship (Daresh & Playko, 1995; Mullen, 2006). Many newly hired principals can expect to enter into a mentoring relationship. At least 32 states currently have legislative policies that support mentoring programs for new administrators (Alsbury & Hackman, 2006). Some will be assigned to a more experienced principal in a formal mentoring program. Others will informally pair up with someone they look up to in their district. As they enter into mentoring partnerships, they will need to be prepared to be successful as protégés in those relationships. It is essential that
27 28 29
http://cnx.org/content/m13691/latest/Culture_Audit.pdf [email protected] This content is available online at
81
educational leadership courses prepare future principals for those mentoring relationships.
Traditionally,
educational leadership professors instruct students in leadership theories, decision-making, school law and nance, curriculum design, public relations, and school management basics.
However, it is questionable
whether the traditional curriculum in educational leadership preparation programs provide future administrative candidates with the tools for being successful as protégés in their future mentoring relationships. Zachary (2000) has characterized mentoring as a mutual learning partnership; however, she emphasizes the importance of the protégé taking the initiative in the relationship. In her book, The Mentor's Guide: Facilitating Eective Learning Relationships, Zachary encourages the protégé to intentionally pursue a mentor. She provides re ective activities that help the protégé identify the qualities desired in a mentor, as well as articulating the protégé's learning needs. The learning partnership proposed by Zachary suggests a move away from the concept of `mentor as superior' and `protégé as passive subordinate' to more of a two-way, power-free, and mutually bene cial relationship. In this conceptualization, the mentor's role shifts from sage on the stage to guide on the side. The mentor takes the role of a facilitator. The protégé takes responsibility for outlining the learning goals, setting priorities, and becoming increasingly self-directed. Mentor and protégé share accountability and responsibility for achieving the protégé's learning goals (Zachary, 2000). Rationale for Mentoring Aspiring Principals Highly skilled school leaders are not born, nor do they emerge from traditional graduate programs in school administration fully prepared to lead (Southern Regional Education Board, 2007).
It is generally
recognized that they will need guidance from a more experienced school leader in their early years of administration. The National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP, 2003) in Making the Case for Principal Mentoring, reported that principals are traditionally thrown into their jobs without a lifejacket (p. 8), unprepared for the demands of the position, feeling isolated and without guidance. Workplace mentoring is critical for inexperienced school leaders so as to provide a bridge between theory learned in graduate school and the complex realities of contemporary school leadership. Although formal mentoring processes are often designed primarily to ful ll organizational needs, mentoring is essentially about learning. Zachary (2000) states one of the principal reasons that mentoring relationships fail is that the learning process is not tended to and the focus of learning goals is not maintained (p. 1). There is a need to help aspiring principals cultivate the disposition of embracing mentoring as an opportunity to further their professional learning goals. Furthermore, it is imperative that educational administration students understand that they play a critical role in preparing themselves for this future adult learning partnership called mentoring (Zachary, 2000). From a learning perspective, future principals need to have the ability to assess both the strengths and weaknesses of their leadership skills, re ect on these, and then make adjustments as needed. As they enter into the mentoring relationships that will assist them in this process, they should demonstrate the selfdirection that is characteristic of adult learners (Knowles, 1980).
A healthy mentoring relationship is a
prime example of adults engaging in a learning endeavor together. As Zachary (2005) points out: Mentoring is the quintessential expression of self-directed learning. At the heart of self-directed learning (and mentoring) is individual responsibility for learning. Self-responsibility means the learner accepts ownership and accountability (individually and with others) for setting personal learning objectives, developing strategies, nding resources, and evaluating learning. In a mentoring relationship, the responsibility is mutually de ned and shared (p. 225). I believe that future school leaders, as adult learners who know their own learning needs best, should take the initiative to engage in mentoring relationships and I emphasize this to graduate students preparing to be school principals.
In the course titled Mentoring for Educational Leadership, one of my goals was
to focus on the importance of mentoring relationships in the life of a leader.
I discovered through class
discussion that students held two common opinions of how to nd a mentor: (a) one should wait to be assigned a mentor in a new job, or (b) there would be someone who would seek them out and volunteer to mentor them. My own knowledge of adult learning, combined with this eye-opening feedback from the students, strengthened my rationale for creating an assignment in this course that would prepare the students to be proactive protégés, taking the initiative to seek their own mentors. I reorganized the curriculum in a Mentoring for Educational Leadership course in the educational leadership preparation program at the
82
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
University of XXXXXX in an eort to assist future school principals in developing the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of eective protégéship. The Assignment: Seek A Mentor Students in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, oered during the 2007 summer term were informed that their major assignment was to (a) choose someone they would like to have as a mentor, (b) approach that individual with the request for mentoring, and (c) conduct an initial mentoring session. When this assignment was announced on the rst evening of class, the looks on the faces of the students, and their ood of questions, told me that they never predicted such a requirement in the course. The syllabus description emphasized that they would be learning about mentoring new teachers. However, I chose to teach this course around the concept of the mentoring constellation (Stanley & Clinton, 1992). Stanley and Clinton propose that every individual should have a mentoring constellation, which includes an upward mentor, peer mentors and a downward mentoring relationship with a protégé. Thus they believe that we all need a mentor and we all need to be mentoring someone. When it comes to peer mentors, we need two types: an ally within our organization, and a con dant who is outside our organization (Searby, 2007). Based on this model, I organized each class session to address the various levels of the mentoring constellation. One third of the class time was devoted to preparing the students to approach their upward mentor. One third of the time was spent in peer mentoring sessions with pairs of students in the class using prompts designed to help them gain self-knowledge and to be re ective. The remaining time was spent on material pertaining to downward mentoring, speci cally, mentoring new teachers. This article, however, will focus only on the portion of class that prepared students to ask for a mentor and become eective protégés. The Protégé Preparation Process Students were made aware that there are preparations they should make before entering into a mentoring relationship. In order to take the initiative in forming a learning partnership, students needed to be armed with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that would enable them to be eective protégés (Searby & Tripses, 2007).
Daresh and Playko (1995) suggest that the skills of protégéship can be acquired.
In
the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, I addressed the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that students should develop in order to be eective protégés through a variety of learning activities.
The
framework for protegeship developed by Searby and Tripses (2007) and illustrated here, gave guidance to the process.
Characteristics for Eective Protégéship Knowledge
Basic understanding of the teaching processBasic understanding of school leadershipUnderstanding of various types of mentoringAwareness of potentials and pitfalls of mentoring
Skills
Goal settingCommunication skillsCapacity to seek out and act upon feedbackRe ection
Dispositions
Willingness to learn. Self-knowledgeDemonstration of initiativeMaintaining con dentialityAwareness of ethical considerations
Adapted from Daresh & Playko, 1995; Mullen, 2005; Portner, 2002; Searby & Tripses, 2006; Zachary, 2000. Developing Knowledge for Protégéship In the area of knowledge acquisition, the students in this course gained an overview of the various mentoring models, an awareness of the potential bene ts and pitfalls of mentoring relationships, and howto information for approaching someone to be a formal mentor.
Dr.
Mark Searby, whose expertise is
mentoring in the business and non-pro t sector, delivered the initial overview lecture.
He covered the
history of mentoring, the need for mentoring, the crucial dynamics of mentoring, what mentoring is and is not, the challenges to protégés, and an overview of the mentoring process. This lecture set the stage for the
83
course (Searby, 2007). In an online discussion on Blackboard following this introductory lecture, students almost unanimously said that they had not previously considered their need for a mentor until this lecture, but afterward nearly all expressed a change in perspective and an awareness of their need for a mentor. Subsequent class sessions focused on gaining additional knowledge of the mentoring process and the nutsand-bolts of mentoring. Students learned how to set ground rules for the mentoring relationship, how to identify when a mentoring relationship has become dysfunctional, and how to accomplish closure to the formal arrangement. They prepared a mentoring agreement that would be signed by their mentor and themselves. As mentioned previously, material from Zachary's (2000) book, The Mentor's Guide: Facilitating Eective Learning Relationships, provided helpful activities for preparing for the process of mentoring. Developing Skills for Protégéship Skills necessary for becoming an eective protégé include goal setting, communication, the capacity to seek and act on feedback, and re ection (Searby & Tripses, 2007). Special attention was given in class to the development of these skills. Goal setting was an important component for the students preparing to enter a formal mentoring relationship. Before setting their personal and professional goals, students practiced their re ective skills as they conducted two self-assessments. They took the DISC personality inventory and re ected on how it compared with a Myers-Briggs personality inventory previously taken in another course. They conducted a personal strengths and weaknesses inventory and discussed it with their peer partner to bring forth areas that could be addressed in the future upward mentoring relationship. After these activities, they composed their goals for the mentoring relationship that they were about to enter. Several class sessions focused on learning the skills of Cognitive Coaching (Costa & Garmston, 1997) which emphasizes active listening and giving re ective prompts. Students practiced these skills with their peer mentors in class using structured scenarios, and oered feedback on the eectiveness of one another's coaching skills. This exercise provided additional practice with the skills of seeking feedback and re ning communication skills. Constant personal re ection was an element of each course activity. portance of re ection in the learning process.
Zull (2002) emphasizes the im-
He states that while experience is necessary for learning,
re ection is required because re ection is searching for connections -literally. Thus, dialogue that promotes re ection is a natural way of learning (p. 164). Zachary (2005) also point out the importance of re ection in the mentoring process, stating that transformational learning is facilitated through a process of critical self-re ection (p. 225). As protégés become aware of their existing assumptions, self-awareness begins. As their existing assumptions are challenged, increased self-understanding can prompt them to let go of selflimiting and often unrealistic assumptions that may be holding them back. When this transformation takes place, the protégés have experienced learning which results in more productive thoughts and behaviors. In this leadership course, then, re ection was crucial for protégés to develop and practice. Every assignment included a requirement of written re ection of the students' emergent learning about mentoring. In addition to the important re ective activities, however, there were also some key dispositions that the protégés needed to develop. Developing Dispositions for Protégéship The dispositions necessary to become an eective protégé are willingness to learn, self-knowledge, taking initiative, maintaining con dentiality, and being aware of ethical considerations in the mentoring relationship (Searby & Tripses, 2007). In the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, students had an opportunity to participate in a number of exercises designed to enhance self-awareness. As mentioned previously, they took the DISC personality inventory and wrote a re ective paper on the relationship of their personality pro le to their future role as a protégé. Each student kept a re ective journal on the peer mentoring sessions conducted in each class period. In Blackboard online discussions, they were asked to share their personal re ections on each class assignment. Students demonstrated their willingness to learn through practice of the newly introduced Cognitive Coaching skills. In addition, they were assigned to read and discuss articles pertaining to mentoring, and were asked to apply each reading to their present life situation or identify how their perspectives had changed as a result of exposure to new knowledge.
84
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
The disposition of `taking initiative' was demonstrated by students' willingness to be courageous by approaching a person they respected and admired and asking that person to enter into a mentoring relationship with them. This proposition, without a doubt, was daunting for nearly all the students, and many admitted they would not have completed this task had it not been a class assignment.
As a part of the
mentoring agreements formed with their mentors, and also with their peer mentors in class, the disposition of maintaining con dentiality was discussed and con dentiality pacts were made. Ethical dilemmas that could arise in the mentor-protégé relationships were covered in class and in online discussions. Examples included how to handle a breach in con dentiality, what to do if a mentor starts to take advantage of the protégé's subordinate status, how to handle issues regarding cross-gender mentoring, and how and when to graciously back out of a mentoring relationship that has gone sour or is no longer satisfactory. Discussion of the Results of the Mentoring Assignment Students were very responsive to the in-class activities designed to help them develop their knowledge, skills, and dispositions for eective protégéship. However, despite their preparation for seeking a mentor, students still had reservations about the major assignment which was to seek out and approach a mentor and participate in an initial mentoring session. Protégés Have Fears When this assignment was explained on the rst night of class, looks of fear and apprehension were observed on the faces of the students. Some students shared candidly that they were being asked to move out of their comfort zones.
However, as the students learned that they would be led through a process
of preparation for approaching a desired mentor, their initial reticence appeared to subside. Each student began sharing names of leaders they admired, considering those they could approach as a mentor. Although the students were apprehensive of engaging in a possible mentorship in the beginning of this course, they were generally surprised that the mentors they approached were so willing to meet with them. The following comments are excerpts from their re ective papers: I was really nervous before making the initial phone call. I wasn't sure that my mentor would have time to really sit down and talk with me this summer. I am happy that I chose her as my mentor. She was very excited about the process and I feel that it will be a rewarding experience. I was immediately apprehensive when I learned that I had to approach someone to become my mentor. I remember feeling very vulnerable at the thought of having my insu ciencies exposed during this process. Nevertheless, I had to complete the assignment. When I made my initial contact with Dr. Parker about meeting with me concerning this assignment for class, she was very glad to be of assistance. I was feeling a little nervous because our meeting had to be more structured than informal. I arrived 10 minutes early, as I remembered my mentor's favorite quote was to be early means to be on time, to be on time means to be late, and to be late is unacceptable. I did not want to start o on the wrong foot. When I arrived at his o ce, he was smiling, pointing to his watch. He told me he was glad that I remembered his biggest pet peeve. I then recited his being on time quote and he laughed. My nervousness seemed to go away. After about 15 minutes of small talk, I brought up the purpose of our meeting. He told me he felt honored that I chose him to be my mentor. Because we had a history of working together, I had mixed emotions about approaching Diane to be my mentor during this next phase in my career. To say I was afraid is truly an understatement! As I sat and pondered this idea, I came up with every excuse why I did not need a mentor. I was afraid that she would turn me down, or think that I wanted her to be my mentor to assist me in getting a job. Selecting a mentor was not as easy as I thought. For fear of rejection, I did not ask my potential mentor directly. I emailed her. She replied and agreed to meet with me, but had to cancel for good reason. I had a second person in mind, so I immediately called my second choice. She graciously accepted and told me she was honored that I asked her because she values the mentoring process. The First Mentoring Session After participating in several class activities designed to clarify their professional learning objectives, each student entered the rst mentoring session with a list of thoughtful and speci c goals for the mentoring relationship. Examples of the goals are too numerous to list here, but in general, it was noted that goals
85
centered on each student's desire to receive guidance from an individual who had proven to be eective in leadership.
Students were also required to discuss the protocols for future mentoring sessions with their
mentors and suggest ground rules for the meetings. Using the template found in Zachary's (2000) Mentor's Guide, students and their mentors lled out a Mentoring Agreement Form which outlined the agreed upon protocols and ground rules.
Students were not required to continue the relationship beyond the initial
meeting for the class assignment, but the majority did ask for and arrange regular mentoring sessions for a speci ed time, ranging from 6 months to 1 year. The Bene ts to the Protégé Toward the end of the course, students were asked to write a re ective paper about their mentoring experience. When asked what the mentoring experience had meant to them and what they learned about becoming a better protégé, the students in the course responded with comments that revealed new insights about mentoring. There were three major themes that emerged in their re ections: (1) seeing their need for a mentor and facing their fears about obtaining one, (2) developing new knowledge, skills and dispositions of protegeship, and (3) gaining awareness of the mentor's role and the protégé's role. Each of these themes will be explained brie y and illustrated with excerpts from the students' re ective journals. Theme 1:
Seeing Their Need for a Mentor and Facing Their Fears.As a part of the Mentoring for
Educational Leadership course, students were asked to identify their own learning goals as they prepared themselves to be administrators.
This activity heightened each student's awareness of his/her need for a
mentor. However, this awareness did not come without the realization that there was a somewhat daunting assignment that their professor was asking them to complete. There were some initial fears expressed about approaching someone to be a mentor to them. After completing the assignment, however, students realized the growth that had come as a result of facing their fears. A sample of their re ections follows: As a protégé, the class has caused me to see the need for a mentor. It has also helped me in addressing the fears of approaching a prospective mentor and in developing a professional attitude of interacting with someone in a mentor relationship. I recognize the fact that I need help and I am willing to accept this assistance. Having to do the assignment decreased some of my apprehensions about securing a prospective mentor. I now understand that mentors usually have a sincere desire to help the protégé. Theme 2:
Developing New Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions of Protégéship.
In the Mentoring for
Educational Leadership course, I designed the learning activities in agreement with Daresh and Playko's (1995) premise that protégéship skills and dispositions can be learned. Knowledge about the many aspects of mentoring was shared in a variety of formats such as lectures, text readings, and guest speakers. Development of skills such as goal setting, learning to communicate eectively, and seeking and re ecting on feedback became the objectives for class assignments and in-class peer mentoring and role playing.
Throughout
the course, students demonstrated their increasing acquisition of the dispositions of protégéship such as willingness to learn, self-knowledge, taking initiative, maintaining con dentiality, and becoming aware of ethical considerations in a mentoring relationship. Sample journal entries reveal this: This class helped me to become a better protégé by allowing me to achieve a greater understanding of myself and the impact I have on others in a leadership role. This class taught me to listen more eectively. This class provided me an increased awareness of how to seek mentors for a speci cgoal or direction for professional and personal growth.I now have added con rmation that "risk-taking" can be enriching in relationships and knowledge development. I will make sure that I set ground rules along with the length of time of the mentoring relationship. I have learned valuable information that I can use in every facet of my life. Theme 3:
Gaining awareness of the mentor's role and the protégé's role.
Students were required to
conduct an initial mentoring session with a chosen mentor, and all did so. Most students stated that they planned to continue meeting with their mentor, and that they were pleased with the prospect of developing a longer term relationship with the mentor. Several students expressed a new understanding of mentoring and an appreciation of what mentoring could mean to them in their professional careers. Fresh insights emerged
86
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
from seeing themselves in the role of proactive protégé in relationship to a new-found mentor: I will make sure that I follow the leadership of my mentor and know that she will lead me in a positive direction. I have advanced tremendously by choosing an in uential mentor who has helped me have a more positive impact on the performance, motivation, job satisfaction and self-esteem of those with whom I work. I have learned that the mentor is not responsible for me; the decisions I make are ultimately mine. The mentor is not God and is not perfect; not omnipresent; not omnipotent; not omniscient. So, I must be honest, transparent, and willing to move on if the trust gets breached. There is a need to help future school leaders learn how to become empowered, eective protégés. One way to aid students in this process is to intentionally design educational leadership course activities that will prepare them to initiate mentoring relationships. There are several bene ts to facilitating the development of the skills of protégéship with educational leadership students. First of all, the students gain an awareness of the dierent types of mentors, learning that there are often multiple mentors in their lives. Second, they come to understand the dierent responsibilities of a protégé and a mentor. A third bene t is that students become aware that not all mentor-protégé relationships are productive, and therefore the students learn how to bring closure to such relationships. Fourth, a productive mentoring relationship helps graduate students bridge theory from educational leadership courses to practice in the real world of school leadership. Finally, empowered protégés ideally take more and more responsibility for their own learning (Searby & Tripses, 2007). Intentional training in protégéship provides graduate students with greatly enhanced capacities to engage in what could be their most powerful learning experience. Implications and Conclusions Educational leadership preparation programs are in a position to make a dierence in a critical aspect of the learning and development of future principals. All new principals will need mentoring, and all will need to know how to be eective protégés. We can enhance their preparation for this role. Although the identi ed knowledge, skills and dispositions of protégéship (Searby & Tripses, 2007) may be found between the lines of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards for educational leadership, intentional teaching about mentoring and the responsibility that students have as protégés in the mentoring relationship may not occur to the extent that would be bene cial to students. In revising the content of this leadership preparation course, I became intentional about teaching future principals about the importance of preparing themselves to be eective protégés as they transitioned into school administration. Students who were in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course hopefully now have a mentoring mindset. They have learned how to prepare themselves to be eective protégés and have overcome reservations associated with acquiring and maintaining a mentor-protégé relationship. As protégés, they are no longer in a passive role, waiting for the mentor's call. They are now positioned to be proactive in seeking a mentor.
Armed with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of eective protégéship, they are ready to
capitalize on the bene ts that can be obtained in a mentoring relationship. I oer my own experience in preparing educational leadership students for mentoring relationships as a possible model for other graduate courses, and would welcome dialogue with others involved in mentoring in higher education, as these concepts apply to other professional elds. I would like to close with the comments of one student, whose re ections captured the common perspective conveyed by students in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course. The student said: This particular mentoring experience has been absolutely invaluable to me. I have learned so much about the ways to improve my own leadership abilities, as well as how to eectively communicate by using trust and honesty in a mentor/protégé meeting situation. This experience gave me the opportunity to step outside of myself and re ect on several ways to improve my abilities and skills. I ultimately ascertained that we can all learn a great deal from those who have gone on before and `know the ropes' if we will simply be willing to open our eyes. Author's Note: IRB approval at the University of University of Alabama at Birmingham has been given for using student quotes which appear in this article. References
87
Alsbury, T. L., & Hackmann, D. G. (2006).
Learning from experience:
Initial ndings of a mentor-
ing/induction program for novice principals and superintendents. Planning and Changing, 37(3/4), 1690189. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1224424311). Chao, G. T., Walz, P.M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with nonmentoring counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, 619-636. Coerdeiro, P. A. & Smith-Sloan, E. (1995). Apprenticeships for administrative interns: Learning to talk like a principal. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 385 014). Costa, A., & Garmston, R. (1997). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools, 3rd Ed. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1995, April). Mentoring in educational leadership development: What are the responsibilities of the protégés? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. ED 381 874. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1994). Mentoring for school leaders: A status report. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1992).
Leaders helping leaders: A practical guide to administrative
mentoring. New York: Scholastic, Inc. Galbraith, M. (2001).
Mentoring development for community college faculty.
Michigan Community
College Journal: Research and Practice, 7(2), 29-39. Hertting, M., & Phenis-Bourke, N. (2007). Experienced principals need mentors, too. Principal, 86(5), 3639. Johnson, S. (2006). The neuroscience of the mentor-learner relationship. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 110, Summer 2006. Knowles, M.S. (1980).
The modern practice of adult education (revised and updated) Chicago, IL:
Chicago Association Press. Kochan, F. K., (Ed.). (2002). The organizational and human dimensions of successful mentoring programs and relationships. Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Kram, K. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Mertz, N. T. (2004). What's a mentor, anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40 (4), 541-560. Mullen, C. A. (2006). Making the most of mentoring: A graduate student guide. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education/ Rowman & Little eld. Searby, L. and Tripses, J. (2007, August). Preparing future school administrators for meaningful mentoring relationships: A comparison of processes in two universities. Paper presented at the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration. Chicago, IL. Searby, M. A. (2007, June).
Mentoring: Investing in our future.
Lecture delivered in Mentoring for
Educational Leadership graduate course, University of Alabama at Birmingham. Southern Regional Education Board. (2007). Good principals aren't born they're mentored: Are we investing enough to get the school leaders we need? Atlanta, GA: Author. Sprague, M. & Hostinsky, V. (2002).
Model mentoring.
Principal Leadership High School Ed.
3(1),
365-340. Stanley, P. D. & Clinton, J. R. (1992). Connecting: The mentoring relationships you need to succeed in life. Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress. Zachary, L. (2005). Creating a mentoring culture: The organization's guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Zachary, L. (2000). Jossey-Bass.
The mentor's guide:
Facilitating eective learning relationships.
San Francisco:
88
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.8 An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and 30
Communities
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a signi cant contribution to the scholarship and practice of education administration.
In addition to publication in the Connexions Content
Commons, this module is published in the International Journal of Educational Leadership Prepa-
31 , Volume 4, Number 1 (January - March 2009).
ration
3.8.1 Introduction Public dissatisfaction with student learning outcomes in PK-12 educational programs has resulted in calls for improvement in the quality of educational leaders serving students, schools, and communities. This dissatisfaction with the state of US educational systems has resulted in demands for change and accountability in school administrator preparation programs at the university level. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act: No Child Left Behind of 2001 responded to these demands by requiring greater accountability in the performance of school administrators (U.S. Government, 2002). Universities have responded by analyzing and implementing changes in educational leadership preparation programs. Professional organizations such as the American Association of School Administrators (AASA, 1993), Council of Chief State School O cers (CCSSO, 1996; CCSSO, 2008), National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA 1993; NPBEA 2002a; NPBEA 2002b; NPBEA 2008), National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE, 2002), and the Education Leaders Constituent Council (ELCC, 2002) among others, along with individual state education agencies have responded by reviewing and revising standards for practicing school administrators and educational leadership preparation programs. The high unemployment rate and downsizing of industries has prompted the increased development of alternative educational executive leadership programs with an eye on providing positions in schools for the newly unemployed.
These movements are blurring the lines of professional preparation between schools,
business, industry, nonpro t, and governmental agencies.
One result of questioning the eectiveness of
educational leadership preparation programs has been a philosophy adopted by some that the training of corporate leaders and military personnel to ll leadership positions in schools will result in improved school operation, instruction, and student learning outcomes. An example of this type of program is The Broad Foundation's Superintendents Academy which prepares CEOs and senior executives from business, nonpro t, military, government, and education backgrounds to lead urban public school systems. As explained by Quinn (2007): Nontraditional superintendents, who are accomplished leaders in other arenas, bring critically needed strengths and experiences to the job, including:
• • • 30 31
Experience managing large, complex, diverse operations; Experience leading large-scale systems change and culture changes; Skills in strategic visioning, planning and accountability;
This content is available online at
89
• •
Expertise in nancial management; and Skills in systems and operational management (p.5).
Executive management programs such as those oered by The Broad Foundation are also blurring the lines of professional leadership preparation between education, business, industry, nonpro t, and governmental agencies.
Educators question whether the lack of pedagogical knowledge in instruction and learning will
have a negative eect on the ability of non-educators to be a success as a school administrator; they question the ability of corporate and military personnel and retirees to lead schools and educational systems; and academicians have both challenged and accepted the rationale of integrating educational theory with organizational management theories in the training of educational leaders (Beyer, 2006).
3.8.2 Structure, Philosophy, and Curriculum of Preparation Programs University programs directed toward the preparation of candidates for roles as educational leaders should be instrumental in the development and implementation of preparation programs that have prepared graduates to serve the unique needs of students and the communities which they will serve. They should be trained to understand, interface with, and incorporate parent and community resources in support of PK-12 educational programs. One way to accomplish this is through the integration of programs, courses, and preparation content that combines the best of educational, business, public sector, social service, and nonpro t leadership theory and practice. Combining these entities in leadership preparation and professional development programs enhances the ability of school and community leaders to work together more eectively toward the support and improvement of educational systems and the development of integrated services for children and youth. Theoretical preparation of educational leaders has long been based in general organizational management and leadership theory. As pointed out by Owens and Valesky (2007), theories of educational administration have their roots in the study of public administration. Administrative practices in public governance such as those of the Egyptians, Chinese, and Greeks; military leadership practices from Alexander the Great and Caesar to modern day military organizations; and the far-reaching and international organizations such as the Roman Empire, Catholic Church, United Nations, World Bank, and the European Union, are all pointed to by Owens and Valesky (2007) as models of public and nonpro t administration practices that form the foundation for the study of educational leadership and administration. Only by knowing the contributions of those who came before us, those who pioneered in building the knowledge that we have for thinking about organizations and leadership, can you prepare yourself to make the strategic and tactical decisions that will undergird your leadership with steadfast purpose, consistency, and eectiveness (Owens & Valesky, 2007, p.84). The incorporation of historical leadership and management theory in literature and in leadership classrooms used as a basis for the preparation of educational leaders, supports the premise that schools like other service organizations utilize a shared knowledge base of organizational management and leadership theory in the development and maintenance of administrative practices. This can be seen in the similar bureaucratic and management practices of these organizations such as the chain-of-command, hierarchy of authority, rules and regulations, application of organizational behavior theories, product development, quality control through assessment and evaluation of products and processes, the use of power and in uence to reach organizational goals, maintenance of records, organizational change processes, development and maintenance of organizational cultures, and in human resources management. How the structure, philosophy, and curriculum of educational leadership preparation programs are developed and presented has a profound and long-lasting impact on how schools will function and how future educational leaders will address the varied and unique needs of students and the communities they serve. Most university programs oer three types of educational administration preparation programs: one to prepare aspirants for PK-12 school administrator roles; one to prepare school administrators for educational leadership roles in school district central o ce positions; and, another to oer professional development opportunities for practicing school administrators. PK-12 administrator preparation programs generally encompass organizational administration topics such as human resource management, budgeting and nance, management
90
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
and leadership skills, legal and regulatory issues, curriculum planning and development, problem-solving and decision making, ethics, applications of technology, school and community relations, assessment of learning, and program evaluation. Programs in central o ce leadership build upon this knowledge base and stress the development of a knowledge and skill base in a variety of areas related to organizational leadership, organizational structures and development, strategic planning and needs assessment, policy and governance, public relations, organizational change processes, facilities management, labor relations, instructional management, resource allocation, and research, measurement, and evaluation of educational programs. Educational leadership preparation programs can be enhanced by integrating theories, courses, and students from educational, government, nonpro t, and social service organizations together in the same program (Beyer, 2006; Rodriguez, 2000). Professional development programs for practicing administrators can also bene t from the integration of information and practices of those organizations that have an impact on schools and schooling.
University inter-departmental and inter-college collaboration between education,
management, business, and public policy schools can result in a better understanding of how each area of research and study in uences organizational knowledge and practices and the management of school systems. This integration of programs provides present and future school administrators with a better understanding of the interrelationships of schools and the community and gives them the added opportunity to develop networking relationships that can be utilized in future collaboration between schools and community agencies. Hugh Price (2008) suggests enlisting the support and involvement of local businesses, nonpro t agencies, community organizations, the media, and faith-based groups in such areas as nancial assistance, celebration of student accomplishments, and providing educational opportunities and support for students that can result in improved student academic achievement and preparation for employment and the world beyond school. Generally, preparation programs remain segmented in topical categories such as nance, leadership, law, and curriculum. Life does not proceed that way, nor does the day-to-day job of a school administrator. Administrators seldom have the luxury of segmenting their day and spending one hour strictly on legal issues and then the next on student issues, curriculum, or personnel concerns. All these topics are intertwined in the fast-paced administrative problem-solving and decision-making processes of the day. For university programs to relate more closely to actual administrative practice there should be an integration of topics across the curriculum and the incorporation of actual eld experience assignments throughout the program, as opposed to only the use of case studies in the classroom setting, or when a student is assigned to an internship in a local school or district upon completion of required program coursework.
3.8.3 Performance Standards and Expectations: Past and Present Standards provide a guide to organizations, programs, and individuals. Great emphasis has been placed on the development and maintenance of educational leadership standards which foster educational leadership policy development, performance expectations for practicing school administrators, standards for preparation programs, state educational leadership policy and standards, and tools for leadership assessment and evaluation (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008). Examples of professional organizations that have been instrumental in the development, review, and implementation of professional standards include the Council of Chief State School O cers, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration, the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, the American Association of School Administrators, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the National Council of Elementary School Principals, and state educational agencies. As stated by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration upon publication of the new Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008, Standards serve dierent purposes. The new standards are designed to serve as broad national policy standards that states use as a national model for developing their own standards. The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELLC) Program Standards guide planning, implementing, and accrediting of administrator preparation programs (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2008). In 1993 the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) Commission on Standards for the Superintendency developed a set of professional standards related to the roles and responsibilities of school
91
district superintendents that were categorized as: Leadership and District Culture; Policy and Governance; Communications and Community Relations; Organizational Management; Curriculum Planning and Development; Instructional Management; Human Resources Management; Values and Ethics of Leadership (American Association of School Administrators 1993). That same year, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) published Principals for Our Changing Schools: Knowledge and Skill Base (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thompson, 1993).
Prominent educa-
tional leaders and practicing principals contributed to development of this publication, sharing knowledge and expertise gained through research and practice.
The knowledge and skill base as presented was de-
scribed as necessary for successful school administration and was categorized into the following four domains of leadership with sub-sections:
Functional • • • • • • •
Leadership Information Collection Problem Analysis Judgement Organization Oversight Implementation Delegation
Programatic • • • • •
Instruction and Learning Environment Sta Development Measurement and Evaluation Resource Allocation Application of Technology
Interpersonal • • • •
Motivating Others Interpersonal Sensitivity Oral and Nonverbal Expression Written Knowledge
Contexual • • • •
Philosophical and Cultural Values Legal and Regulatory Application Policy and Political In uences Public Relations
(National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thomson, 1993) In 1996, the Council of Chief State School O cers published the ISLLC Standards for School Leaders (Council of Chief State School O cers, 1996), containing knowledge, skills and dispositions for successful school leadership, established a guide for state departments of education and university preparation programs in the development of educational leadership preparation programs and performance expectations for practicing administrators. This was followed in 2002 by The Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) Standards for Advanced Programs in Educational Leadership published by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2002a). In 2008, the Council of Chief State School O cers published the Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (hereafter referred to as ISLLC 2008). These standards are the result of the collaborative eort of professional education organizations, leaders in the eld, a state education agency representative, and
92
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
members of university preparation programs, convened together to develop policy standards that can be used to in uence leadership practice and policy.
(Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.6). The
ISLLC 2008 utilized the 1996 ISLLC Standards for School Leaders as a foundation and guide for development of the new Standards and Functions. In developing the new standards, CCSSO strongly points out that these are policy standards that will contribute to a coherent vision and system of leadership that can guide state policies and leadership programs and further states: The following principles set the direction and priorities during the development of the new policy standards: 1. Re ect the centrality of student learning; 2. Acknowledge the changing role of the school leader; 3. Recognize the collaborative nature of school leadership; 4. Improve the quality of the profession; 5. Inform performance-based systems of assessment and evaluation for school leaders; 6. Demonstrate integration and coherence; and 7. Advance access, opportunity, and empowerment for all members of the school community. (p. 8) ISLLC 2008, Provides a framework for policy creation, training program performance, life-long career development, and system support (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.13). The standards have been developed to in uence and drive system-wide change in training programs, licensing and induction, performance evaluation, support of ongoing training and professional development, and improvement in working conditions, with the desired nal outcome of, Eective instructional leadership that positively impacts student achievement (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p. 13). A key change in the wording used in ISLLC 2008 standards diers from the 1996 ISLLC Standards particularly in the phraseology used to state the standard. The 1996 ISLLC Standards begins the description of each standard with the phrase, A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by. . . ISLLC 2008 begins each standard with the phrase, An education leader promotes the success of every student. . . (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p. 18). Following the publication of ISLLC 2008, The State Consortium on Education Leadership (SCEL), representing state education agency personnel, convened under the auspices of CCSSO, and developed and published Performance Expectations and Indicators for Education Leaders: An ISLLC-Based Guide to Implementing Leader Standards and a Companion Guide to the Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (Sanders & Kearney, 2008).
This publication is the result of collaboration between SCEL,
CCSSO, and representatives from state education agencies, the District of Columbia, and American Samoa. This guide presents performance expectations and begins the description of each expectation with the phrase, Education leaders ensure. . . rather than Education leaders promote. . . as used by ISLLC 2008. There is a vast degree of dierence between promote and ensure. The expectation is higher. When one promotes they encourage. When one ensures they guarantee that it will be achieved. As with higher expectations for student performance, state agencies are seeking the same higher expectations for education leader performance. The evolution of standards and guidelines has developed considerably from responses to the outcries of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), to the NPBEA Principals for our Changing Schools: Knowledge and Skill Base in 1993 (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thomson, 1993), to clearly stated high performance expectations in 2008 to be met by education leaders. As stated by Sanders & Kearney (2008), Emphasizing performance expectations helps make policy standards operational by presenting them as they might be observed in practicein dierent leadership positions and at dierent points of a career. The performance expectations and indicators use observable and measureable language that describes current responsibilities of leaders (p.2). In a review of the performance expectations, there is no single expectation that holds any greater importance than another.
They are all important and become interwoven with each other as part of the
daily practice of educational leaders and their service to students and communities. Sanders and Kearney (2008) have placed the six standards of performance expectations into the general categories of: Vision and
93
Goals; Teaching and Learning; Managing Organizational Systems and Safety; Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders; Ethics and Integrity; and, The Education System.
As stated by Sanders and Kearney
(2008),
. . .the
guiding principles used in developing the ISLLC Standards were important considerations for
developing the Performance Expectations and Indicators.
Therefore, the performance expectations and
indicators
• • • • •
re ect the centrality of student learning acknowledge the changing role of the school leader recognize the collaborative nature of school leadership are high; upgrading the quality of the profession inform performance-based systems of assessment and evaluation for school leaders. (p. 10)
3.8.4 Meeting Needs of Students and Communities In addition to the basic curricular topics oered in university preparation programs, strong consideration should to be given to providing educational leadership candidates with a knowledge base that includes skills to develop and support educational programs that will serve the special and often unique needs of students and communities.
The inclusion of addressing special student programs and services across the
graduate program curriculum in law, principalship, internship, budgeting, curriculum, strategic planning, organizational development, and human resource classes is an imperative for programs when preparing candidates for school leadership positions, to enable successful transition from the university classroom to the school or school district administrative o ce. Currently, some states and university programs require one or more courses addressing compensatory education and special services and programs to prepare candidates with a knowledge base that can be used in service to the unique and individual needs of children and youth in schools. Texas is a good example of one state that requires potential and practicing school administrators to possess knowledge of special and compensatory programs and school student services, and how these programs can be eectuated in school settings. Title I and special education laws and programs are often emphasized in university courses much to the detriment of exploring and learning about other programs and services available to all PK-12 students such as guidance and counseling, bilingual and ESL programs, student services and activities, dropout and drug/alcohol abuse prevention programs, among many more that should also be part of the university curriculum. Sadly, this is an area of study that graduates, when reporting back to the university, say they had to learn on the job. It is important that educational leadership candidates gain an understanding of the importance of all these programs and understand the planning, development, and implementation of special programs to better serve the needs of students and communities. As stated by Beyer & Johnson (2005), The role of educator has expanded beyond the original concept of student and teacher working together toward academic achievement. [Supplemental services and programs] are essential to ensure that students are ready to learn and that teachers, support sta, and school administrators are providing the essential services and support systems to ensure that all students have the best opportunity possible to achieve academically and become well-prepared, active, contributing members of society in the world beyond school (p. xii).
3.8.5 Performance Expectations and the Link to Special Programs and Services Each policy standard presented in Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008) and as presented and detailed in the companion guide, Performance Expectations and Indicators for Education Leaders: An ISLLC-Based Guide To Implementing Leader Standards And A Companion Guide To The Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (hereafter referred to as the ISLLC-Based Guide) (Sanders & Kearney, 2008), carry equal weight and importance in informing policy development, university preparation programs, and the assessment and evaluation of school site administrative practices. With this in mind, it is important to look brie y at how meeting needs of students and communities through special programs and services is linked to each standards and performance expectation.
94
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.8.6 Vision, Mission, and Goals Standard 1 An education leader promotes the success of every student by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders. Element A. High Expectations for All. Sanders & Kearney (2008) state, The vision and goals establish high, measurable expectations for all students and educators. (p.14). Indicator 4 under Element A states a leader, Advocates for a speci c vision of learning in which every student has equitable, appropriate, and eective learning opportunities and achieves at high levels (Sanders & Kearney, 2008, p. 14). This indicator does not say some students should receive these learning opportunities, it states all students. All students encompasses a wide range of students in need of special programs and services including: ESL/bilingual students; those identi ed in need of special education services; students at-risk of academic failure or dropping out of school; abused, abandoned, and neglected children and young adults; those with health and human service related issues; those falling within the identi able Title I category; as well as those identi ed as gifted and talented. Element B. Shared Commitments to Implement the Vision, Mission, and Goals, provides leadership Indicators which address the importance of sta, community, and diverse stakeholders to be engaged in the commitment to build shared understanding, decision-making, support, responsibility, and Advocates for and acts on commitments. . .to provide equitable, appropriate, and eective learning opportunities for every student (Sanders & Kearney, 2008, p. 14).
3.8.7 Teaching and Learning Standard 2 An education leader promotes the success of every student by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and sta professional growth. Teaching and learning opportunities are not only con ned to the classroom but can also be provided through programmatic development, support, and funding to encourage and support students to be involved in athletics, student council, mentoring, Junior Achievement, work-study programs, development of school policy, in eld trips, before and after school programs, focus groups, leadership challenge programs, community service, and in any number of other clubs and instructional related activities.
The list is endless
and all can be eectuated through the collaboration of stakeholders utilizing school, business, parent, and community support and involvement. A function of teaching and learning as stated in Standard 2 of ISLLC 2008 is to, Create a personalized and motivating environment for students (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.14). The ISLLC-Based Guide (Sanders & Kearney, 2008) provides indicators for practice which state, a leader. . . 1. Develops shared understanding, capacities, and commitment to high expectations for all students and closing achievement gaps. 2. Guides and supports job-embedded, standards-based profession development that improves teaching and learning and meets diverse learning needs of every student (p.17). Once again the terms, all students and every student, stand out in the performance indicators as a reminder that regardless of the disability, circumstance, or uniqueness of students' needs, in response to teaching and learning standards and expectations, all must be served equally.
3.8.8 Managing Organizational Systems Standard 3 An education leader promotes the success of every student by ensuring management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, e cient, and eective learning environment. Operational management is a broad category covering a myriad of overlapping and on-going functions of education leadership and administration within educational systems. It is the area in which leadership
95
intermixes with administration and often draws the organizational leader away from pursuing the ultimate vision and goal of instructional leadership and ensuring the academic success of every student. The important questions for educators to remember when making operational decisions are how does a particular decision relate to students, and how will a decision or action help every student achieve academic success? Operational management encompasses tasks and responsibilities such as scheduling, budgeting and resource management, personnel selection and retention, legal and regulatory issues, transportation, food services, facility management and maintenance, student and personnel safety and security, and human resource management and development. All these decision-making tasks must be directed toward meeting the ISLLC 2008 Standard 3 goal of creating and maintaining an eective and e cient learning environment. Keeping an eye on this goal contributes to eective administrative management in problem-solving and decision-making. Sanders & Kearney (2008) remind us that, Education leaders need a systems approach to complex organizations of schools and districts. In order to ensure the success of all students and provide a high-performing learning environment, education leaders manage daily operations and environments through e ciently and eectively aligning resources with vision and goals.
Valuable resources include nancial, human, time, materials, technology, physical plant, and
other system components (p.19). Ensuring quality instruction will positively impact the opportunity for every student to learn and advance academically. It begins with the selection of quality teachers and support service personnel and providing the time and funding for on-going professional development for everyone. Operational management activities such as developing class schedules, strategic placement of students and teachers, and inclusion of opportunities for student support programs and activities within the regular schedule provides a basic structure for instruction and meeting students' special needs. Management of the operational budget should include providing equitable funding for all instructional programs and student service activities such as eld trips, before and after school programs, academic tutoring, athletics, student counseling services and support programs, transportation to accommodate exibility in program schedules, or funding and incentives for development of creative academic and student support programs and activities. Seeking grant funding to supplement the budget can provide nancial support for the development of special services and programs. Legal and governmental considerations include meeting federal and state rules and regulations as they related to areas such as ADA requirements, ensuring safety of students and sta, meeting special education and Title I requirements, serving the needs of ESL and bilingual students, meeting the instructional requirements for migratory, delinquent, and at-risk student populations, or supporting due process for students and sta.
3.8.9 Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders Standard 4 An education leader promotes the success of every student by collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources. The development of collaborative partnerships with parents and community organizations provides an additional support and resource for education leaders in schools and school districts as they move to develop and implement special services and programs to meet the needs of every student. Collaboration and development of partnerships with families and community service organizations can result in development and support for programs serving students with special needs.
The cultural, racial, socio-economic, and
ethnic make-up of communities served by schools are an important resource for education leaders in the development of programs and services created or maintained to meet the unique needs of the families and communities. Developing lines of communication with families and stakeholders in their native language can result in better understanding of educational programs and partnerships in support of teaching and learning. Both school district public relations programs and communication channels developed at individual school sites help parents understand and support their student's learning. Schools are at the center of community activities. Parents choose communities in which to live based on the academic achievement of students in
96
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
local schools. Families choose school districts based on the special services and programs available to meet the educational needs of their children.
3.8.10 Ethics and Integrity Standard 5 An education leader promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner. Education leaders are under public scrutiny as a group and are expected to foster and exhibit ethical behavior in their day-to-day work. They are expected to exhibit ethical behavior through professionalism, concern for and responsibility to others, and consideration of the community as a whole in their decisionmaking (Beyer, 2004). The education leader functions set forth under this standard address accountability for the academic and social success of all students, moral principles for self-guidance, democratic values, potential legal consequences for unethical decision-making, and social justice for every student in meeting their education needs (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008). It is imperative that university preparation programs prepare all education leaders to act in an ethical manner in program planning, resource allocation, curriculum development, human resource management, providing a safe and secure learning environment, and oering the special programs and services that will support the academic and social success of every student.
3.8.11 The Education System Standard 6 An education leader promotes the success of every student by understanding, responding to, and in uencing the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context. An understanding of local, state, and federal policies, rules, and regulations is essential to the successful leadership of schools and school systems. Knowledge of laws pertaining to the social and academic success of all students is required for successful leadership. Accurately interpreting policy and laws and acting to in uence education policy in a way that will advocate and bene t all students is an essential role of an education leader. Performance expectations described by Sanders & Kearney (2008) state, The education leader believes in, values, and is committed to:
• • • • •
Advocate for children and education In uence policies Uphold and improve laws and regulations Eliminate barriers to achievement Build on diverse social and cultural assets (p. 28).
This Standard speaks to the necessity of education leaders to engage in on-going inquiry and professional development to remain current educational research and keep abreast of changes in policies and laws that aect the educational rights of children and families to the programs, services, and opportunities that will meet unique and special needs of every student.
3.8.12 Implications for Practice How does all this relate to preparation and practice? Education leader practices suggested and discussed under each standard are not unique and many are implemented each day in schools across the nation. It is important for universities to regularly review the structure and curriculum of leadership preparation programs to determine whether there are any gaps in the preparation provided to candidates. Are candidates su ciently prepared in the knowledge and skills necessary to develop and implement special programs and services at the PK-12 school level that will ensure quality educational programs for every student?
The
imperative and challenge for leadership preparation programs is to ensure that graduates have been prepared
97
to meet the special and unique needs of the students, schools, and communities which they will serve. ISLLC 2008 provides a policy framework and guide for practicing administrators, school districts, university preparation programs, and state and national education agencies that can be utilized in the evaluation and assessment of education leadership across the nation. It provides a framework for university programs that can be directed toward the preparation of candidates with the knowledge and skill base to meet the unique needs of students and the communities they will serve. These skills can be applied to the development and maintenance of essential special programs and services to ensure academic achievement and success for all students. CCSSO clearly states that the ultimate goal of these policy standards and the nal outcome of the implementation of the ISLLC 2008 standards is eective instructional leadership that positively impacts student achievement (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.
13).
This intended outcome of
the standards should guide and drive decision and policy making in university education leader preparation courses, in national, state, and local educational agencies, and must be the goal toward which every education leader strives.
3.8.13 References American Association of School Administrators.
(1993) 1994 Platform and resolutions.
Arlington, VA:
American Association of School Administrators. Beyer, B. (2004). Applying Ethical Standards in Leadership Practice. NCPEA Educational Leadership Review.
National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.
Sam Houston State University:
Huntsville, TX. Beyer, B. (2006). Combining forces in the development of programs and services: Bringing education, government, and nonpro t agencies together. NCPEA Connexions. The Connexions Project: Rice University. Available: http://cnx.org/content/m13614/latest/ Beyer, B. M. & Johnson, E. S. (2005). Special programs & services in schools: Creating options, meetings needs. Lancaster, PA: Pro>Active Publications. Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. R. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint. Council of Chief State School O cers (1996). Interstate school leaders licensure consortium (ISLLC): Standards for school leaders. Washington, DC: Author. Council of Chief State School O cers (CCSSO). (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008 as adopted by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.ccsso.org/publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=365. Hoyle, J.R., English, F.W., & Stey, B. E. (1998).
Skills for successful 21st century school leaders:
Standards for peak performance. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators. Milstein, M., & Associates (1993).
Changing the way we prepare educational leaders: The Danforth
experience. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. National Commission on Excellence in Education.
(1983).
A nation at risk.
Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing O ce. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (2002).
Professional standards for the
accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (1993). Principals for our changing school: The knowledge and skill base. Alexandria, VA: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002a). The Educational Leadership Constituent Council standards for advance programs in educational leadership. Washington DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002b). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008. Washington DC: Author. Available: http://www.npbea.org/projects.php. Owens, R. G. & Valesky, T. C. (2007). Organizational behavior in education: Adaptive leadership and school reform. 9th edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
98
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Price, H. B. (2008). Mobilizing the community to help students succeed. Alexandria VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Quinn, tor.
T. (2007).
Preparing Non-Educators for the Superintendency.
Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
The School Administra-
Retrieved June 30, 2008, from
http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetailtest.cfm?ItemNumber=9255
32 .
Rodriguez, F. J. (2000, Spring). Interdisciplinary leadership in the Americas: Vision, risk, and change. Journal of the Intermountain Center for Education Eectiveness. 1(2), 64-71. Sanders, N. M. & Kearney, K. M. (Eds.) (2008). Performance Expectations and indicators for education leaders: An ISLLC-Based guide to implementing leader standards and a companion guide to the educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School O cers. Available: http://www.ccsso.org/publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=367 Thompson, S. (Ed.)(1993).
Principals for our changing schools: Knowledge and skill base.
National
Policy Board for Educational Administration. Roman Little eld Publisher. U. S. Government (2002). The no child left behind act of 2001. (PL 107-110, 107th Congress). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing O ce.
3.9 It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty: Implementing Triangu33
lar Mentoring Relationships
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Those who have torches will pass them on to others (Plato, Republic) This scholarly essay features a formal mentoring program for new faculty in its rst and crucial year of development in a research university culture. We are two mentoring leaders, a professor (program director) and dean (program sponsor), who focus on the program's inception, implementation, and evaluation. Our emphasis is on the collective support and growth that allowed the program to take root and transition into its second year. The village of present is changing in the state of Florida and across the nation, with increased expectations for faculty scholarly productivity, as well as relevance and impact, within America's major research universities like our own: The point [has been] made clear: faculty who want tenure and promotion must do (and publish) research, preferably research that meets the needs of the university (Brown, 2006, p. 51). Knowing that newcomers experience signi cant challenges and dramatic change within the rst year of their tenure-earning lives and that stress levels tend to escalate thereafter (Rice, Sorcinelli, & Austin, 2000; Sorcinelli, 1994), we are invested in the belief it takes a village to raise new faculty. In order to help new professors feel a sense of community in their workplaces and to learn how to maneuver the ambiguities of tenure systems, we heed the lessons of salient studies that underscore this dual problem in the academy (e.g., Boice, 1991; Rice, et al., 2000; Sorcinelli, 1994). Toward this end, mentoring and collegiality can go a long way to support tenure-earning faculty in understanding their complex environments and in adjusting and experiencing success more quickly (Bode; 1999; Ostro & Kozlowski, 1993). While formal mentoring
32 33
http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetailtest.cfm?ItemNumber=9255 This content is available online at
99
programs have increased in popularity nationwide, greater awareness and more documentation are de nitely needed (Gibb, 1999), a goal this writing supports. The College of Education (COE) at the University of South Florida (USF) is a public doctoral/research university. The primary aim of the New Faculty Mentoring Program (NFMP) is to promote the professional development and academic success of new faculty in their rst two years.
A second, equally important,
purpose is to provide seasoned faculty with opportunities to share their expertise with a new colleague and within the college's rst mentoring network of new and established colleagues (for more information, consult the COEUSF's NFMP website: http://www.coedu.usf.edu/main/faculty/mentoring.htm). The COEUSF New Faculty Mentoring Program Program Vision and Goals The NFMP encapsulates joint decision-making, triangular mentoring relationships, and faculty leadership. It grew out of Carol Mullen's initiative as a tenured faculty member and Dean Kennedy's enthusiastic support of her proposed mentoring program for all new faculty.
The program was rapidly developed by
consulting the literature on formal faculty mentoring programs and processes, and through interactive, joint decision-making. Speci c goals of this formal mentoring program are assisting faculty members and departments in actively mentoring new professors; enabling the scholarly development of newcomers through triangular mentoring relationships that support the retention and advancement of all new faculty, and that sustain collegewide mentoring through ongoing practice. NFMP Structure and Activities The new faculty who join us function as the center of a mentoring triad, assigned to both a mentor in their department and another in the college. Academic protégés bene t more from multiple relationships focused on their interests and needs (Higgins, 2000), so we followed this established mentoring protocol. Department chairs identify department mentors, and in addition, the mentoring director makes the college matches, with input from the Dean's o ce. The department mentor is likely to have close contact with the new academic, serving as an invaluable resource and sounding board. The college mentor is a go to person for discussing any concerns in con dence and an outsider to the mentee's department, this mentor can oer fresh perspectives. For the inaugural year in which this piloted program was tested, the following activities were implemented: fall orientation, meet and greet luncheon for new faculty, end-of-the-year luncheon, and a research and scholarship panel. The current year of 20062007 of the NFMP is characterized by more sophisticated as well as inclusive mentoring strategies, which will be outlined later. This brief report focuses on the processes and outcomes of the rst year of 20052006 of this program. What We Learned During the Pilot Phase The 30 participating facultythat is, 10 new faculty participants joined by their department mentor and their college mentor to form a triad were surveyed both fall 2005 and spring 2006. 2 For the preliminary study, the 30 faculty members were surveyed twice (fall and spring) with 10 participants per group (new faculty, department mentor, college mentor). The overall return rate of survey responses was 63% for the fall semester and 57% for the spring semester. The new faculty response rate was 80% in both the fall and spring. Department mentors had a 60% return rate in the fall, with 80% the following semester. Relatively speaking, the college mentor response rate was modest50% (fall) and 30% (spring), but overall a healthy return rate can be reported. We learned that new faculty needs in our college typically ranged from entry-level concerns such as learning the functions of key personnel, to academic agendas such as securing resources, to performance reviews such as clarifying requirements for annual evaluations. Additional ndings concerning faculty mentor support and improvements for the second year follow. Faculty Mentor Support Most established faculty members were willing to provide the new professors with much-needed guidance and support. In relation to their academic careers, faculty mentors provided protection and visibility, for example. Mentors also provided guidance and support in terms of psychosocial aspects, such as role modeling and counseling functions as well as providing for their direct interests, such as grants development and
100
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
teaching feedback (see Kram, 1985/1988). The quality and regularity of mentoring varied across college and departmental mentorships. Meetings with internal mentors were, as could be expected, less formal, more frequent, and more unit-focused. O ce and campus proximity was identi ed as crucial to the regularity and success of mentoring. A dierent level of expectation should probably be held for the o-campus or college mentor role. The college and department mentoring arrangements functioned somewhat dierently.
As con dantes, college
mentors mostly oered a safe haven, providing objective viewpoints on issues involving promotion and personalities, while department mentors focused on relationship-building and problem-solving. Over time, then, the college mentors served more of a careerist, preparatory function embodying a long-term view, whereas department mentors seemed more local in their emphasis, helping with daily or weekly survivalist approaches to their work. However, the mentoring functions of both college and department eorts naturally overlapped, regardless of physical location, with all serving as functional mentors, oering career and psychosocial bene ts ranging from help with adjustment to a new place to assistance with scholarly development. Certainly, both mentoring groups fostered the career and psychosocial functions of mentoring. Perhaps because a mentoring mindset and climate were established in the college, nonappointed faculty and chairs also provided assistance in at least two cases uno cially assuming the role of mentor. Validation of the program and its centerpiece, the triangular mentoring relationship, was con rmed and, signi cantly, a budding mentoring culture was established. Importantly, both college and department mentors reported that a growing sense of collegiality with their mentees signi cantly in uenced the relationship. Mentoring parties located at a distance, then, could feel genuine concern for one another, which in turn built a sense of collegiality and helped to ensure support. On the other hand, physical distance and time stood out as signi cant barriers to successful mentoring for some parties.
Distance had less to do with whether the mentor was situated outside the new professor's
unit, and more to do with whether this individual was located at a dierent campus. The new professors who were situated at the regional campuses, as opposed to the main campus, were inevitably challenged. As one solution, most of the newly hired regional faculty agreed to be mentored by three mentors, with at least one from their own site and another from the main campus. Because promotion and tenure for all a liated regional faculty are handled through the main campus, one of their mentors needed to be located centrally. An end-of-year evaluation is too late to discover interpersonal problems and program pitfalls. Hence, we incorporated new faculty only gatherings in the early fall along with survey assessments and follow-ups with tenure-earning faculty. A policy of con dentiality informed the mentoring director's communications with all participants, ensuring privacy as well as anonymity. Improvements for Year Two For the transitional period at the end of the rst year and for the second year cycle of this program, all recommendations were satis ed. The 2005 spring data were analyzed in time to satisfy the participants' requests for recognition, information, and other program changes; some were made at the end of the inaugural year with additional changes implemented for the second year. The suggestion that mentor training be nancially supported was acted upon, with resources obtained for a luncheon that drew together all mentoring parties. However, no speci cation for payment to mentors was made. Widespread commitment to support new faculty is also expected to evolve with combined eorts on the part of the NFMP leaders and faculty more generally.
Through exchanges with the rst year faculty as
to whether they wanted to continue in the program, recognition came that formal mentoring is essential collegewide and prompted widespread buy-in. In fact, ninety percent agreed to extend their formal arrangements.
Certainly, one test of formal mentoring success in any organization is for new faculty to want to
continue to receive mentoring from senior faculty. These protracted arrangements will be examined at the conclusion of the second year, along with the new mentorships formed. Based on this extended mentoring opportunity, it will be possible to learn more about both formal and informal mentoring within a research university culture and its evolutionary process. Another strategy for soliciting and extending collegewide involvement was to continue some of the same mentors into the second year, while some new mentoring triads were formed. Long-term goals are to involve
101
as many willing and capable senior faculty as possible and to reap the rewards of a robust culture of mentoring not dependent on assigned relationships. Additional improvements introduced in the second year of the NFMP were: (1) a training session identi ed as a meet and greet work luncheon, complete with other inclusive social events); (2) a written mentoring agreement for parties wanting to clarify what is expected, in addition to learning goal statements accompanied by speci c responsibilities for the mentors and their mentees; (3) a new survey item with best-match variables, (4) library sessions focused on advanced database searches and citation indexes, and (5) conversion of the fall and spring surveys into a user-friendly, online instruments. Life in the Evolving Village We found that this formal mentoring experience not only potentially spearheads faculty bonding, but also better positions our village of scholars to generate widespread cultural change.
The facilitation of
collegiality and interdependence via formalized mentorships can even be thought of as a cultural reform strategy. Fullan (2006) persuasively argues in Turnaround Leadership that all successful strategies [aimed at changing educational cultures] are socially based and action oriented (p.
44).
Attention to mutual
commitment and interest, scholarly overlap, proximity, and diversity must be upheld in the making of good faculty matches. Another goal is for us to include the faculty mentors in all events focused on new faculty development, as well as to continue soliciting recommendations for improvement and, when advisable, acting on these. The New Faculty Mentoring Program is obviously evolving. Modi cations continue to be made based on faculty input.
A few recent hires in our College of Education have actually requested, as part of the
negotiating process, that they be allowed to participate in our collegewide mentoring program for tenureearning faculty only to learn that they will automatically become part of it. Universities that function as mentoring organizations oer something that is relatively new (Forret, Turban, & Dougherty, 1996), yet mentorprotégé relationships ensure a bright future so they must be encouraged and facilitated.
Finally,
successful formal mentoring programs make a dierence to new academics and even to seasoned faculty. Such support networks enable the exchange of experience and best practice, as well as desirable cultural change. No doubt, universities implementing formal faculty mentoring should be encouraged to share ideas and tips with respect to research-based faculty mentoring, so as to continue to improve the climate and culture for tenure and promotion of new faculty. Author Notes 1Academic publishers are now recognizing the value of formal faculty mentoring programs, especially as concerns relevance for multiple university colleges, with the rst-ever book on this topic recently appearing in print (Mullen, in press). 2This study received USF's Institutional Review Board approval in 2005. This essay treatment is of a larger empirical work: Mullen, C. A., Feyten, C. M., Holcomb, C., Kealy, W. A., & Keller, H. R. (in press). Birthing a new faculty mentoring program in a research culture. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), The handbook of successful faculty mentoring programs. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. References Bode, R. K. (1999). Mentoring and collegiality. In R. J. Menges and Associates (Eds.), Faculty in new jobs (pp. 118-114). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Boice, R. (1991). New faculty as teachers. Journal of Higher Education, 62(2), 150-173. Brown, S. C. (2006). University research: Con ict between federal and local interests? Florida Educational Leadership, 6(2), 51-53. Forret, M. L., Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1996). Issues facing organizations when implementing formal mentoring programmes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 17(3), 27-30. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Gibb, S. (1999). The usefulness of theory: A case studying evaluating formal mentoring schemes. Human Relations, 52(8), 1055-1075. Higgins, M. C. (2000). The more, the merrier? Multiple developmental relationships and work satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 19(4), 277-296.
102
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Kram, K. E. (1985/1988). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Lanham, MA: University Press of America. Mullen, C. A., Kennedy, C. S., & Keller, H. R. (2006). Establishing new faculty mentoring programs in research institutions. School Leadership News: The newsletter of AERA; Division A: Administration, Organization, & Leadership, 17, 12-15. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from http://www.aera.net/divisions/?id=66 Mullen, C. A. (Ed.). (in press). The handbook of successful faculty mentoring programs. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. Ostro, C., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1993). The role of mentoring in the information gathering processes of newcomers during early organizational socialization. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 170-183. Rice, R. E., Sorcinelli, M. D., & Austin, A. F. (2000). Heeding new voices: Academic careers for a new generation. (Inquiry #7, working paper series). New pathways: Faculty careers and employment for the 21st century. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) and Stylus Publishing. Sorcinelli, M. D. (1994).
Eective approaches to new faculty development.
Journal of Counseling &
Development, 72, 474-479. Tierney, W. G. (2001). Reforming tenure in schools of education. Phi Delta Kappan, 550-554.
3.10 Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in 34
Educational Leadership and Administration
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. This preliminary study asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? Four scholar-practitioners who were the most frequently nominated by fellow academics from 2002 to 2003 were identi ed. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteriasigni cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systemsappear in table form, complete with representative quotes. Importantly, issues of context and tension are raised as dierent perspectives were oered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents. On the one hand, a survey respondent commented, I realize the impossible task of selecting the greatest living scholar in our eld. Some are naturalistic methodologists rather than mainstream educational administration scholars, while others approach scholarship with very narrow or very broad perspectives. On the other hand, another declared, Some scholars do stand out. There is one who I think is simply the greatest mover `n' shaker in the profession. This individual has done more than any to shape the direction of the eldhis work is widely read by both scholars and practitioners, and his contributions to educational leadership are widely recognized. Introduction For this study, academics in educational leadership and administration were asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? The respondents (university faculty constituents) were encouraged to provide an explanation for their votes. The focus here is on the perceptions
34
This content is available online at
103
of nominators relative to outstanding scholarship in educational leadership. Not only the who, but particularly the why, served as the guiding framework for this analysis.
Throughout this survey research
spanning 2002 to 2003, four scholar-practitioners in particular were most frequently nominated, leading to their eventual identi cation. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that are discussed here; these can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteriasigni cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systemsappear in Table 1, complete with representative quotes from the data. Importantly, issues of context and tension were raised as dierent perspectives were oered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents.
The tension evident in the opening quotes
signi es deep, unresolved issues that surfaced during the data analysis. The complexities of this picture are also brie y explored in this article and are open to further interpretation. Conceptual Framework and Research Scaolds In addition to my own curiosity as a professor in this area, four sources inspired this preliminary exploration: (1) the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration's (NCPEA) Living Legend Awards, recognized annually since 1999 (http://www.ncpea.net); (2) Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study of highly productive educational psychologists, which identi ed living legendsRichard Anderson, Richard Mayer, Michael Pressley, and Ann Brownthrough nominators' eyes; (3) Culberton's (1995) seminal work on the University Council for Educational Administration's (UCEA) history that provides insight into the creation of this organizational inter-university system and those pioneering scholars involved; and (4) Murphy's (1999) self-portrait of the profession, informed by professors in school administration programs. Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study bene ted from their ongoing research on productive scholars. They combined a eld-based survey approach with dialogic case study methods, interviewing the most successful nominees. Adapting but also modifying this approach to satisfy my own objectives, I surveyed practicing educational leadership professors in their role of peer nominator. To obtain as many responses as possible and to dilute the in uence of any particular lter on the outcomes, I did not seek sponsorship from an association or funding agency, instead accessing dierent venues over time. Murphy's (1999) study also explored professors' concepts of important markers in the academy over one decade (e.g., reform eorts and publications and presentations within the eld). Interestingly, those authors and works cited as seminal from 1987 to 1996 overlapped with the results of my own study carried out seven years later. Of the top four nominees in my own studyin alphabetical order, John Goodlad (University of Washington, retiree), John Hoyle (Texas A&M University), Joseph Murphy (Vanderbilt University), and Thomas Sergiovanni (Trinity University) all but one (John Hoyle) were listed in Murphy's results. Since my survey question did not specify what con gures a living legend, the possibilities for naming new and dierent individuals extended beyond the use of publications and citations as a traditional marker of excellence in the academy. The results outlined in Table 1 support this perception, as criteria generated by nominees for making these decisions were much more comprehensive and show value for theory/practice links. However, despite these dierences between the two studies (e.g., my own pool of participants was greater, list of nominations longer, and survey question open-ended), the core selections of Murphy's respondents mirrored my own. This suggests outcomes beyond the scope of either of the studies, each reinforcing the other and, perhaps, enhancing validity.
However,
neither Murphy's study nor my own claim to have comprehensively sampled the discipline, opting instead for a purposeful sampling, consistent with a preliminary exploration. This is also the case for Kiewra and Creswell's study. Participant Pool and Study Method Nominated Scholars The many persons forwarded as exceptional by faculty peers may all qualify as scholar-practitioners for whom their academic productivity inextricably links to impact and application within the eld. While most can be described as full- edged scholars who have signi cantly in uenced national trends and policies in addition to local contexts, others were selected for their leadership roles within school districts and the
104
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
community. However, the majority of exceptional scholars nominated work within the academy in various disciplines, primarily educational administration, in one of two respects: (1) broadly representing educational studies within such areas as business, politics, humanities, and philosophy, or (2) specializing in educational leadership with a focus on school leadership, higher education, or teacher education, and in such areas as supervision, schooluniversity collaboration, leadership preparation, policy, and reform.
3.10.1 Survey Methods Pilot and group discourse. For the survey `The Greatest' Living Scholars of Our Time (that some quipped to be a tough assignment) recipients were asked to take a moment to make a dierence by answering this question, to nominate one person, and to brie y jot down the reason(s) for your choice. The form alluded to the necessity of being able to make an informed judgment (this survey assumes that you're in the eld of educational leadership). It was established that any feedback would be anonymously reported. A pilot sampling, conducted in 2002 at a doctoral research-extensive metropolitan university in Florida, involved eight educational leadership professors. The question was openly tested and the interest level gauged. This process further veri ed the value/importance of the question itself, so I broadened my data collection eorts. I also learned that some faculty wanted either to nominate more than one person or to vote with reservations, an outcome that foreshadowed an emerging pattern on a larger scale for some respondents. Fuller sampling and distribution. Turning to listserves of professional associations, I accessed those most relevant to my study, including university-based educational leadership departments located through Internet searches. Conference councils and educational leadership editorial teams also received the survey. My goal was to obtain 200 surveys214 (6%) complete responses were received; additionally, 19 electronic messages were returned explaining why a nomination was not possible.
In all, 233 (7%) responses were analyzed.
Approximately 3,500 individuals would have received the survey (some more than once), but this number proved impossible to accurately track. While the goal set for the completed surveys was met, the very low return rate needs to be addressed, especially when one considers that a good response rate of 50 to 60% is generally considered accepted for survey research (Diem, 2002). However, at least one social science research team has found that its traditional paper survey yielded a higher response rate (60%) than the same questionnaire distributed electronically, which dropped signi cantly to 27%; this led them to question whether e-surveys are a reliable means of collecting data from a targeted population (Fraze, Hardin, Brashears, Smith, & Lockaby, 2003). In the long list provided by Newman (2002) for increasing one's response rate from surveys in general, I used most of the suggestionsprovide a salient question, indicate why the respondent's answer matters, keep the survey short and simple, use university identi cation and a personalized note, and follow up with a reminder. I did not make many telephone calls or oer monetary incentives, both optional strategies for maximizing one's response rate. While I do not know why for certain why the response rate was low, several possibilities do come to mind. For one thing, the tensions evident in some of the responses (and non-votes) received suggest that the nature of the topic itself is controversial. Asking who the most exceptional scholar in educational leadership is today may seem confounded for those who question the very notion of greatness, especially among one's living contemporaries, or those who can think of more than one person, or those who can think of no one at all deserving of such status. As Renzetti and Lee (1993) acknowledge, researching sensitive topics poses conceptual, methodological, and imaginative challenges, an explanation that describes my own experience. As another possibility, there is little control that can be exerted over a study that is conducted electronically and where the recipients, although from a targeted population, may question the survey focus or the researcher's motives. This is why I spent additional time collecting the data, re-stating the purpose of the study, eliciting some responses in-person, and emailing reminders to non-respondents, all as strategies for seeking a higher response rate. Speci cally, the survey was electronically circulated to the American Educational Research Association's (AERA) Division A (Administration), which had 820 members in 2002, and AERA's Division K (Teaching & Teacher Education), which had 1,004 (http://www.aera.net).
Additionally, representatives of UCEA's
executive council and member institutes were recipients (http://www.ucea.org), along with NCPEA's 1,622
105
members (http://www.ncpea.org). Thirty- ve leadership professors also represented the Florida Association of Professors of Educational Leadership Association (FAPEL). Deviation from KiewraCreswell study.
Unlike Kiewra and Creswell (2000), who generated a list of
names based on AERA's Division C (Learning and Instruction) membership, I did not preselect scholars to be rated. I strove to avoid tying the results to particular associations and their star leaders, which could have limited and even biased the data. And I did not want to presume what living scholar might mean to others, so I avoided de ning this term. Those respondents who forwarded the names of two exceptional scholars, explaining their reasoning for this decision, had both votes counted. Also, in contrast with Kiewra and Creswell's focus on cognition and learning for their survey and recipient pool, my own form provided no premapping or compartmentalization relative to educational leadership. Reasons for selecting any particular area, such as supervision or policy, seemed arbitrary, serving only to privilege one at the expense of another. I opted for openness, hoping this would promote greater inclusion or representation of the educational leadership eld and hence provide a rich data set of interest to readers. Finally, the Kiewra and Creswell results were based on 41 (out of 113) responses. The 233 I received from nominators also compares with the 105 that Murphy (1999) collected. Saturation and data analysis. The scholars recognized as exceptional in this study achieved this status once the data (i.e., votes cast and reasons provided) revealed clear patterns. Also, the response data (reasons given for selections) were coded, and key words and phrases highlighted, in search of potential themes, applying Miles and Huberman's (1994) qualitative procedures for data management and analysis. Discussion of Survey Results In supplying the reason(s) for their choice, respondents generally emphasized areas of importance, speci c contributions, and lines of work, even areas that personally in uenced their own scholarship. Others noted publications and further scholarly contributions. Four scholars have been identi ed as exceptional in this article.
Although many more names were
forwarded, some with obvious and consistent support by the voting body, a demarcation became evident based on the sheer number of tallies over time.
A top tier consisting of four individuals had emerged in
addition to a second and third tier. Those nalists identi ed here are all white males. A number of females and a few minorities were nominated (and some were nominators), but not to the point of selection. Although there has been a dramatic increase of women in educational leadership, school leadership certi cation programs, and leadership positions in national level associations (e.g., UCEA, NCPEA, and AERA), male scholars may be publishing more frequently (Engstrom, 1999). As McCarthy (1999) speculated, women as a group have been faculty in this eld for fewer years than men, and so have not yet hit their stride in terms of scholarly productivity and impact (p. 202). As another possibility, male scholars may be receiving greater recognition for works disseminated and scholarly eorts made. The same trend probably applies to minority scholars. Obviously, such trends and possibilities should be closely examined in the context of equity, ethics, and policy development in academe, as recommended by Haring (1998) and other scholars. Dierent Readings of the Question The survey question was interpreted in various ways.
While some viewed it from a national policy
perspective, others considered contribution to the scholarly eld, schools, or novice leaders. Selection Criteria and Reasons The criteria of selection and reasons given were numerous; these are summarized in Table 1. The entries (appearing on the left) represent the themes that emerged from the response data and each quote (on the right) provides support from two or more respondents for the corresponding theme; these all characterize the typical comments received. The four scholars selected as leading academics do not evenly ful ll all of the criteria listed, perhaps because each is known for particular spheres of in uence (e.g., leadership standards, administrator program preparation reform, ethics and moral leadership, K12 institutional partnership).
Nonetheless, all were
associated with such dimensions as signi cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systems. The reasons provided extend beyond the traditional association with publication rates and impact via frequency of citation as markers of scholarly
106
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
excellence. The proliferating criteria also t with some of the emerging contemporary trends in our eld, such as the increase since 1986 of university faculty committing to improving relationships with schools and practitioners, developing eld-based components in preparation programs, and focusing more on ethics in professional practice (McCarthy, 1999; Mullen, Gordon, Greenlee, & Anderson, 2002). However, the recurring reasons that were forwarded virtually bypassed contributions in the areas of diversity and social justice as well as alternative paradigms, such as feminism, critical theory, and postmodernism. Perhaps these and other philosophically critical locations will emerge in a more exhaustive sampling or a future one. A critical reader of a draft version of this article asserted that the results re ect a chasm in the eld, which is still very traditional while moving ahead. Going Wide/Deep as Reformers Those who functioned broadly in their work and impact received more tallies within the discipline than scholars who functioned more narrowly. This pattern suggests that those receiving an abundance of votes were perceived as having a higher value. However, those who have made signi cant inroads in an educational leadership domain, such as administrator program preparation reform, were simultaneously associated with speci c change agendas.
Going wide/deep was a salient pattern, then, associated with living legend.
Generally speaking, nominees had appeared to construct their own meaning of exceptional, seeing this as a comprehensive eort closely related to particular reform agendas.
Fullan (1999) explains that large
scaleness is only possible where human contact has been fully established and a multilevel system has been managed on a continuous basis (p. 74). Although Fullan was addressing large-scale reforms per se rather than particular reformers, these can be linked as I have done in this discussion.
3.10.2 Tensions in the Data Analysis As is evident from Table 1, the results proved productive for identifying criteria that some academics currently associate with outstanding scholarship. In contrast, a minority (19 individuals) oered powerful insights into why nomination was simply not feasible to them. For a few, the very use of our eld in the survey question was problematic: I see a problem with your question vis-à-vis your use of the label `our eld. ' Respondents doubtless thought about the heroes in their own areas of study. Granted, the concept of eld is very tricky. English (2003) critiques eld and its cousin knowledge base as leftovers from modernism, denying a plurality of realities, truths, and interpretations. Postmodernism brings context, human agency, and multiplicity into the foreground: Educational leadership, similar to leadership studies, incorporates a broad range of perspectives, from descriptive to social scienti c to humanistic and drawing upon the interpretive methods of history, literature, philosophy, and education (Johnson, 1996, p. 13). Another perception is that educational leadership is changing: The intent to bridge theory with practice has created an emerging discipline that transcends the academy precisely because it is more than mere scholarship; it is scholarship plus (Born, 1996, p. 47). The hybrid or borrowing nature of educational administration has produced a composite eld, arousing concern.
Someone shared, I've been deeply troubled by the many contradictions between American
democratic ideals and the theories and notions borrowed from business, the military, and the social sciences being subsumed within the eld of education administration with little scrutiny. Because of the increasingly amorphous nature of educational leadership, another argued in favor of actually creating a eld that has boundaries and a distinct identity: Without clear, substantive dierences from other academic departments, educational administration as a eld of serious scholarly inquiry has no legitimate grounds on which to defend its continued existence within academe, particularly while higher education is being downsized. For still others, the use of living scholar understandably incited confusion and controversy, as thoughtfully articulated: In good conscience I must say that I nd the term living scholar something of an oxymoron. My de nition may be out of style these days, but I believe before one can be considered a scholar that person's writings or orations must have withstood the tests of time. Interestingly, this decision evoked considerable di culty. Every time I visit your email the same questions prevent an answerdoes `greatest living' mean most frequently cited by other scholars? Most followed by practitioners? Contributed the greatest theoretical insights about leadership?
107
Done most to redirect the eld of study?
Or, added most to the empirical base for understanding
leadership? My reaction to all of these pivotal concerns is that while the survey question is laden with datable, slippery concepts (i.e., the eld, living scholar, exceptional, and even educational leadership), so is the profession itself. Further, the question solicited valuable informationit is useful to see the multiple, disjointed, and even contradictory viewpoints taken.
Areas of consensus also surfaced from this mixed
response, as captured in Table 1. Accounting for the feedback of non-voting members as I have done here has made visible issues of contention.
Those who provided critiques about the nominating process and
suggestively about its validity performed a probing hermeneutic deconstruction that was treated as data and thematically analyzed, with some attention given here. Contextual In uences and Background Issues One crucial insight of survey respondents was, Who is outstanding in educational leadership and administration or any scholarly eld is really framed by the times and the needs.
In many respects, this
resounding message has greater worth than the criteria and even the participants' selections. Certainly, context matters, a reality that keeps the idea of living legend and practice of hero-worshipping in perspective. This admission of temporality and contextuality contrasts with the view that the living legend nalists represent a static, noncontroversial choice. The results, inevitably debatable from almost any angle, are also in uenced by the methods I have selected and the venues surveyed. Regardless of my attempt to appraise the educational leadership eld as comprehensively as possible, a disjointedly con gured domain required piecemeal, pick and shovel sampling. Because no single repository exists to which all leadership professors belong, it is currently not possible to communicate with the complete constituency and at one time. Such systemic barriers make it clear that any such study should not be construed as the last word on the subject of exceptional scholarship. In addition to systemic barriers to data collection, other contextual issues included political alliances, decision-making challenges, and generational biases.
Some scholarly communities hold tight allegiances,
making it di cult to know the extent to which nominations were in uenced by loyalty rather than informed judgment.
In a few instances, junior professors confessed that they had nominated their former major
professors.
Perhaps more exhaustive sampling procedures would have better monitored the in uence of
political entanglements; on the other hand, these seem inherent in the psyche of any discipline.
Other
contextual in uences underscore how challenging it proved for some respondents to make a single selection. This struggle emphasizes just how demanding this decision-making process can be as well asthis is the good newsthe high number of outstanding leaders from which to select. A few participants even postulated that no such scholars currently exist, except as experts within their own domain. But most persons did provide a nomination, even where disclaimers had been announced, an admission that supports the contentious notion that leading scholars for contemporary times can in fact be identi ed, even where tensions and uncertainty are embedded in the conclusions and where debate is inevitable and ongoing. As mentioned, a generational bias entered into the results but once again the degree of in uence is unknown. More senior professors generally know the older or more established generation of scholars, whereas those younger have familiarity with the newer stars. Several nominees addressed this phenomenon, as in: The more scholarly respondents might tend to select someone who is treasured within their eld for the writing they have done. Personally, I am not as up-to-date with names because my own heroes are mostly retirees; in fact, I am ignorant of the mid-career hotshots who are making good waves. Final Remark The issues of complexity raised herein suggest that while nominations of living legends seem possible, especially where constituents have formulated criteria, deeper issues prevail. Nominators forwarded useful and revealing criteria supporting their decision makinga process thoughtfully undertaken, particularly by those sharing re ections and caveats. And the dissenting critiques proved invaluable as well. Nominators provided clues about the patterns of educational leadership they most value, the individuals to whom they have looked for guidance, the status of the eld, and emergent trends. Further research is needed that continues work on the controversial topic of exceptional scholarship in educational leadership. Debate is also encouraged about the topics of signi cance raised: The critical tensions
108
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
explored herein that capture the thinking of some university faculty in addition to the self-identifying criteria for the votes cast would bene t from a community-wide response. References Born, D. (1996). Leadership studies: A critical appraisal. In P. S. Temes (Ed.), Teaching leadership: Essays in theory and practice (pp. 45-72). New York: Peter Lang. Culbertson, J. (1995). Building bridges: UCEA's rst two decades. University Park, PA: The University Council for Educational Administration. Diem, K. G. (2002).
Maximizing response rate and controlling nonresponse error in survey research.
New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension/Resource Center Services.
[Online].
Available:
http://www.rce.rutgers.edu. English, F. W. (2003). The postmodern challenge to the theory and practice of educational administration. Spring eld, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher. Engstrom, C. M. (1999). Promoting the scholarly writing of female doctoral students in higher education and student aairs program. NASPA Journal, 36(4), 264-277. Fraze, S., Hardin, K., Brashears, T., Smith, J. H., & Lockaby, J. (2003). The eects of delivery mode upon survey response rate and perceived attitudes of Texas agri-science teachers.
Journal of agricultural
education, 44 (part 2), 27-37. Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer. Haring, M. J. (1998). Response to A woman's name: Implications for publication, citation, and tenure. Educational Researcher, 27(8), 43. Johnson, P. F. (1996).
Antipodes: Plato, Nietzsche, and the moral dimension of leadership.
In P. S.
Temes (Ed.), Teaching leadership: Essays in theory and practice (pp. 13-44). New York: Peter Lang. Kiewra, K. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2000). Conversations with three highly productive educational psychologists: Richard Anderson, Richard Mayer, and Michael Pressley. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 135-161. McCarthy, M. M. (1999). The changing face of the educational leadership professoriate. In J. Murphy & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform (pp. 192-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mullen, C. A., Gordon, S. P., Greenlee, B., & Anderson, R. H. (2002). Capacities for school leadership: Emerging trends in the literature. International Journal of Educational Reform, 11(2), 158-198. Murphy, J. (1999). The reform of the profession: A self-portrait. In J. Murphy & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform (pp. 39-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Newman,
M. E. (2002).
`Rounding up' responses to mailed questionnaires.
ation Association/Extension Education Evaluation].
[Online].
Available:
[American Evalu-
http://danr.ucop.edu/eee-
aea/AEA_HearItFromTheBoardJuly2002.pdf Renzetti, C. M., & Lee, R. M. (Eds.). (1993). Researching sensitive topics. London: Sage. Author Notes The respondent quotes appearing on this chart (and in this article) have been synthesized and slightly altered, rendered gender-neutral where possible and anonymous, protecting both the nominees and the nominators.
I am grateful to the faculty nominators who generously shared their perceptions.
Also, I
appreciate the helpful critique provided by the editor and the two reviewers. Acronyms for national standards used by nominators: Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC); Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)
109
110
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
INDEX
111
Index of Keywords and Terms
Keywords are listed by the section with that keyword (page numbers are in parentheses).
Keywords
do not necessarily appear in the text of the page. They are merely associated with that section. Ex. apples, 1.1 (1)
Terms are referenced by the page they appear on.
H I
. A
administration, 1.2(8)
L
Leadership by Outrage, 3.3(50) leadership preparation, 3.4(54)
Best Practices in Online Teaching Course, 1.3(14) blended learning, 1.3(14) Building Leaders, 3.3(50) Bureaucratic, 3.3(50) CHALLENGING THE PRESENT, 50 Change, 3.3(50)
M Manager, 3.3(50) Mentoring, 3.7(80), 3.9(98)
N O
CREDITING THE PAST, 50 cultural competence, 3.6(75)
P
Preparation Programs, 3.8(88) principal preparation, 3.7(80)
Dependency, 3.3(50)
professional development, 3.7(80) protegeship, 3.7(80)
distance education, 1.3(14)
education, 1.2(8)
Purposing, 3.3(50)
S
school improvement, 3.5(62), 3.6(75)
Educational Leaders, 2.1(17)
school leaders, 3.4(54)
educational leadership, 1.1(1), 3.6(75)
Social and Political Acumen, 2.1(17)
Empowerment, 3.3(50) global, 3.6(75)
scholar-practitioner, 3.10(102) school culture, 3.6(75)
educational administration, 3.9(98)
G
policy, 3.6(75) preparation, 3.10(102)
distance, 1.2(8)
E
online learning, 1.3(14) online teaching, 1.3(14)
Curriculum, 3.8(88)
diversity, 3.6(75)
ncpea, 1.1(1), 2.1(17), 3.7(80), 3.9(98)
online pedagogy, 1.3(14)
CREATING THE FUTURE, 50 credentialing, 3.4(54)
Leader, 3.3(50) 3.10(102)
audit, 3.6(75)
D
Higher Education, 3.8(88)
leadership, 1.2(8), 3.7(80), 3.8(88),
assessment, 3.6(75)
C
apples, 1
..............................................................CONTENT.............................................................., instruction, 1.2(8) 50 instructional design, 1.3(14) administrative support, 2.2(33)
B
Ex.
Standards, 3.8(88)
T
teacer mentors, 2.2(33) technology, 1.1(1), 1.2(8)
112
ATTRIBUTIONS
Attributions Collection: Mentorship for Teacher Leaders Edited by: Fred Mednick URL: http://cnx.org/content/col10622/1.3/ License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching and Leadership" By: Mary Harris-John, Sherri Ritter URL: http://cnx.org/content/m15069/1.1/ Pages: 1-8 Copyright: Mary Harris-John, Sherri Ritter License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development" By: Ed Cox, William Sharp URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14133/1.1/ Pages: 8-13 Copyright: Ed Cox, William Sharp License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning" By: Larry Ragan URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14977/1.2/ Pages: 14-16 Copyright: Larry Ragan License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs" By: Andra McGinn URL: http://cnx.org/content/m17184/1.1/ Pages: 17-33 Copyright: Andra McGinn License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning Teachers" By: Arnold Barrera, Richard Braley, John Slate URL: http://cnx.org/content/m18056/1.3/ Pages: 33-46 Copyright: Arnold Barrera, Richard Braley, John Slate License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Toward a Leadership Practice Field" By: Theodore Creighton URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12743/1.8/ Pages: 47-48 Copyright: Theodore Creighton License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
ATTRIBUTIONS
113
Module: "CREDITING THE PAST, CHALLENGING THE PRESENT, CREATING THE FUTURE" Used here as: "The Long View" By: National Council of Professors of Educational Administration URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12868/1.3/ Pages: 48-50 Copyright: National Council of Professors of Educational Administration License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "The Principalship: Manager to Leader" By: Angus MacNeil, Michael Yelvington URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12924/1.2/ Pages: 50-53 Copyright: Angus MacNeil, Michael Yelvington License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: Continuous Learning for Professional Roles" By: Patricia Reeves, James E. Berry URL: http://cnx.org/content/m18260/1.1/ Pages: 54-62 Copyright: Patricia Reeves, James E. Berry License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Reality Check: Designing a New Leadership Program for the 21st Century" By: Bob Smith, Rayma Harchar, Kathleen Campbell URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13690/1.1/ Pages: 62-75 Copyright: Bob Smith, Rayma Harchar, Kathleen Campbell License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "THE CULTURE AUDIT: A LEADERSHIP TOOL FOR ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING IN DIVERSE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES" By: Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13691/1.2/ Pages: 75-80 Copyright: Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés" By: Linda Searby URL: http://cnx.org/content/m16930/1.2/ Pages: 80-87 Copyright: Linda Searby License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and Communities" By: Bonnie Beyer URL: http://cnx.org/content/m19029/1.1/ Pages: 88-98 Copyright: Bonnie Beyer License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
114
ATTRIBUTIONS
Module: "It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty: Implementing Triangular Mentoring Relationships" By: Carol Mullen, Colleen Kennedy URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14546/1.2/ Pages: 98-102 Copyright: Carol Mullen, Colleen Kennedy License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in Educational Leadership and Administration" By: Carol Mullen URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13677/1.1/ Pages: 102-110 Copyright: Carol Mullen License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Mentorship for Teacher Leaders A set of research modules to help selected Teachers Without Borders members best prepare for their active role as mentors for those teachers participating in the ve-course Certi cate of Teaching Mastery program
About Connexions Since 1999, Connexions has been pioneering a global system where anyone can create course materials and make them fully accessible and easily reusable free of charge. We are a Web-based authoring, teaching and learning environment open to anyone interested in education, including students, teachers, professors and lifelong learners. We connect ideas and facilitate educational communities. Connexions's modular, interactive courses are in use worldwide by universities, community colleges, K-12 schools, distance learners, and lifelong learners.
Connexions materials are in many languages, including
English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Vietnamese, French, Portuguese, and Thai. Connexions is part of an exciting new information distribution system that allows for
Print on Demand Books.
Connexions
has partnered with innovative on-demand publisher QOOP to accelerate the delivery of printed course materials and textbooks into classrooms worldwide at lower prices than traditional academic publishers.
Collection Editor: Fred Mednick
Mentorship for Teacher Leaders Collection Editor: Fred Mednick Authors: Arnold Barrera James E. Berry Bonnie Beyer Richard Braley Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. Kathleen Campbell Ed Cox Rayma Harchar Mary Harris-John Colleen Kennedy Angus MacNeil
Andra McGinn Carol Mullen Larry Ragan Patricia Reeves Sherri Ritter Linda Searby William Sharp John Slate Bob Smith Michael Yelvington
Online:
CONNEXIONS Rice University, Houston, Texas
©
2008 Fred Mednick
This selection and arrangement of content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Table of Contents 1 Elearning for Mentors 1.1 e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching and Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.3 Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 Mentorship and Leadership Practices 2.1 A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2 Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3 The Role of the Principal 3.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.2 The Long View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.3 The Principalship: Manager to Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3.4 Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: Continuous 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10
Learning for Professional Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Reality Check: Designing a New Leadership Program for the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 THE CULTURE AUDIT: A LEADERSHIP TOOL FOR ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING IN DIVERSE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty:
Implementing Triangular Mentoring
Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in Educational Leadership and Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Attributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
iv
Chapter 1
Elearning for Mentors 1.1 e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching 1
and Leadership
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Professional development is both a growing trend and an increasing need in this country for those employed in a wide variety of professions. It is a way for employees to engage in workplace learning to improve performance levels and skills, and to learn new ones as well. According to the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD), Many economists and business leaders agree that the key to achieving business results and sustaining a competitive advantage is a fully engaged, knowledgeable, and skilled workforce (Rivera & Paradise, 2006, p. 2). According to this same report, American industry spends an estimated $109.25 billion annually on professional development activities. Educators make up about two percent of the American workforce (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007). According to the US Department of Education (USDOE), there are over 2.7 million full-time teachers in this country, and they play a critical role in the quality of education. In a 2004 report by the USDOE, The single most important factor aecting student achievement is teachers. . . (Kleiman, 2004). The importance of highly-quali ed teachers is evident, and therefore the question becomes:
how do we keep 2.7 million
teachers trained and current so they may deliver the quality education this country's children deserve? Professional development is a key component to maintaining a skilled workforce and producing quality teachers, so the challenge lies in providing and delivering training so that it is meaningful, high-quality, and presented in the most eective format. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, teachers on average spend over 40 hours per week on school duties both inside and outside of the classroom. In addition, they work 10 months during the year and then during their two-month break many take second jobs, teach summer courses, or spend time in workshops or college classes to continue their education (U.S. Department of Labor, 2006).
To complicate matters,
many teachers live in rural areas where they do not have access to professional development opportunities. Additionally, there is the problem of a shortage of quali ed teachers in such elds as mathematics, science,
1
This content is available online at
2
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
and foreign languages who need speci c training and courses to obtain state certi cation (Kleiman, 2004, p. 1). Electronic professional development (e-PD) may provide the solution to some of these training issues. It provides teachers with opportunities to participate in quality in-service education while staying in their communities, and even in their classrooms. Having the opportunity to meet the standards of high-quality professional development while living a normal life may encourage more teachers to participate, thus reducing some of the shortages we now face. We are just beginning to see the full potential of e-PD, but to be eective these programs must address the quality standards like those outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001; in other words, professional development today must be relevant, meaningful, useful, and standardsbased.
These standards include such criteria as being delivered by quali ed individuals with appropriate
credentials and providing training in the use of technology. Forty states have written professional development standards and thirty nine of those engage in nancing professional development opportunities for their teachers (National Center for Education Statistics, 2006). This fact alone highlights the importance of how state and federal governments contribute to quality teacher training. Ohio, for example, has developed a Tri-Tier Model of School Improvement, which aligns resources, information, tools, professional development and technical assistance. This model, found on the Ohio Department of Education website, http://www.ode.state.oh.us
2 , focuses on six areas: data analysis; best practices; plan-
ning; implementation and monitoring; resource management; and high-quality professional development. All of these are integrated for the purpose of improving student achievement, teacher instruction, and overall school performance. Ohio's professional development plan is built around the needs of educators by responding to the needs of the students. It is also aligned with local, state, and national goals. The state's standards for professional development are the following: Standard 1 High Quality Professional Development (HQPD) is a purposeful, structured and continuous process that occurs over time; Standard 2 HQPD is informed by multiple sources of data; Standard 3 HQPD is collaborative; Standard 4 HQPD includes varied learning experiences that accommodate individual educators' knowledge and skills; Standard 5 HQPD is evaluated by its short- and long-term impact on professional practice and achievement of all students; and Standard 6 HQPD results in the acquisition, enhancement or re nement of skills and knowledge. The use of e-PD as a viable source for developing quality teachers is becoming more common, but as with all new ventures, the lack of accepted standards make for a wide range of quality learning opportunities. Some questions to be considered are: What dierent types of e-PD courses are available? administrators and teachers look for when trying to choose a quality e-based course?
What should
How should an e-
based professional development course be evaluated? The goals of this paper are to help identify good e-PD courses, and to help the reader understand the process of distinguishing electronic high quality professional development programs so they can make informed decisions when considering various e-based opportunities. Background of Traditional Professional Development: Taking Aim According to Roland Barth (2001), traditional professional development for educators has been characterized by assorted courses at universities, episodic in-service activities in school districts, or incoherently planned workshops. Barth describes this as a wasteland of professional development, and Malone (2001) concurs, stating that after a rather intense period of formal training for educators, it seems that the professional development that follows is rather informal, self-guided, and sporadic. Teaching and school administration are intense, complex jobs, and without regular, well-planned, relevant professional development, educators become stagnant and less productive in terms of new ideas, instructional strategies, time management, interpersonal and communication skills, and the energy required to keep up with the pace of teaching and learning, especially under the stringent guidelines of No Child Left Behind. Barth (2001) contends that in the past, those traditional forms of professional development drew upon common assumptions and logic: nd schools where students achieve at high levels, observe and identify those traits that are exhibited by the teachers and principals, and develop professional activities based on those traits. While this appears sound on the surface, Barth asserts that the aw in this design comes from assuming that the main measure of eective teachers and principals comes solely from high student test scores. However, as we now know, a good education is much more than high test scores, and schools are
2
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/
3
very seldom that similar. Unlike teachers, school principals were actually not assumed to require professional development prior to the 1980's, and only in the 1990's did participation in administrative sta development become common. Today, many states require that school administrators complete a speci ed number of in-service hours or courses over a speci ed period of time (Hallinger and Murphy, 1991).
Likewise, teachers in almost every
state are required to attend in-service workshops to renew their teaching certi cation, meet state standards, or maintain their jobs. Two decades ago, principals were seen as the learn-ed, while teachers and students were the learn-ers. Principals were required to know everything from building management to human relations to every subject in the curriculum.
Their needs for professional development came dead last; it was simply assumed that
they knew all they needed to know, and therefore had no immediate need for professional development. As we moved into the 1990's, professional development for principals came to be viewed as a `necessary evil' for the advancement of administrative skills, knowledge, and abilities. Workshops and conferences abounded all over the country, and indeed, there was a movement toward sharpening principals' management skills and ne-tuning their knowledge of curriculum, instruction, assessment, supervision, and more recently, the use of technology as a management tool. With professional development, we often expect a great deal of change for a minimum amount of eort (Caldwell, 2001).
Whether it is increased leadership competency or other signi cant behavior changes,
principals are sometimes expected to exhibit changes in leadership ability or habits by simply being exposed to new ideas and motivational speakers. In the past two decades, it has been common practice to expose principals to short-term, topic-speci c in-service sessions held out of the district, which in essence ended up being appropriate for only awareness-level development. These experiences have not usually had an ongoing, consistent nature, which is needed to build leadership skills and result in substantive behavior change. Recent research indicates that principals need continuous professional development to support their eorts to improve their schools and to revitalize their commitment to maintaining positive learning communities (Foster, Loving and Shumate, 2000; Evans and Mohr, 1999; Neufeld, 1997). Today's increasingly complex society requires that principals learn to guide their schools through greater challenges than ever. The federal legislation No Child Left Behind, for example, has changed the landscape of accountability for all children's learning, and principals, more than ever are being held accountable for how well teachers teach and students learn. Traditional views of professional development for principals essentially took on the assumption that transferring knowledge from experts to practitioners would su ce. This, however, has proven to be disappointing and insu cient to principals, negating the assumption that periodic in-service, oered in a remedial manner, was most eective and that the most eective way for principals to learn was to be exposed to a speaker. Past practice assumed that professional development involved acquiring new skills, instead of building the capacity for re ective practice (Evans and Mohr, 1999). The research on best practices in professional development outlines another set of assumptions, which serve to empower the principal not only as a school leader but as an adult learner.
These assumptions
include: that ongoing professional development is needed for substantial change to occur; that school change is partly due to personal change; that a goal of professional development is to support the inquiry into and study of teaching and learning; that principals learn as a result of training, practice, feedback, and re ection; that professional development is essential to school development; and that professional development should be primarily school-focused and job-embedded (Mann, 1998). If we view principals as key gures in the eort to improve schools, we begin to understand the special professional development needs they have. Principals are pivotal to creating conditions that lead to eective schools, and this is well-documented in the research literature on school improvement. According to Ron Edmonds' work in the 1970's, strong leadership in the person of the school principal is one of the Correlates of Eective Schools.
Studies show that in schools with high student achievement and a clear sense of
community, good principals can make a signi cant dierence (Boyer, 1983; Center for Educational Policy Analysis, 2003; DuFour, 1991). Improved professional development not only gives principals the con dence to take on their roles as leaders, it gives administrators the competence to be successful and motivated
4
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
through job satisfaction (Howley, Chadwick, and Howley, 2002). Growth of Needs-Based Professional Development: Hitting the Target What are the characteristics of successful professional development for principals and teachers?
The
research literature identi es several key features: (a) it is built upon practice and re ection; (b) it takes place in the context of the school (job-embedded); (c) it is most successful when presented in a collaborative learning environment; and (d) it requires appropriate resources (Bezzina, 1994). Additionally, we need to look at the most successful methodologies for principal professional development.
Murphy and Hallinger
(1992) advocate problem-based learning because it incorporates the content of the principal's role (e.g., legal issues, instructional supervision, sta development) with the management skills and processes that go along with this leadership role (e.g., interpersonal relationships, communication, decision-making). Two decades ago, Joyce and Showers (1983) contended that eective professional development involves a wellplanned sequence of relevant activities including presentation of theory, demonstrations, and opportunities for practice, feedback, application, and re ection. They have further asserted that short-term conferences or workshops seldom provide these, because the importance of the application and re ection phases of training lies in learning by doing. Even though these researchers proposed this nearly a quarter of a century ago, it makes sense for professional development in the 21st century as well. Professional development for principals should focus on learning new behaviors or re ning skills that can be directly related to the business of providing school leadership (Caldwell, 2001). We have known for a long time that people learn best when given the opportunity to practice, re ect on their own learning, and react to feedback. This mindset serves us well today as it did then. The National Sta Development Council (2005) has been dedicated to the issue of providing quality professional development, as are the state and national professional principals' organizations (e.g., National Association of Elementary School Principals - NAESP, and the National Association of Secondary School
3 ), the Leadership
Principals - NASSP). For example, according to the NAESP website (www.naesp.org
Academy oers workshops, seminars and e-learning opportunities with continuing education units (CEU's) or professional development units (PDU's) for each hour of engaged learning in the on-line environment.
4 ) outlines the George Lucas
Likewise, the NASSP's website (www.edutopia.org/foundation/courseware.php
Educational Foundation's Professional Development Modules, where each module contains articles, video footage, PowerPoint presentations, and other features on innovative classrooms and educational leadership. The National Sta Development Council also supports other approaches to long-term professional development. One example is Area Cooperative Educational Services (ACES) in Hamden, Connecticut. Their Professional Development and School Improvement Program oers a variety of thematic modules for teachers and administrators that can be implemented over a period of one to ve years. According to the company's philosophy, the one-shot or short-term workshop designs may ll speci c, immediate needs of schools districts, but theirs is designed for long-term, systemic improvement. According to their website (www.aces.k12.ct.us
5
), the integral components to ACES's approach are online training modules, remote coaching and support. While there are eorts to provide professional development for school leaders, it seems to be a matter of quality vs. quantity. According to Barth (1986), principals seem to have built up antibodies against useless professional development activities.
Instead of being told Here it is and this is what I expect of
you, principals don't want their valuable time wasted with a so-called expert speaker or another canned lecture. They want something they can take back to their schools today and really put to use. For example, This is how you can use your Palm Pilot to record data during a teacher observation, and This will help with organization and time management in your supervision duties. Or, This is what will happen in the courtroom during a level four grievance hearing. And nally, Here are some suggestions for dealing with a special education child advocate in an IEP meeting. These are real issues that principals deal with. With their input, substantial professional development can be crafted around topics like these to meet their needs and interests.
And without follow-up and some link between the professional development activities and
their own practice, principals will gain little or sustain much learning - from the experience.
3 4 5
http://www.naesp.org/ http://www.edutopia.org/foundation/courseware.php http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/
5
According to the Virginia Department of Education (2004), there are several key factors that de ne high-quality professional development. First is richness of content that is speci cally selected to deepen and broaden the knowledge and skills of teachers and principals.
Next, it is based on well-de ned objectives.
High-quality professional development is well thought out regarding how it is delivered, the amount of time it takes, the styles of pedagogy included, and the use of formative and summative assessments.
Finally,
high-quality professional development is delivered by individuals who have demonstrated the appropriate quali cations and should provide training for educators in the use of technology so that it results in improved teaching and learning. e-Based Professional Development: Making a Bullseye Distance education in the United States has evolved from the tradition of independent learning, where learners who did not have geographical access to a physical site studied their own materials, generally in isolation of other similar learners (Frydenberg, 2002). Online professional development includes a variety of technologies. Typically, the term online refers to instruction delivered via the Internet. But, other forms of computer-based courses and training exist, such as CD-ROM's (Killion, 2000). Today, the Internet provides a virtual landslide of resources, including those mentioned previously through the national professional organizations.
Universities, both the brick-and-mortar kind as well as the online ones, oer courses and
continuing education courses for every content area, as well as those on leadership, instructional strategies, use of technology in education, and numerous others. Warmack-Capes (2005) reports that some other sources of online courses for educators include: Classroom Connect, IDE Corporation, Atomic Learning, and Scholastic. The Public Broadcasting Service's (PBS) TeacherLine, found at http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline
6 ,
is a premier professional development resource, delivering courses online for PreK-12 teachers, both for graduate credit and recerti cation. Tapped In, an online workplace for educational professionals located at
7 , is an e-based forum where teachers, administrators, and others can gather
http://tappedin.org/tappedin
to learn, collaborate, share, and support one another in learning as well as in professional practice. Another source is individual state departments of education. West Virginia, for example, is on the cut-
8 )initiative, supported by a one million
ting edge with its 21st Century Leadership (http://wvde.state.wv.us
dollar grant. While principals spend some of their time in face-to-face workshop sessions, there is also an online component, which oers the participants the opportunity to evaluate professional development sessions, journal and communicate with others in the program, and receive information on the current research on various topics. South Carolina oers online professional development and training through its website found at http://ed.sc.gov
9 , where topics include character education, special education, community collabora-
tion, and facilitating partnerships. Other state eorts in professional development include: Alabama's Best Practices Program; Alaska Professional Development; the Arkansas Leadership Academy; Florida's Online Reading-Professional Development (FOR-PD) Project; the Iowa Professional Development Model; the University of Hawaii's Education Laboratory School; and the Washington Professional Development Initiative (http://www.teacherquality.us
10 ).
Today's educators, both classroom teachers and building principals, are part of what Bartlett (2005) refers to as the Net Generation (Net Geners). They are not only technology savvy, they expect to receive information, entertainment, and even learning opportunities via some form of technology. As Bartlett asserts, the Net Geners are not only acculturated to the use of technology, they are saturated with it. From laptops to iPods to Palm Pilots to sophisticated cell phones, technology consumes our lives both at home and at work. Most professionals in any eld also value education. They may learn in dierent ways than those ten or twenty years ago, but they still want to learn.
Convenience, after quality, is one of the main issues
these adult learners look for when choosing professional development opportunities. No longer is the lecture format interesting or convenient for them; in fact, with the current Net Geners, it would not even be attractive or acceptable. Professional development that does not include at least a module of technology-
6 7 8 9 10
http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline http://tappedin.org/tappedin http://wvde.state.wv.us/ http://ed.sc.gov/ http://www.teacherquality.us/
6
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
based oerings will probably be less than successful considering the characteristics of current adult learners who are autonomous in their approach to learning. The Net Generation is selective about those kinds of professional development oerings where they can make the best use of their valuable and limited time. This is especially true of school principals, whose days are jammed with meetings, classroom observations, parent conferences, and problem solving.
Anything less than high-quality, relevant, and convenient professional
development for the 21st century educator will not be acceptable. Summary Today's workforce, whether in the eld of business or education requires quality, continuous, jobembedded professional development to remain current with best practices, and to continually improve skills, knowledge, and abilities.
In a highly competitive world laced with a variety of technological devices and
software, it becomes imperative that this training is oered in a manner that is both convenient and relevant to the worker, and that includes oering training in an e-based format. Teachers and school principals, in many cases do not have the funds or the time to spend away from their schools, and with shrinking budgets, school districts are wise to explore oering professional development in this alternative manner. Furthermore, training modules oered online can be revisited an unlimited number of times by educators so that its content and strategies become imbedded into daily practice. Planning time for teachers can become time for study, research, and further training, while principals can engage in problem-based learning and use what they learn immediately to improve their own practice. Electronic professional development (termed here e-PD) also has broad implications for delivering training to very rural schools, where teachers and principals might otherwise not have the opportunity to attend training sessions due to distance or cost.
The delivery of e-based professional development also makes it
possible for larger numbers of participants to `attend' the same training session(s), whereas the traditional lecture delivery method could reach only a small, isolated audience. As we move forward into the 21st century, we nd a strong relationship between educational reform and the use of technology for learning; technology enhances the learning power of the people who use it. The use of technology for professional development has begun to transcend the former isolationism of this kind of learning to a level of collaborative professional growth (Serim, 2007). The development of professional learning communities built around e-based platforms promises to encourage a lifetime of learning through online professional development opportunities for all educators. References Area Cooperative Educational Services (ACES). Professional development and school improvement. Retrieved March 30, 2007 http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/
11
Barth, R.S. (1986). Principal centered professional development. Theory into Practice, 25, 156-160. Barth, R.S. (2001). Learning by heart. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bartlett, M. (2005, May 9). Generation x? So old school the emphasis is now on the `Millennial'. Credit Union Journal. Bezzina, M. (1994).
Empowering the principal through professional development.
Paper presented at
the annual conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association, July 3-6, 1994. Boyer, E.L. (1983). A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper & Row. Caldwell, S.D. (2001). Eective practices for principals' in-service. Theory into Practice, 25, 174-178. Center for Educational Policy Analysis.
(2003).
What we know about successful school leadership.
Retrieved March 15, 2005 from http://www.epa.gse.rutgers.edu/
12 whatweknow.pdf
DuFour, R.P. (1991). The principal as sta developer. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. Evans, P. & Mohr, N. (1999).
Professional development for principals: Seven core beliefs.
Phi Delta
Kappan, 80, 530-533. Foster, E., Loving, D., & Shumate, A. (2000). schools. Teaching and Change, 8, 76-98.
11 12
http://www.aces.k12.ct.us/ http://www.epa.gse.rutgers.edu/
Eective principals, eective professional development
7
Frydenberg, J. (October, 2002). Quality standards in e-learning: A matrix of analysis. Retrieved April
13
29, 2007 from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/109/189
Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J. (1991). Developing leaders for tomorrow's schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 514-520. Howley, A., Chadwick, K., & Howley, C.W. (2002, April). Networking for the nuts and bolts: The ironies of professional development for rural principals.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1983). Power in sta development through research on training. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Killion, J. (2000, Summer). To reap bene ts of online sta development, ask the right questions. Journal of Sta Development, 21. Kleiman, G. M. (2004). Meeting the need for high quality teachers: e-Learning solutions. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/o ces/list/os/technology/plan/2004/site/documents/KleimanMeetingtheNeed.pdf
14
Malone, R.J. (2001). Principal Mentoring. (ERIC Digest No.149). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED457535) Mann, M. (1998). Professional Development for Education Leaders. PREL Brie ng Paper, Honolulu, HI. Murphy, J. & Hallinger, P. (1992).
The Principalship in an Era of Transformation.
The Journal of
Educational Administration, special issue. National trieved
Center
March
for
30,
Education
2007,
from
Statistics.
Institue
of
(2006). Education
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/res_tab4.asp National ing
School
Sta
Development
Quality
Through
Council.
Principal
16
(2005).
15
State
Learning
Professional
Education
Sciences to
U.S.
Lead,
Development.
Reforms
Department Leading
Retrieved
to
March
(SER) of
Learn: 15,
.
Re-
Education: Improv-
2005
from
http://www.ndsc.org/library/leaders Neufeld, B. (1997).
Responding to the Expressed Needs of Urban Middle School Principals.
Urban
Education. Vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 490-510. Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2006). No Child Left Behind Federal De nition of High Quality Professional Development.pdf. Retrieved April 9, 2007, from O ce of Educator Quality and Certi cation: http://www.ridoe.net/EducatorQuality/prodev.aspx Rivera, R. J., & Paradise, A. (2006). ASTD 2006 State of the Industry. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from ASTD: Workplace Learning and Performance: http://www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/A314C9A6-D2F1-42C7-
17 .
AD72-F2F3EA0D688F/11196/2006SOIRExecsum.pdf Serim,
F. (2007).
Building Virtual Communities for Professional Development.
http://www.ws.gov/Techn ology/Futures/serim.html U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
(2007).
18 .
U.S. Department of Labor.
Retrieved from
Retrieved April 2, 2007, from
19
Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet U.S. Department of Education O ce of Postsecondary Education.
(2005, October).
The Secretary's
Fourth Annual Report on Teacher Quality: A Highly Quali ed Teacher in Every Classroom .
Retrieved
March 30, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/teachprep/2005Title2-Report.pdf U.S. Department of Labor. (2006, August 4). Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#emply
20
Virginia Department of Education (April 2004). High-Quality Professional Development Criteria.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/109/189 http://www.ed.gov/about/o ces/list/os/technology/plan/2004/site/documents/Kleiman-MeetingtheNeed.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/res_tab4.asp http://www.ndsc.org/library/leaders http://www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/A314C9A6-D2F1-42C7-AD72-F2F3EA0D688F/11196/2006SOIRExecsum.pdf http://www.ws.gov/Techn%20ology/Futures/serim.html http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#emply
8
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
Warmack-Capes, D. (2005). Online Professional Development Courses for Teachers. School Executive. March/April.
1.2 Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development
Note:
21
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
1.2.1 As technology expands the professional development available outside the traditional classroom, it is important that educational executives consider the role of distance education in the development of school leaders. The student population has changed with many older adults, particularly school administrators attending universities and urging the universities to provide instruction in more convenient ways. More districts are seeking to develop leadership in their districts through customized leadership programs. Working adults want education delivered direct to them, at home or the workplace. . ..
Preparation may be weaker than
among conventional students; motivation may be stronger (Jones & Pritchard, 1999, p. 56). These new methods of delivery include television and the Internet, both of which allow students to access coursework miles from the traditional campus classroom. Instruction will have to change and assignments will need to be more tailored to a population that is not on campus. College instructors will increasingly encounter classes that are much larger than the traditional graduate level class. Decisions regarding which courses are selected for distance education need to be carefully considered.
As Lamb and Smith (2000)
pointed out, The distance education environment tends to exaggerate both the positive and the negative aspects of all the elements of instruction (p. 13). Kelly (1990) noted that instructors must develop new skills for distance education teaching in the areas of timing, teaching methods, feedback from students at remote sites, and the evaluation of students. Stammen (2001) noted that technologies in and of themselves do not change the nature of leadership but the way educators use the technology does. The new technology requires instructors to re-consider and develop additional learner centered environments. To make learning happen instructors need to understand both how to work the content and how the technology is impacting their instruction. Some are skeptical of university motives noting the prospect of not having to build new facilities to accommodate more students has great economic appeal (Weigel, 2000).
Regardless, the opportunity to improve the instruction and
availability through the new technology is here to stay. It is important to determine the eectiveness of the new methods of delivery and periodically compare them to traditional campus classroom instruction. Swan and Jackman (2000) discussed Souder's 1993 comparison of distance learners with traditional learners, stating that the distance learning students performed better than the host-site learners in several areas or elds of study, including exams and homework assignments (p. 59). Citing the limited number of studies comparing dierent methods of instruction in higher education, Swan and Jackson looked at remote-site and home-site students at the secondary school level. They found no signi cant dierences in student achievement between the two sites when comparing grade point averages.
21
This content is available online at
9
Methodology In 2002, educational leadership students in our school nance class and school principalship classes at Ball State University were surveyed (Sharp & Cox, 2003). Of these students, 12 in the nance class were in a studio classroom, with 89 taking the course on television at 42 o-campus sites around the state of Indiana. In the principalship course, 25 students were in the studio and 60 were at 22 remote television sites. In 2004, when one of the professors had moved to the University of South Carolina, we again surveyed our distance learning classes. This time, we had 75 students in the school nance television class and seven in the studio class at Ball State.
At South Carolina, we had 64 in the televised sections of school law and leadership
theory and 35 students in the studio sections of those courses. The purpose of the identical surveys in both years was to see if there were diering points of view regarding the questioning format, attendance, and assessment procedures between the studio groups and the groups at the remote sites and whether there were any changes in opinion between the survey conducted in 2002 and the one done in 2004. We also wanted to collect data regarding any technological problems and information about the students themselves and their backgrounds. The survey for the research study was added to an evaluation form so that all students would complete the survey. The results were not given to us until after nal grades were submitted. Proctors at the remote sites distributed surveys to the students to complete onsite and then mailed them back to the o ce for scoring.
Thus, every student in attendance completed a survey.
The research questions addressed in the
study were as follows: (a) What was the prior experience with television classes?, (b) How did students accept the practice of not being able to ask questions anytime they wished?, (c) Did students feel that attendance should be taken in these large classes?, (d) Did the students like the testing method used for them?, and (e) Were there major technological problems?. Results and Discussion Distance learning has become more popular with students in general and with educational leadership students in particular. We wanted to see if this was true with our students, and we wanted to see to what extent they had prior experience with television classes.
Also, it is possible that the attitude of the on-
campus students towards the o-campus arrangements (taking time for attendance, discussing technological problems, etc.)
could be aected if they had also utilized these o-campus classes in the past.
We also
wanted to know the experience that the educational leadership students had previously had with television classes to see how popular this format was for educational leadership students (see Table 1). Table 1
While the majority of students in both 2002 groups had prior experience with television classes, less
10
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
than 14% of either group had four or more courses. In 2004, over 52% of both groups had taken four or more courses by television before taking the courses that were surveyed.
This is a large increase in the
participation of students in distance education, and looking at the individual counts for the two universities (not shown here), this increase is evident for both places and from both groups of studentsstudio and o-campus students. The gures show that over half of these students are taking, at the minimum, their fth television course. Thus, whatever problems the students may have encountered, they continue to take courses with this delivery format. It should be noted that the studio students have taken the same number of courses via television (except this course).This may help explain why the majority of on-campus students were generally understanding of interruptions from o-campus sites, as shown in later results. Technology enabled students at the remote sites to push a button to dial in to talk to the professor during class. When someone dialed in, a beep would sound in the studio classroom indicating that someone was calling. In discussing live television classes with other instructors, we were told that one common problem was that the students would call in without warning (unlike students raising their hands in class) and interrupt the ow of the class for all the other students and the instructor. In 2002, both of us told students that they could only call in to ask questions during designated question and answer times. Since this waiting for permission to ask questions was so dierent from the usual graduate classroom routine, we wondered how the students would accept this new procedure. In our 2002 classes, the students cooperated and did not call into the studio until we asked for questions or until we called on students to call in to answer questions. In the earlier survey, we asked the students for their opinion on this no call-in rule. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 2. Table 2
The 2002 results indicated that 82.1% of the studio students said that this rule was reasonable due to the class size, and 83.5% of the remote site students agreed. In 2004, the same rule was in place for the Ball State students (but was not used in South Carolina). The Ball State students at the remote sites responded in a manner similar to the students two years ago, with 81.3% saying that the rule was a good one because of the class size. However, in the studio, only 57.1% said that they agreed with this rule in 2004, possibly due to the small number in the studio (n=7), as one or two students were not happy that they could not get immediate responses from the instructor like they could in a traditional class. (They had been told that they would be treated like the remote-site students, having to wait for a designated time to ask questions.) Since phone calls that came from the remote sites would make a buzzing noise, the studio students were asked if they were bothered by these call-ins. Findings indicated that, in 2002, 66.7% of the campus students said that it never bothered them, and 30.6% said that it sometimes bothered them. In 2004, 85.7% of the campus students stated that they were never bothered by the call-ins, with 14.3% saying that it sometimes bothered them. One assumption may be that with students taking more and more television courses, they have become used to the call-ins. The size of the classes meant that attendance took longer. The students were asked whether it was still appropriate to take attendance in these large classes. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 3. Table 3
11
In the studio class, in 2002, 76.7% said that attendance should be taken, while 56.0% of the remote-site students felt that taking attendance was appropriate. In 2004, the percentages declined: 42.9% of the studio students said that attendance should be taken, with 32.4% of the remote-site students agreeing. Another change was the way in which the educational leadership students were tested. two options that did not require students to come to campus.
There were
We could use the usual pencil and paper
examination and mail them to the remote sites where a proctor would supervise the exams and return them by mail, or we could put the exams on the Internet and students could take them by computer. In 2002, both methods of testing were used.
The students in the school nance class were given the
written exams, and the students in the principalship class were tested by computer.
When the students
were asked whether they preferred the way they were examined or whether they would prefer the alternate method, students in both classes preferred the way they were tested, even though they were tested in dierent ways. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 4. Table 4
For the studio class taking a paper test ( nance class), 100% said that they would prefer a paper test; for the o-campus students taking a paper test, 79.5% said that they liked that method. For the studio classes that completed exams on computer (principalship class), 68.2% said that they would prefer the computer for taking exams; for the o-campus students taking the computer test, 91.9% said that they would prefer that method. This seems to suggest that either way is acceptable to students. Since access to computers was the same for all students and since paper tests could have been used for all students, it seems that students simply preferred what was given to them. In 2004, all students were tested using written tests, and they were asked whether they would prefer taking their exams that way or whether they would prefer tests on a computer. For the studio students, 69.0% said that they would prefer the way they had been testedby written exams. For those at the remote sites, 66.9% said that they would have preferred to have been tested by computer rather than by written exams. We also surveyed the students about technology problems. Students attending class in the studio were not required to use telephones or to ask questions, and they did not need to utilize the television technology to view or hear the professor.
If any studio students had been adverse to technology, it would not have
12
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
aected their class. For o-campus students, however, bad weather could cause major problems with both the telephones and television technology. When asked about problems with the audio and/or video, 59.7% of the 2004 o-site students said that the system worked all the time, 38.1% said that it sometimes did not work but was not a problem, and 1.4% said that it did not work a lot of the time and was a problem for them. While these gures were a slight improvement over 2002, it should be remembered that one of the sites changed from Ball State to South Carolina. Still, it was reassuring to know that nearly 98% felt that they did not have a real problem with the television technology. Students at the remote sites could call in for attendance or questions/answers on a phone system by pushing a button on a special phone at their site. This phone system worked all the time for 66.9% of the students in 2004, did not work sometimes but was not a problem for 27.3%, and did not work a lot of the time and was a problem for 2.9% of the students.
As noted earlier, students were given a regular phone
number to call into the television studio director's o ce and report problems with their special phones or problems with the television system. The director then noti ed us during the class and noted whether this was an isolated case or whether there were other sites that were having problems. Although 46.8% of the students did call into the studio to report technical problems, previously mentioned ndings indicate that their outages were not considered a problem for most of them. O-campus students were asked if they ever had to order tapes/videostreaming of the presentations because of technical problems. The responses (2004) indicated that 10.1% ordered one tape or videostreaming, 2.9% ordered more than one tape/videostreaming, and 86.3% did not have to order any recordings of the classes. Again, it appears that technical problems, though present at times, were not a major problem for the vast majority of the students, and there were provisions made for those who did have problems. Previous researchers have sometimes stated that females had more problems with technology than males, and we wanted to see if females tended to take the on-campus class or the o-campus class or whether there was any dierence in their choices. We also wanted to know what percentage of the students were classroom teachers and how many students taking these administrative courses were already school administrators. Finally, since recruitment of students is important to a department's survival, we wanted to know if we had students in our classes who were actually in programs at other universities and took our courses for convenience. Questions were asked to gather student information about gender and position. The results of that inquiry are summarized in Table 5. Table 5
In 2004, the studio class was 35.7% female, while the o-campus students were 51.8% female.
In the
studio class in 2004, 71.4% of the students were classroom teachers, and 14.3% were school administrators. At the remote sites in 2004, 79.1% were teachers, with 18.0% stating that they were administrators. In 2002 we noted that females did select the on-campus class more than the o-campus sites. This was reversed in
13
2004, so no conclusions can be made about selection of sites by gender. The reasons the students chose a particular method of course delivery was also an area of inquiry. The studio students were asked if they would have preferred to have taken the course o campus instead of coming to the studio.
Although in 2004, 11.9% said that this was sometimes true, 85.7% stated that it
was never true (a change from 30.6% and 69.4% in 2002, but similar if added together). The students who completed the course o campus did not have to pay student fees (recreation, library use, sports and musical tickets, etc.)
and only paid tuition for the three-hour graduate course.
Students on campus had to pay
the full tuition and fees amount. When we asked the o-campus students the advantage of taking a course on television, 93.5% said that it was for convenience. An important question for the o-campus students was the following: Considering the advantages and the disadvantages of a television course, would you take another one if it was something that you needed and it was at a convenient site? Responses indicated that 97.8% would take another televised course. Clearly, the advantages outweighed the disadvantages for these students. Conclusions Distance education experience was more evident in the 2004 survey. The no-call-in rule was considered reasonable by the students, and most of the on-campus students were not bothered by the phones. Taking attendance took quite a bit of class time, and students at both sites wished that taking attendance could be reduced or eliminated. There were problems with the technology, but these problems were not major for most students. Students who had no prior degrees from these two universities took the television courses, pointing out potential recruitment bene ts of this method of instruction. When asked the reason that ocampus students completed the course by television, the overwhelming reason was the convenience of driving to a nearby site instead of traveling to campus. The results were positive for our o-campus students and technology-based leadership development. The o-campus students received the same instruction as campus students for a lower cost, with no major technological problems, and at a convenient location. The on-campus students seemed to accept the various technological requirements necessary for our o-campus students.
For school district leaders considering
technology-based leadership development, the results are encouraging. References Jones, D. R., & Pritchard, A. L. (1999). Realizing the virtual university. Educational Technology, 39(5), 56-59. Kelly, M. (1990). Course creation issues in distance education. In Education at a distance: From issues to practice (pp. 77-99). Malabar, FL: Krieger. Lamb, A. C., & Smith, W. L. (2000). Ten facts of life for distance learning courses. Tech Trends, 44(1), 12-15. Sharp, W. L., & Cox, E. P. (2003).
Distance learning: A comparison of classroom students with o-
campus television students. The Journal of Technology Studies, 29(1), 29-34. Sinn, J. W. (2004). Electronic course delivery in higher education: Promise and challenge. The Journal of Technology Studies, 30(1), 24-28. Souder, W. E. (1993).
The eectiveness of traditional vs.
satellite delivery in three management of
technology master's degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7(1), 37-53. Stammen, R., & Schmidt, M. (2001). Basic understanding for developing distance education for online instruction. NASSP Bulletin, 85(628), 47-50. Swan, M. K., & Jackman, D. H. (2000). Comparing the success of students enrolled in distance education courses vs. face-to-face classrooms. The Journal of Technology Studies, 26(1), 58-63. Weigel, T. (2000). E-Learning: The tradeo between richness and research in higher education. Change, 33(5), 10-15.
14
CHAPTER 1.
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
1.3 Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning
22
1.3.1 What to Do?
Figure 1.1: Perpetual Motion Machine, Created by Karl Leitzel, Penn State World Campus
Eective online instructors challenge their students' thinking and foster active, constructive participation in learning.
1.3.2 How to Do It? •
Emphasize the importance of learning by playing an active role in the learning process, not from direct instruction or lecture as in a traditional classroom.
• •
Provide opportunities for the students to critically critique and/or re ect upon certain course topics. Encourage your students to use the Internet for researching on course topics; however, remind them to be critical about the information they will share with peers. (For more information, see Intellectual Property Guidelines module
•
23 )
Encourage your students to be proactive in their learning by doing the following:
· · · ·
Regularly logging into course site Submitting assignments on time Completing quizzes within required timeframe Reading messages posted and replying within required timeframe
This content is available online at
15
· •
Cooperating with teammates, etc.
Provide opportunities for your students to be actively involved in information seeking and problem solving.
• •
Provide opportunities for your students to interact, to collaborate, or to review a peer's work. Encourage your students to participate in online discussions actively by:
·
Designing thought-provoking discussion questions: see Crafting Questions for Online Discussions
24
from ITS
· ·
Encouraging students to respond to questions at a deeper level Using discussion forums eectively by posting messages that weave several strands of conversation into a summarization that may prompt people to pursue the topic further" (Berge, 1995)
· •
Pointing out opposing perspectives, dierent directions, or con icting opinions" (Berge, 1995)
Use dierent discussion formats listed below to cultivate students' critical thinking (MacKnight 2000, p40.):
· · · ·
Small group discussions Buzz group: two people discussing for a short period of time Case discussions using real-world problems for analysis and suggested solutions Debating teams wherein students present ideas, defend positions, and argue against opposition's reasoning
· · •
Jigsaw groups where subgroups discuss various parts of a topic and report to the others Role play mocking real settings
For more information about facilitating online discussions, please see Ten Tips for Generating Engaged Online Discussions
•
25 by Donna Reiss.
For more information about self-regulated learning components, please go to Encourage Students to Regulate Their Own Learning Module
26
1.3.3 Why Do It? It is critical to understand the pedagogical potential of online learning for providing active and dynamic learning opportunities for learners.
Faculty can employ strategies and activities that
will engage students in `producing learning' (Barr & Tagg, 1995) for active learning (Vonderwell & Turner, 2005, p.66).
"Learning occurs in a social context through collaborating, negotiating, debating, peer reviewing, and mentoring; Collaboration requires a level of re ection that promotes knowledge construction and a deep understanding of the subject matter (Grabinger & Dunlap, 2000).
1.3.4 References Berge, Z.L. (1995). Facilitating Computer Conferencing: Recommendations From the Field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22-30. Grabinger, R.S. & Dunlap, J.C. (2000). Rich environments for active learning: A de nition. In Squires, D., Conole, G. & Jacobs, G. (Eds.). The changing face of learning technology (pp.8-38). Cardi, Wales, UK, University of Wales. MacKnight, C.B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. EduCause Quarterly, 4, 38-41
http://tlt.its.psu.edu/suggestions/online_questions/ http://www.wordsworth2.net/activelearning/ecacdiscustips.htm "Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Encourage Students to Regulate Their Own Learning"
16
CHAPTER 1.
Vonderwell, S. & Turner, S. (2005).
ELEARNING FOR MENTORS
Active learning and preservice teachers' experiences in an online
course: A case study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 65-84
Chapter 2
Mentorship and Leadership Practices 2.1 A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs
Note:
1
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Purpose of Study This paper studies the need for leadership development programs to integrate elements of social and political acumen. In the course of the study, the role of mentorship was identi ed as an essential element of any leadership program.
2.1.1 De nition of Dynamic Educational Leadership As de ned in this study, the essence of dynamic leadership is to support and facilitate positive initiatives and change. It is the dynamic leader who creates an environment for change that enables and supports progress and evolution. Because the leader's role is one that encompasses human relationships and exists within an organizational structure, this study has identi ed social and political acumen as important elements that support the essence of dynamic leadership. Review of the Literature Review of the literature on educational leadership supports this de nition of dynamic leadership and the need for the leader to understand and integrate social and political acumen in order to achieve dynamic leadership. Today, the dynamic educational leader is responsible for more than meeting expected standards.
As
a dynamic leader, the principal is accountable for ensuring that eective teaching and learning occur in a learning community (Robertson & Webber, 2002; Shellard, 2003). To ensure that this happens, the dynamic
1
This content is available online at
18
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
educational leader must possess the skills and knowledge that support the evolution and growth of this learning community (Czaja, Livingston Prouty & Lowe, 1998; Mitchell & Sackney, 2001). For educational leaders to be dynamic, therefore, they need to be able to support and implement change that enhances eective teaching and learning and has ongoing bene t for the student (Lieberman & Miller, 1999). Dynamic educational leaders need to ensure that there is a structure in place that supports eective teaching and learning, and allows productive change to occur (Dimmock, 1996; Tomlinson & Allan, 2000). This structure must involve the engagement of students, sta, and parents within that community (Lambert, 2003).
In order for educational leaders to be able to support and enhance these structures in a dynamic
manner, they require particular skills and knowledge (Reynolds & Stoll, 1996). These skills need to include the abilities:
• • • • • •
to build a sense of community (Deal & Peterson, 1999), to create a sense of ownership (Kouzes & Posner 1999), to establish shared vision and values (Sergiovanni, 2000), to provide insights, identify strengths and areas for growth (Reiss, 2007), to empower, enable, and build capacity (Lambert, 1998, 2003), to implement strategies that share knowledge with others to ensure evolution of the system (Luna & Cullen, 1995).
The knowledge of the leader requires:
• • • • •
understanding good pedagogy (Tomlinson & Allan, 2000), being familiar with local and global in uences (Courchene, 2001), recognizing innovations that positively impact teaching and learning (Manzer, 1994), identifying the elements that support eective leadership (Fullan, 2003, 2006; Goleman et al, 2002), comprehending the strategies that build leadership capacity (Lambert, 2003) and leadership density (Chenoweth & Everhart, 2002).
Many elements impact the culture of the teacher and learner. These involve in uences at a local level that include students, sta, and parents. Yet they also involve in uences at a more global level that re ect the needs of society. It is essential that leaders understand the necessity to understand and think proactively as a leader (Gardner, 2007). In addition, culture is subject to change due to political and social in uences (Manzer, 1994). In fact, there is a direct connection between the identi ed needs and changes in society and the expectations of the educational leader (Evans, 2000). The primary responsibility of educational leaders, therefore, is to ensure that their learning communities are functioning eectively (Shellard, 2003; Robertson & Webber, 2002) within the local and global spheres (Manzer, 1994). Whereas the expectation of the educational leader is clear, the attitudes held about educational leaders are not always unambiguous. The structure of our society involves formal and informal leaders. Aristotle's (322 BC/1986) discussion of the need for society to function with leaders is still valid. Although society recognizes this, there is at the same time an attitude of cynicism and skepticism regarding leaders' motives. In addition, increased democratization has increased society's expectations of educational leaders (Manzer, 1994). The role of accountability has increased at local and more global levels. There is an expectation that parents need to be able to exercise their rights as primary educators of their children and to play a signi cant role in the educational decision-making process (Devereaux, 2000). At the same time, there is a public expectation that the costs involved in education are an investment and that bene ts and pro ts for society must result (Mandel, 2000). Diverse in uences have impacted the pro le of the dynamic educational leader and resulted in the leader needing to be more than an instructional leader of a community of learners (Dufour, 2002). These in uences include new understandings about teaching and learning, as well as societal and political elements. Educational leaders need to stay informed about the political structure and expectations of education (Roher & Wormwell, 2000). If educational leaders are to function in a dynamic manner, they need to be able to meet the needs of their culture and, at the same time, work within the organizational structure at all levels (McBride & Shields, 1997).
19
All of this has implications for leadership development programs. It is important that such programs recognize the complex elements involved in dynamic educational leadership. Plans for leadership development, therefore, need to include the diverse elements that in uence and compose the pro le of the educational leader.
Extending and evolving leaders' knowledge about pedagogy must be an essential part of leader-
ship development. In addition, leadership development needs to increase leaders' understanding of societal in uences and the impact they have on how leaders ful ll their roles and responsibilities. Educational leaders need to understand the heightened political reality in which they function. Concerns regarding education are often the center of attention for the media and politicians and they are a focus of government planning and budgeting.
This attention to education has meant that education and the
educational leader are forefront in the public eye. Consequently, educational leaders need to understand the political context if they are to function eectively (Kneebone & McKenzie, 1996). Indeed, the political context of education is unavoidable. Government, at a local and more global level, envisions education as a platform to achieve its goals. This results in education being shaped and in uenced by social and political factors. Leaders, therefore, need to have the skills and knowledge to understand the societal and political in uences on the structure within which they work. They need to be con dent about their ability to meet the needs of the individual student and at the same time meet the social and political expectations of their educational structures. Indeed, a school leader lives in a shbowl (Figure 1).
Figure 2.1
Figure 1. Fishbowl Existence of the Educational Leader Role of Social Acumen An important element of the dynamic leader's ability to build productive relationships is the possession of social acumen that supports eective communication and relationships. Indeed, there is a close connection between eective communication skills and productive relationships (Gladwell, 2002; Villiani, 2006). It is essential, therefore, that leaders develop skillful communication if they are to be dynamic leaders. These skills
20
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
require the leader to understand the signi cance of making connections (Wheatley, 2000). It is also essential that the leader understand how to support a strong culture (Deal & Peterson, 1999; Hesselbein, 2002), facilitate eective team dynamic (Lambert, 1998), and build a shared vision (Sergiovanni, 2000). In addition, the dynamic leader needs to hone the con ict-management skills that ensure functioning relationships (Fisher & Ury, 1991; Stone, Patton, & Heen, 1999). Particularly, the eective use of one-on-one communications, dialogue, group interaction, and the written word is essential for the dynamic educational leader. The success and failure of leaders can directly relate to problems with communication skills (Spady & Schwahn, 2001).
These skills, however, include more than verbal and written communication.
Body
language, eye contact, interpretation of body posture and even clothing can make a dierence to the delivery and interpretation of communication (Dyer & Carothers, 2000). Dynamic leaders need to be able to communicate that they are operating with a shared vision and values (Aristotle 322 BC/1986; Leithwood & Montgomery, 1986).
It is not enough to have a shared vision; the
leader must also be able to articulate this shared vision. By communicating a sense of shared vision and values, the leader is able to create a sense of shared ownership. This common base strengthens relationships and contributes to a positive culture that is productive and this will support dynamic leadership. In particular, the leader's communication of values and vision needs to be transparent, authentic, and consistent with decisions and action (Evans, 2000; Leithwood, 2002). Successful leadership involves establishing a sense of shared values. It is important, therefore, that leaders are able to communicate the value base from which they operate and understand the value base of others (Lambert, 2003). The dynamic leader is able to take this shared value base and use it as a means to bring about change and contribute positively to society. Role of Political Acumen Much educational leadership supports the need for dynamic leaders to know how to use the structure within which they operated (Bolman & Deal, 2002; Deal & Peterson, 1999; Fullan, 2000, 2006). In this study I refer to this knowledge and skill as political acumen. Aristotle (322 BC/1986) de ned politics as the interactions of a group of human beings who strive to attain certain standards.
Because educational leaders need to interrelate with many dierent people
at many dierent levels, their work by necessity involves politics.
In fact, there is a distinctive political
element of educational leaders' roles because they are working with individuals and groups within local and global spheres that involve organizational structures (Bolman & Deal, 2002). By knowing the role of this organizational structure, dynamic educational leaders can understand and use the power of relationships to in uence, persuade, and impact action. Due to the fact that educational leaders are an integral part of the social organization, they are therefore an integral part of the political process (Manzer, 1994). The dynamic leader, who strives to attain progress through high standards, needs to understand and embrace this political dimension of leadership. Making Connections Ignoring the political aspects of leadership is unproductive and damages the potential of the leader's role. Consequently, it is important that educational leaders understand such factors and possess the knowledge and ability to work eectively within these political parameters. The political acumen to build a network at micro and macro levels will support dynamic leaders in eectively ful lling their roles. Educational leaders must therefore understand the iterative and interactive role that they must play in their connections with the elements that make up the organizational structures at local and global levels.
In particular, these
connections depend on productive relationships. The skills involved in political acumen will support dynamic educational leaders in maintaining productive relationships that sustain the systemic structure within which they operate. Through understanding how connections function within the structure of the system, dynamic leaders are able to sustain the system (Senge et al., 1999). This requires leaders to be politically aware at all levels and to understand the relevance of relationships within the structure.
In fact, dynamic leaders also need organizational skills to make the
necessary changes to sustain relationships and the system. Understanding the structure within which educational leaders exist will support leaders in ful lling their roles and responsibilities in a dynamic manner.
Such understanding brings insight and a greater level of
21
awareness regarding the in uences on the leaders' positions.
The ability to make connections within the
structure in which leaders work will enhance relationships that support a productive network and allow leaders to function at a more optimum level of capacity. Research Method In this study I aimed to understand the nature of dynamic educational leadership and the role of social and political acumen in supporting dynamic leadership. A further aim of the study was to make deductions from this understanding of leadership in relation to planning and implementing leadership development programs. In order to achieve this aim, an attempt has been made in the research component to examine the role of social and political acumen in the educational leadership of a speci c group of school principals. The focus of the research study, therefore, was to explore an identi ed group of dynamic principals' experiences as leaders and explore the structure of the consciousness of their experiences. Because the study involved human exploration, the exibility of qualitative research techniques (Cresswell, 1998) supported the investigation.
Qualitative techniques in collecting and analyzing the data from the research provided the
ability to guide the investigation and interpret the data to support the purpose of this study. For this reason, the analysis of the data collected from this group of principals, involved mostly qualitative techniques that were supported by some quantitative analysis. Analysis of the data aimed at identifying an understanding of the role of social and political acumen in the reality of dynamic educational leaders ful lling their roles and responsibilities. In addition, the research aimed at identifying the extent to which social and political acumen were essential invariant elements of these principals' leadership. The research component provided the participants the opportunity to provide their views about what characteristics of leadership support dynamic leadership.
In addition, the participants
were able to provide their views on appropriate leadership development activities. In the analysis of the research data, therefore, the invariant elements and structure within which these principals functioned were identi ed. The analysis also included an assessment of how these elements re ected this group of principals' development and exercise of social and political acumen and the research participants' views on leadership development in general and their leadership development in particular. The quantitative component of the analysis investigated whether there was any relationship between these leaders' understanding of the signi cance of the role of social and political acumen in eective leadership and their exercise of social and political acumen. In addition, the analysis investigated the relevance of these principals' experiences in leadership development and their exercise of social and political acumen. Selection of the Participants Two school districts from Alberta, Canada that included schools in rural and urban areas agreed to participate in the research and collection of data. After ful lling each school district's research application process, I requested nominations for identi ed dynamic leaders from the three hundred school communities in these two districts. School stas and parents from the two selected school districts were invited to nominate a principal who ful lled one or more of the following descriptors of a dynamic leader. These criteria included:
• • •
Principals who had successfully implemented a change or initiative. Principals whose style of leadership had increased the capacity of those with whom they work. Principals whose communication and interpersonal skills had improved the culture of the school environment.
• •
Principals who had eectively created an environment in which others were successful. Principals who were dynamic for other reasons.
Survey I communicated with the thirty- ve nominees, explained the purpose of my research, and requested that they respond to a survey.
The questions in the survey focused on their leadership experience, their
understanding of the role of social and political acumen in their leadership, their ideas about the role of social and political acumen in leadership in general, and their participation in leadership development. The questions were grouped according to subject of content. scale.
Responses to the survey involved a Likert
A pretest to test for internal consistency was carried out with ve principals from another school
district. The pretest indicated the need to group questions under number and then letter, rather than in
22
CHAPTER 2.
a long series of numbers.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Also, the pretest indicated the need to use bold lettering for emphasis.
These
revisions were included in the nal survey that was distributed to the thirty- ve nominated principals. Follow-up communication with the nominated principals was used to ensure maximum level of participation. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was used in completing the report on the data from the surveys. Face-to-Face Interviews Eight nominated leaders from each of the school districts were randomly selected for face-to-face interviews. Two additional senior high principals were randomly chosen from the group of junior high and senior high principals to provide a better balance of elementary, junior high, and senior high principals' involvement in the interview part of the research. The nal total of 10 principals represented:
• • • • •
three senior high school principals, two junior high school principals, ve elementary school principals, ve male principals, ve female principals.
Focus Group The ten principals who participated in the face-to-face interviews were invited to participate in the focus group, which in the end was composed of ve of these principals. I provided supper for the focus group and we ate as we talked. This helped to provide a convivial atmosphere for our meeting. Topics for the focus group involved discussion statements about the role of social and political acumen in leadership and further development of the questions included in the survey and the face-to-face interviews. The focus group questions made a speci c connection to each principal's individual experiences. Questions also probed how leadership development programs might support leaders in their exercise of social and political acumen. There was also an opportunity, however, for open discussion about their perceptions of what social and political acumen contribute to dynamic leadership and leadership in general. The focus-group session lasted 1 hour and 45 minutes, and it was taped and transcribed. Observational notes were made immediately after the focus group and summaries and charts were made from the transcript and the observation notes. As the moderator of the focus group, I had the opportunity to help guide the discussion. Krueger (1988) described this role as facilitating multiple interactions amongst the participants in the group. Through open-ended questions, individuals in the group were encouraged to communicate their opinions about their own exercise of social and political acumen. These questions also led to discussion about the role of social and political acumen in general in educational leadership. Artifacts In addition, artifacts regarding leadership, leadership requirements, and leadership development were gathered and analyzed from the two selected school districts.
These included information for potential
administrators; professional development plans for educational leaders, and the sta ng descriptors and criteria for administrative applications.
Content analysis of the artifacts was made through categorizing,
coding, and identifying speci c characteristics (Cresswell, 1998). Results from the Research Three hundred schools from two school districts were involved in the research study. Nomination forms were sent to the sta and school council of each school. From these schools, a total of 35 principals were nominated as dynamic leaders. These nominated principals were then sent a letter explaining the research study and their nomination. They also received a letter of informed consent that asked them to agree to participate in the study and respond to the survey. Thirty surveys were returned completed. From the 35 principals nominated, every fourth one was requested to participate in a face-to-face interview. This group of eight consisted of ve elementary principals, two junior high principals, and one senior high principal. From the group of junior high and senior high principals remaining, two were randomly chosen to increase representation beyond the elementary level.
This resulted in two additional senior high principals being
included in the group. All 10 principals agreed to participate in face-to-face interviews, and the 10 principals interviewed were invited to participate in a focus group. All were willing to participate, but because of time commitments, only 5 of the 10 principals nally participated in the focus group. In addition, artifacts from
23
the two school districts that related to the principal's role were reviewed in relation to the exercise of social and political acumen. Summary of Artifacts The leadership artifacts from the school districts involved in the research study were reviewed for content that related to leaders' social and political acumen. This included information that related to an application for leadership development programs, the content of leadership development programs, an application for school administration, and the criteria for the pro le of the school principal. From the analysis a commonality identi ed in all of the districts' artifacts was a focus on the need for the educational leader to be an instructional leader. These artifacts did not refer speci cally to social and political acumen, nor did they identify the need for leaders to possess social and political acumen. They did, however, refer to some of the skills and attributes that this study has identi ed as elements of social and political acumen. The artifacts indicated that the principal competencies needed to include more than instructional leadership. The competencies outlined in these school districts' artifacts recognized the need for principals as leaders to:
2.1.2 foster learning, 2.1.3 engage people, 2.1.4 resolve issues, 2.1.5 manage con ict, 2.1.6 organize work, 2.1.7 possess critical inquiry, 2.1.8 communicate eectively, 2.1.9 promote cooperation between school and community, 2.1.10 build vision and shared commitments, 2.1.11 optimize resources, 2.1.12 facilitate change, 2.1.13 optimize systemic thinking. All of these elements re ected the de nitions in this study for leaders' exercise of social and political acumen. That is, leaders must have the ability to function with eective interpersonal and communication skills, as well as the ability to know how to function within the micro and macro structures within which they exist. There were also speci c references in the artifacts to systems thinking and operating within the district's governance model.
There was not, however, a signi cant focus on the leader's development of political
acumen. It is interesting to note that a review of the districts' artifacts had a more direct focus on the need for leaders' personal attributes to re ect social acumen and a lesser focus on the attributes that this study connects with political acumen. Some of the attributes included:
• • • •
professional knowledge, critical thinking, team orientation, community orientation,
24
CHAPTER 2.
•
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
personal qualities (integrity, respect for others, collaboration, courage, intuition, creativeness, risk taking),
• • • •
responsibility for personal learning, problem-solving abilities, con ict-management abilities, system orientation.
Summary of Survey Results
2.1.14 Although the study was in general a qualitative study, the use of quantitative data supported the overall ndings of the research. The quantitative element of the research involved analysis of a survey that included a number of multiple-choice sections involving a Likert scale. The data from these questions were analyzed through use of Open O ce and R[U+2011]Language, Version 1.7.1. Quantitative analysis was also used to identify these principals' opinions about the role of leadership development in their exercise of social and political acumen. Pearson Chi-square test was used to determine whether there was a relationship between the success of a group of identi ed dynamic principals and their exercise of social and political acumen. The Pearson Chi-square test was used because it determines whether there was a relationship other than chance. In fact, this test tells the strength of the association between two variables, as well as the probability of any association being due to chance factors (Neuman, 2000). The results from the survey did indicate that there was a connection beyond that of chance in the principals' responses regarding the connection between their exercise of their skills involving social and political acumen and their belief that eective leaders needed to possess these skills. Some of the results of the Chi-square data included:
2.1.15 cultural leadership:p-value = 0.0423 2.1.16 instructional leadership:p-value = 0.0234 2.1.17 understanding political dimensions beyond the school: p-value = 0.012 •
political acumen:p-value = 0.0137
The data analysis of the survey indicated that communication skills, interpersonal skills, and social acumen were most highly regarded by the principals as contributors to their leadership and necessary to educational leadership in general. The data did not indicate any speci c skill that these principals thought was necessary for leadership but that they did not possess. Indeed, the skills that the principals identi ed as necessary for leadership were also the skills that these principals believed they possessed at varying levels. The skills that the principals identi ed as important for eective leadership were all skills involving social and political acumen. The data therefore reinforced this study's premise that social and political acumen are integral to leadership development programs. In addition, the data supported the idea that leadership development is important for leaders and has the potential to support leaders' exercise of social and political acumen. An implication for leadership development is the need to ensure that the skills identi ed as necessary by these principals should be part of leadership programs; this is discussed in the implications section of this study. Summary of Face-to-Face Interviews All of the transcripts clearly re ected the principals' articulation of their commitment to ful ll their role in an eective way. They also re ected a group of people who had a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities as leaders. These principals were able to talk about the challenges of their positions but also
25
the joy and satisfaction that their leadership roles gave them. There was a clear indication that social and political acumen are integral to leadership. In addition, it was evident that these principals believed that leadership development plays an important role in supporting leaders and should involve the development of social and political acumen. In particular, the transcripts indicated that mentors played a signi cant role in the lives of all these principals and should be a part of leadership development programs. Summary of the Focus Group It was exciting to watch the dynamic of the focus group. The participants were obviously building on each other's comments. There was a sense of the concepts and ideas evolving as the discussion progressed. This group pro led as a highly committed and enthusiastic group of leaders, and their comments re ected a high level of involvement in their own growth as leaders and their sense of responsibility to support and mentor other leaders. In addition, there was clear evidence of a common belief that their rst responsibility was to their own community but that they also needed social and political acumen to be systemically aligned. All of the members talked about the need to be able to take risks as leaders, but these risks need to be intelligent risks. They agreed that the eective exercise of social and political acumen by the leader would support success in this area. In particular, they emphasized the need for leadership development to recognize the intertwining nature of the exercise of social and political acumen. All of the participants in the focus group talked about the need to be able to ful ll the role and responsibilities of leader and agreed that the eective exercise of social and political acumen supported being a successful leader. They discussed the fact that social and political acumen have become a greater necessity for the eective leader.
Indeed, the entire group was committed to the idea that leadership development
can support a leader's development of social and political acumen.
There was agreement that leadership
development should give leaders a heads up on the expectations of leadership so that the leader understands how to develop social and political acumen. Also, however, all ve of the participants expressed concerns that leadership development should authentically meet the needs of potential and seasoned leaders and that it should be ongoing. They also agreed that leadership development programs should recognize talent and develop talent and that there needed to be a process for self-re ection. In addition, all members of the focus group believed that the role of mentor was key to the success of leaders and that mentors should be trained to support leaders in their development and exercise of social and political acumen. There was a general concern that there should be enough time allocated for the mentorship relationship and that this should be a structured part of leadership programs. This re ects Young, Sheets and Knight's work of 2005 when they emphasize the need for principals and mentors to have time to observe, question and re ect. There was also a consensus in the group that leaders' exercise of social and political acumen can be supported through formal and informal networking with colleagues.
The entire group agreed that such
networking should also be part of the structure of leadership development programs. The focus group participants' willingness to share experiences, opinions, and ideas meant that the discussion was rich and productive. Members of the group often initiated questions or probed other members for more details. This meant that the ow of discussion did not require or closely follow the focus group interview questions at all times. On the other hand, it also meant that there was a natural dynamic within the group that allowed the members to share their personal experiences. Indeed, the focus group further developed the information gained from the survey and the face-to-face interviews. Throughout the focus group discussion there was a high level of synergy. The fact that there were only ve participants in the focus group encouraged all members to participate. At the same time, this limited number may have contributed to the commonality of opinion and may not have nurtured the expression of more diverse opinions and ideas. Nevertheless, there were numerous insightful comments about the role of the leader:
•
All of the experiences I have had in life and the people that I crossed paths with have made a dierence to how I lead.
•
Principals should be asked what are the areas of growth they need to focus on and these should be included in the leadership development program.
26
CHAPTER 2.
•
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
If you can't rise to the challenge of exercising social and political acumen, then you're not ready to be a principal.
•
You have to be able to function with people because the system is made up of people, and social and political acumen will help this.
•
I have worked in a remote community where social acumen was more important.
Then I moved to
a larger urban district where I was closer to central o ce, and it meant the need for more political acumen.
• •
It is a concern that if once you are a leader you do not participate in leadership development. A real growth for me was the timing of nishing my master's degree. . . . I could count on one of my strong mentors. I would get constructive criticism or feedback that wouldn't veil it in soft terms.
•
It is worth investing time and energy into leadership development programs and they should share the internal expertise.
Summary of the Triangulation of Data All of the principals recognized the importance of the exercise of social acumen in eective leadership and, at the same time, displayed a high level of con dence in their ability to successfully exercise social acumen.
The triangulation of data indicated that these principals had mixed feelings about the role of
political acumen in educational leadership and did not exhibit a high level of con dence in their exercise of political acumen. Common in all of the research data was a clear indication that these principals were committed to ful lling their roles and responsibilities and that they enjoyed their positions as leaders. Implications for Leadership Development Programs Leadership development programs need to be planned and implemented to support dynamic leadership by providing leaders with opportunities to develop and hone the skills connected with the characteristics, attitudes, and actions associated with the nature of dynamic leadership (Figure 2).
The evolving nature
of dynamic leadership makes it essential that leadership development programs be constantly revised and updated.
In this way, leadership development can keep pace with the evolving nature of the educational
leaders' roles and responsibilities. It is also important that educational leaders' participation in leadership programs is ongoing and that they meet their immediate and future needs to support the skills and knowledge required by dynamic educational leaders.
27
Figure 2.2
2.1.17.1 Figure 2. Identi ed Components Required in Leadership Development Role of Mentors Other relevant information from the research component was the fact that the role of the mentor was regarded as an essential part of leaders being able to operate eectively. In fact, in all areas of the research, mentors were identi ed as contributing to leadership capacity.
Eight of the 30 principals referred to the
importance of the role of mentors in the open-ended questions. There was no question in the face-to-face interview relating to mentors, and as the interviewer I did not prompt or request a comment on mentors. Nevertheless, all 10 of the principals participating in the face-to-face interviews emphasized the role of mentors in their lives. In the focus group, I did discuss the feedback from the face-to-face interviews in order to discuss in depth the focus group's perception of the role of mentors.
All members of the focus group
agreed that the role of mentors had great signi cance in their lives and that it is essential for leaders to have mentors in order to be able to build their capacity in exercising social and political acumen. The data from the face-to-face interviews and focus group also indicated that the role of the mentor was seen as an important factor contributing to and ensuring leadership density. This was regarded as important in an environment that has had a high turn over of administrators and few veteran administrators. The participants in the face-to-face interviews and focus group were concerned about the lack of validation
28
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
for informal mentors and the need for time to be designated to ensure that the mentor-mentoree relationship was successful (Figure 3). In addition, the focus group data indicated a need for adequate preparation and training of mentors. These factors need to be integrated when planning leadership development programs. ***SORRY, THIS MEDIA TYPE IS NOT SUPPORTED.*** Figure 3. Impact of role of mentor. The data from the research component were very much aligned with this study's conceptual and theoretical framework and the information cited from the leadership literature. From these data came very speci c recommendations regarding the skills and activities required to support the role of social and political acumen in dynamic educational leadership. The required skills for dynamic educational leadership identi ed in the research component include:
2.1.18 interpersonal relationships, 2.1.19 communication skills, 2.1.20 ability to share and enable a common vision, 2.1.21 ability to share and realize common values, 2.1.22 knowledge regarding the learning process, 2.1.23 ability to empower others, 2.1.24 ability to create a team, 2.1.25 ability to create a network, 2.1.26 understanding of the elements of the structure, 2.1.27 ability to work within the structure, 2.1.28 ability to see the big picture. The suggested leadership development activities identi ed in the research data (Figure 4) include:
2.1.29 practicum, 2.1.30 informal and formal networking opportunities, 2.1.31 sessions addressing self-identi ed needs, 2.1.32 book groups, 2.1.33 formal mentorship, 2.1.34 ongoing leadership development, 2.1.35 time for self-re ection. 2.1.36 The data also indicate that leadership development programs need to: • • • • • •
Build knowledge and hone skills related to social and political acumen. Support the role of mentors. Integrate postgraduate activities. Provide opportunities to build knowledge of self and others. Build knowledge of the elements of leadership. Involve the participants in the planning and implementation of leadership development.
29
As indicated, the data from the research component has signi cance for planning any leadership development program that will support the exercise of social and political acumen and therefore contribute to dynamic leadership. Concluding Comments This study supports the need for educational leaders' professional development to include elements of social and political acumen. The research data re ected the need for the educational leader to be able to exercise social and political acumen in order to function as a dynamic leader. Indeed, it is the combination of social and political acumen that enables leaders to function at a higher dynamic level. This study also stresses the necessity of ensuring that leaders understand the potential of leadership programs in supporting them and that they need to become engaged in the leadership development process. Leadership development, therefore, needs to be planned with the input from the participants, there needs to be opportunities for choice in development activities, and there needs to be guidance by the leadership development planners to ensure that the identi ed necessary aspects of leadership development are included. In particular, the data indicated the need for leadership development programs to involve the role of mentors and the integration of postgraduate activities to ensure that leadership development activities are eective, meaningful, and relevant for the participants. Leadership development should not involve knee-jerk planning that responds only to an immediate need. Rather, the research supported the idea that those developing leadership programs need to understand not only the needs of current reality, but also the needs of the future (Reiss, 2007; Stein, Schwan Smith, & Silver, 1999). In addition, leadership development program planners need to understand the backgrounds and abilities of those participating in these programs. To plan and implement eective leadership development, therefore, the planner needs to focus on the purpose of leadership development that will involve the short term and the long term (Guskey, 2000). In addition, the planners of leadership development need to understand and focus on the backgrounds, abilities, and requirements of the participants involved.
30
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Figure 2.3
Figure 4. Implications of Data for Leadership Development . Most importantly, leadership development programs will better engage the participants when these programs are planned in a consultative and collaborative manner with the participants. Components of leadership development programs need to support the exercise of social and political acumen; therefore, these components need to include knowledge and skill building to enhance the participants' social and political
31
acumen. There also needs to be a clear connection between the leadership development activities that enhance leaders' exercise of social and political acumen and the aim to support dynamic leadership meeting current needs. This study does not attempt to defend the concept of leadership; rather, it recognizes the reality of our world that needs leaders in order to function and evolve. Also recognized is the responsibility of individuals who assume leadership positions to ful ll their roles in a dynamic manner. introduce and/or facilitate initiatives and make changes that bring bene t.
This requires the leader to Certainly, the understanding
of what is bene cial is related to context and can change according to developments in societal ethos. In any case, it is the responsibility of the leader to develop an awareness and understanding of self, hone the necessary skills and knowledge related to leadership, and strive to ful ll the leadership role to make a dierence that is positive for the current reality. The dynamic leader will exercise social and political acumen to meet the needs of the present and support the direction of the future. As such the dynamic leader who exercises social and political acumen to make a positive dierence to education will have contributed to their immediate community and to the evolution of humanity. References Aristotle. (1986). Aristotle's politics (H. G. Apostle & L. P. Gerson, Trans.). Grinnell, IA: Peripatetic Press. (Original work published 322 BC) Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2002). Reframing the path to school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Chenoweth, T. G., & Everhart, R. B. (2002). Navigating comprehensive school change. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. Courchene, T. J. (2001). A state of minds. Montreal: Institute of Research on Public Policy. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among ve traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Czaja, for
teacher
tional
M.,
Livingston
leadership:
Journal:
Prouty,
A
Continuous
study
J., of
&
Lowe,
twenty-four
Improvement
Monitor,
J.
(1998).
professional 1(3).
Mentoring development
Retrieved
2
and
the
schools.
September
4,
context Interna-
2000,
from
http://llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No.3/czaja.html
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Devereaux,
L. (2000).
Principal training:
The missing link for successful school councils.
ternational Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning,
5.
Retrieved September 20,
2001,
Infrom
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/∼iejll Dimmock, C. (1996). Dilemmas for school leaders and administrators in restructuring. In K. Leithwood, J. Chapman, D Corson, P. Hallinger, & A. Hart (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 135[U+2011]170). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Dufour, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 12[U+2011]15. Dyer, K. M., & Carothers, J. (2000). The intuitive principal. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Evans, R. C. (2000). The authentic leader. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 287-309). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes. New York: Penguin. Fullan, M. (2000). Leadership for the twenty- rst century: Breaking the bonds of dependency. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 156-164). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2003). Change forces with a vengeance. London: Routledge Falmer. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround Leadership. Jossey-Bass. Gardner, H. (2007). Five Minds for the Future. Harvard Business School Press. Gladwell, M. (2002). The tipping point. Boston: Little, Brown. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Revitalizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
2
http://llanes.panam.edu/journal/library/Vol1No.3/czaja.html
32
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Hesselbein, F. (2002). The key to cultural transformation. In F. Hesselbein & R. Johnston (Eds.)., A leader to leader guide on leading change (pp. 1-7). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kneebone, R. D., & McKenzie, K. J. (1996). Swallowing frogs and herding cats: The conjunctural forces behind the Alberta budget cuts.
Calgary: University of Calgary.
Dept.
of Economics, 1996.
Discussion
papers series no 96-03. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1999). Encouraging the heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus group. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Leithwood, K. (2002). Introduction. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 815[U+2011]821). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers: Transforming their world and their work. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Luna, G., & Cullen, D. L. (1995). Empowering the faculty: Mentoring redirected and renewed. ERIC Digests.
Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.
(ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED399888) Mandel, D. R. (2000).
Recognizing and encouraging exemplary leadership in America's schools:
A
proposal to establish a system of advanced certi cation for administrators. Issues and Insights: American Association of School Administrators.
Arlington, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Leadership,
pp. 2-11. Retrieved November 7, 2001, from http://www.aasa.org/issues_and_insights Manzer, R. (1994). Public schools and political ideas. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. McBride, S., & Shields, J. (1997). Dismantling a nation. Halifax, NS: Fernwood. Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2001). Building capacity for a learning community. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba. Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Reiss, K. (2007). Leadership Coaching for Educators. Corwin Press. Reynolds, D., & Stoll, L. (1996). Merging school eectiveness and school improvement: the knowledge bases. In D. Reynolds, R. Bollen, B. Creemers, D. Hopkins, L. Stoll, & N. Lagerweij (Eds.), Making good schools (pp. 94[U+2011]112). London: Routledge. Robertson, J. M., & Webber, C. F. (2000). Cross-cultural leadership development. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 3(4), 315-330. Robertson, J. M., & Webber, C. F. (2002).
Boundary breaking leadership:
A must for tomorrow's
learning communities. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 519[U+2011]553). Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer Academic. Roher, E. M., & Wormwell, S. A. (2000). An educator's guide to the role of the principal. Aurora, ON: Aurora Professional Press. Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change. New York: Doubleday. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shellard, E. (2003). De ning the principalship: A principal's instructional and managerial responsibilities should complement and support each other. Principal, 82(4), 56[U+2011]60. Spady, W., & Schwahn, C. (2001). Leading when everyone goes back to zero. Principal Leadership, 2(4), 10[U+2011]16. Stein, M. K., Schwan Smith, M., & Silver, E. A. (1999). The development of professional developers. Harvard Educational Review, 237-269. Stone, D., Patton, B., & Heen, S. (1999). Di cult conversations. New York: Penguin. Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000). Leadership for dierentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
33
Villiani, S. (2006). Mentoring and Induction Programs that Support New Principals. Corwin Press. Wheatley, M. (2000). Good-bye command and control. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 339-348). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Young, P.G.; Sheets, J.M. & Knight, D.D. (2005). Mentoring Principals. Corwin Press.
2.2 Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning 3
Teachers
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
2.2.1 Introduction Croasmum, Hampton, and Hermann (2000) documented that mentor programs have been developed throughout the nation's schools in an eort to address the attrition rate of rst-year teachers in American schools. The e cacy of these mentoring programs is still under investigation. Gold (1999) documented that the teacher attrition rate for beginning teachers in his school district was 18% when they did not have an assigned mentor and only 5% when they had a school district assigned mentor. Evertson and Smithey (2000) reported that pairing mentors who had undergone training to be a mentor with beginning teachers yielded beginning teachers with higher-level teaching skills. Beginning teachers who were not paired with mentors lacked these higher-level teaching skills. Darling-Hammond (2003), in an examination of the eectiveness of mentoring programs, wrote that beginning teacher retention rates were increased. Recent research into teacher induction, of which mentor programs are the primary method of teacher induction (Fideler & Haselkorn, 1999), has documented its e cacy in (a) making the transition of beginning teachers easier, (b) reducing teacher turnover, (c) and increasing work satisfaction (Andrews & Quinn, 2005; Archer, 2003; Bullard, 1998; Feinman-Nemser, 2003; Fuller, 2003; Holloway, 2001). It is clear that beginning teachers need time to become pro cient teachers. Researchers (e.g., Claycomb & Hawley, 2000) have reported that 3 to 7 years of experience in teaching is needed before teachers attain a level of pro ciency. It is the rst years of teaching that are the years where beginning teachers gain the most pro ciency. Rivkin, Hanushek, and Kain (2005) documented that beginning teachers make important gains in teaching quality in the rst year and smaller gains over the next few career years (p. 449). What exactly is meant by mentoring? Mentoring can be said to occur when a senior person (the mentor in terms of age and experience) provides information, advice, and emotional support to a junior person (i.e., the mentee) in a relationship lasting over an extended period of time and marked by a substantial emotional commitment by both parties (Bowen, 1985). Several characteristics appear to be present in eective mentors. These components include: (a) a generosity of time; (b) a willingness to learn; (c) a complete trust; (d) an ability to praise and encourage; and (e) an openness to recognize the limitations of others (Madison, Watson, & Knight, 1994).
More recently, Brown, Hargrove, Hill, and Katz (2003) remarked that quality
mentors are approachable, able to listen, maintain a high degree of integrity, and have sincerity. Mentors also display a willingness to spend time with their protégés while being enthusiastic and positive about their
3
This content is available online at
34
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
role. Other characteristics included being exible, tactful, experienced in teaching, being trustworthy, and able to maintain con dentiality between themselves and the mentee (Brown et al., 2003). Mentors need to be trained in the roles and responsibilities of being mentors, rather than being assigned that role without being trained (Holloway, 2001). Five stages have been documented in the process for developing a mentor teacher program (Sindelar, 1992). The ve stages include: (a) establish a rationale; (b) select mentors and protégés; (c) train mentors; (d) monitor the mentor process; and (e) evaluate and revise the program (pp. 13-17). Sindelar wrote that school districts might want to examine the process and customize it to t their own needs based on their own resources. More recently, best practices have been developed regarding mentoring programs. Regarding as best practices for mentoring programs are: (a) selecting mentors with the same certi cation and in close proximity to their mentees (Conway, 2003; Serpell & Bozeman, 1999), (b) providing mentors and mentees schedules that allow common planning time and opportunities to observe each other (Andrews & Quinn, 2005; Conway, 2003; Gilbert, 2005; Mills, Moore, & Keane, 2001; Villani, 2002), (c) reduced workloads for mentees (Feinman-Nemser, 2003; Moskowitz & Stephens, 1997; Renard, 2003; Serpell & Bozeman, 1999), and (d) providing orientations for both mentors and mentees (Odell, 1990; Serpell & Bozeman) (cited in Flynn & Nolan, 2008, pp. 173-174).
2.2.2 Statement of the Problem Several challenges in mentorship programs that need to be addressed were determined from an extensive review of the research literature. Davis (2001) wrote that de nite criteria must be present for the selection of eective mentors. Another challenge is the retention rate in the profession (Krantrowitz & Wingert, 2000). An estimated 2.2 million teachers will be needed in the next decade to teach over 48.1 million students (Protheroe, Lewis, & Paik, 2002). This demand for teachers, along with an increased need for accountability and an assumption that teacher quality is high on the list of variables in uencing student achievement, have presented school administration and policy-makers with a formidable challenge (Protheroe et al., 2002). Consistent with the national problems of teacher attrition, the teacher attrition rate and the expected student population growth rate in South Texas have forced an abundance of teaching vacancies for the upcoming school years (Sanchez, 2003). According to Sanchez (2003), student education is aected by the high teacher turnover rate and unstable educational programs that resulted from teacher loss. In developing a mentoring practice of support, Scherer (1999) thought the needs of the novice teacher should be examined so that quality assistance could be provided.
The cost of high attrition in teachers is directly re ected
in lower levels of student achievement, the allocation of resources to recruitment and training rather than to instruction, increased behavioral concerns associated with lack of continuity, and unstable educational programs (Croasmum et al., 2000; State of South Dakota, 2000). As a result, many school districts have implemented teacher-mentoring programs. School districts and individual campuses throughout Texas provide mentorship programs for rst-year teachers. Although mentorship programs are provided, the incidence and the in uence of the experiences of what/when vary by districts and by campuses. The initial purpose of the programs was to provide new teachers with the skills and knowledge to be successful and remain active in the profession.
Mentoring
programs would be examined periodically to assess whether or not the needs of beginning teachers were satisfactorily met. Needs of beginning teachers and successful teacher mentoring programs in South Texas have not been assessed as well as other regions (Sanchez, 2003).
2.2.3 Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to examine, in the South Texas region, the views of mentors of rst-year teachers regarding the teacher mentoring programs in their school districts.
In particular, two areas of
emphasis were investigated: (a) the characteristics or practices associated with teacher mentoring programs in South Texas secondary schools; and (b) the needs of beginning teachers in relation to mentoring programs in South Texas.
35
2.2.4 Research Questions The following questions guided the study: 1. What teacher involvement/support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to be successful in preparing rst-year teachers? 2. What sta development training factors are perceived as necessary for the instruction of mentors? 3. What administrative support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to in preparing rst-year teachers successfully? 4. What resource materials factors are perceived as necessary for the success of mentors in preparing rst-year teachers?
2.2.5 Method Sample The target sample for this study was mentors of rst-year secondary teachers in South Texas public secondary schools. A systematic sample population was used in the study, with every fourth campus listed in the Region One directory selected. Responding to the Mentor Survey were 46 participants, all of whom were mentor teachers. Of this sample of 46 mentors, 18 (39.1%) were male and 28 (60.9%) were female. Thirty-one of the participants were Hispanic (67.4%), with 13 participants were White (28.3%). One participant was African-American and another participant was of Other ethnic membership. Twenty- ve mentor teachers indicated they were responsible for high school grade levels (54.3%), with 21 participants stating their responsibilities were at the middle school grade levels (45.7%). Concerning teacher preparation programs, 33 mentor teachers reported a traditional teacher preparation program (71.7%), with12 (26.1%) stating an alternative certi cation program and 1 participant reporting a De ciency Plan. Mentor teachers were queried regarding the subject area in which they taught. Seven participants responded math (15.2%), 8 teachers reported science (17.4%), 10 teachers indicated English (21.7%), 7 teachers stated social studies (15.2%), and 14 teachers responded elective (30.4%) as their subject area. Instrumentation A self-administered survey instrument created by the senior researcher was used to collect data.
The
instrument was developed by reviewing the extant research literature and then creating a matrix of key terms associated with successful teacher mentoring programs. Mentor teacher responses to the 27 survey questions were measured on a Likert-format scale with a range of scores of 4 (absolutely essential), 3 (mostly essential), 2 (somewhat essential), 1 (not essential) and d (uncertain) to the retention of beginning teachers. For the variable of teacher involvement/support, the following factors were examined:
(a) Positive role
models; (b) Collaboration with rst year teachers; (c) Lessons and materials; (d) Active participation with the mentor; (e) Meetings regarding student discipline; (f ) Communication through newsletter, memos, and emails; (g) Support from other teachers who serve as informal mentors' (h) A climate that encourages seeking assistance; (i) Year round support that started before school year; and, (j) Professional materials (articles or newsletters) to help grow professionally. Concerning the variable of sta development, the following factors were investigated: (a) Classroom management included in sta development; (b) Working within a team for collaboration and support; (c) Review assessment practices; (d) Review motivational strategies; (e) Training on dealing with di cult students; (f ) Received sta development on teaching strategies; (g) Involved in sta development activities designed for rst-year teachers; (h) Sta development in how to work with or conference with parents; (i) Assistance in developing my professional goals; and, (j) Provided orientation to include procedures for doing tasks and guidelines. In this study, the variable of administrative support consisted of the following factors:
(a) Monitor
the rst-year teacher; (b) Frequent walk throughs are accomplished; (c) Assist with hallway monitoring; (d) Assist with student discipline; (e) Allow time for mentee to do classroom observations; (f ) Carefully select mentors and match mentor/mentee grade levels and subject area; (g) Assign fewer professional responsibilities to mentees; (h) Mentees are given the opportunity to observe the practices of highly eective,
36
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
experienced teachers to learn from them; (i) Mentees received helpful support from central o ce administrators; and, (j) Mentees must have an experienced teacher or administrator to observe. Regarding the variable of resources/materials, the following factors were investigated: (a) Technology training to incorporate into lessons; (b) Assistance in the creation of student learner lessons that engage students; (c) Teaching supplies that aid for hands on lessons are available; (d) Review the teacher handbook of all district/campus policies; (e) Information about what to expect from mentoring program; (f ) Provide printed materials about employment and school regulations; (g) Received important resource/materials to begin my teaching experience; (h) Have been part of an induction program that has well de ned goals about what it is intended to do; (i) My mentee and I have coordinated schedules so we can meet regularly; and (j) Have had help creating a portfolio for my professional growth. Along with the 27 closed-ended questions, respondents were asked four open-ended questions.
These
questions were designed to evaluate support provided in the teacher-mentoring program, the most di cult duty of the program, and what areas they would have appreciated more support in the teacher-mentoring program. In this qualitative portion of the study, data were collected through open-ended questions from the survey instruments that were distributed to the rst-year teachers. Validity.
To ascertain the validity of the Likert-format questionnaire items, the survey was initially
reviewed by experts (n = 17). This group consisted of the dissertation chair, (n = 1), dissertation committee members (n = 2), a human resource director (n = 1), secondary school principals (n = 3), and secondary veteran teachers (n = 10). Each expert evaluated the instrument for content, clarity, and appropriateness (Patton, 2001). Amendments were made in wording and arrangement and construction of response options, as recommended by committee members. Reliability. The most frequent method for improving reliability for surveys is to work towards re ning questions, clarity, and instrument design. Good development procedures should result in a reasonably reliable survey instrument (Creswell, 2003). To ensure reliability of responses to the scale items, a reliability analysis was conducted. For the 27 survey questions measured on the factors being viewed as essential or not, the Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .86, with the range of corrected item-total correlations ranging from a low of .14 to a high of .67. Concerning the six survey items that comprised teacher involvement/support, Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .66.
For the six items that constituted the sta development cluster,
Cronbach's coe cient alpha was .77. The internal consistency of the administrative support factor that was comprised of seven items was .75. Finally, the last factor, resource materials, had a Cronbach's coe cient alpha of .65. As such, all four factors yielded su ciently high reliability for research purposes. Procedures The list of practicing rst-year teachers and their mentors, obtained from the Education Service Center, Region One, Edinburg, Texas, was used to create a database in which every fourth secondary campus was selected as the sample for the study. A self-administered survey instrument was mailed out to the mentors of all rst-year middle school and high school teachers identi ed in the sample, with the permission of the district's school superintendent.
A pre-contact post card was sent to the identi ed mentors in the
districts. A pre-contact involves the researchers identifying themselves, discussing the purpose of the study, and requesting cooperation (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003). A follow-up contact was sent out to non-respondents a few days after the deadline. The response time for the survey was a 30-day window. A few days after the time limit speci ed, non-respondents were contacted by mailing a follow-up letter along with a copy of the questionnaire and another self-addressed envelope (Heberlein & Baumgartner, 1981). All participants were sent notes thanking them for their participation in the study.
2.2.6 Results Research Question One What teacher involvement/support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to achieve success in training rst-year teachers? Teacher involvement/support items were 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as shown in Table 1. A teacher-mentoring program that has well-de ned goals was believed to be absolutely essential by 95.7% (n = 44) of mentor teachers. The following factor, creation of a climate that encourages teachers to seek assistance when needed,
37
was given as absolutely essential by 91.3% (n = 42) of mentor teachers. On item 2, creating a professional portfolio that demonstrates growth as a teacher, 30.4% (n = 14) of mentors believed this factor to be absolutely essential. Table 1 Mentor Responses to Teacher Involvement/Support Items by Percentages
Absolutely
1.
A
teacher-
mentoring
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
95.7
2.2
2.2
0.0
30.4
41.3
26.1
2.2
73.9
21.7
4.3
0.0
91.3
8.7
0.0
0.0
43.5
41.3
13.0
2.2
82.6
13.0
4.3
0.0
Essential
pro-
gram that has well de ned goals. 2.
Creating
a
professional
portfolio
that
demonstrates professional
growth
as a teacher. 3. Discussing with peers skills necessary to be successful in the teaching profession. 4.
Creation
of
a climate that encourages
teachers
to seek assistance when needed. 5.
Being
of
a
part
support
group made up of other
beginning
teachers. 6.
Having a men-
tor
who
provides
support in coaching
with
needed
strategies for student success. Research Question Two What sta development training factors are perceived as necessary for the instruction of mentors? Sta development training factors were given in survey items 7 through 12 as shown in Table 2. Mentor teachers rated the highest percentage of responses to item 10 to be absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Sta development that provided strategies and activities to better serve students in populations was regarded to be absolutely essential by 60.9% (n = 28) of mentor teachers. Mentor teachers rated social functions to help beginning teachers build relationships with colleagues to be absolutely essential by 26.1% (n = 12). This item was the lowest rated item of the sta development survey factors that were absolutely essential to the retention of beginning teachers.
38
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Table 2 Mentor Responses to Sta Development Items by Percentages
Absolutely
7.
Sta
devel-
opment
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
56.5
41.3
2.2
0.0
56.6
39.1
4.3
0.0
26.1
28.3
41.3
4.3
60.9
23.9
15.2
0.0
54.3
37.0
8.7
0.0
that
included
instruc-
tional
strategies
that
in uenced
student outcomes. 8.
Quality
sta
development
that
addressed instructional strategies. 9. Social functions to help beginning teachers
build
relationships
with
colleagues. 10.
Sta
velopment
dethat
provided
strate-
gies and activities to
better
serve
students in special populations. 11.
Workshops
or
conferences
that
provided
professional velopment teacher's
dein
area
of
education.
continued on next page
Essential
39
12.
Provided
30.4
50.0
17.4
2.2
with federal, state and icy
local changes
polin
education. Research Question Three What administrative support factors are perceived as necessary for mentors to successfully train rst-year teachers? Administrator support factors were given in survey items 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19, as shown in Table 3. Mentor teachers responded evenly to items 16 and 17 by 52.2% (n = 24) perceiving as absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Mentoring program was explained of my duties and responsibilities and con dentiality laws between teachers and students were explained were deemed to be absolutely essential by 52.2% (n = 24) of mentor teachers. Item 18, time was provided at the end of each grading period to evaluate the teacher mentoring program, was deemed absolutely essential by 30.4% (n = 14) of mentor teachers. Table 3 Mentor Responses to Administrative Support Items by Percentages
Absolutely
13.
Allowed time
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
50.0
32.6
15.2
0.0
47.8
37.0
13.0
2.2
to visit as a team (mentors, mentees, administrators) to re ect and evaluate on the school year. 14.
Given
opportunity year
to
ratively
the this
collaboanalyze
what was observed in the classrooms of
experienced
teachers.
continued on next page
Essential
40
CHAPTER 2.
15.
Planning was
provided
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
47.8
39.1
4.3
6.5
52.2
37.0
8.7
2.2
52.2
26.1
17.4
2.2
30.4
39.1
21.7
4.3
43.5
34.8
17.4
2.2
that
focused on teacher expectations
for
mentor training. 16.
Mentoring
program
was
ex-
plained of my duties and responsibilities in the program. 17. ity
Con dentiallaws
between
teachers
and
students
were
explained. 18.
Time
provided end
of
grading to
at
was the each
period
evaluate
the
teacher-mentoring program. 19.
Teaching
assignments,
re-
sponsibilities teacher were
and
duties based
teacher
on
experi-
ence. Research Question Four What resource materials factors are perceived as necessary for the success of mentors in training rst-year teachers? Survey items 20 through 27, as shown in Table 4, comprised the resource materials factors. Orientation on PDAS was provided by the district to rst-year teachers on the method of evaluation was seen as absolutely essential to 82.6% (n = 38) of mentor teachers. Next, requirements for a teacher certi cate as an educator has been ful lled were given as absolutely essential by 73.9% (n = 34) of mentor teachers.
Technology
(e.g., computers, TV/VCR, overhead projectors) was provided to assist in implementing technology into the classroom was deemed as absolutely essential by 71.7% (n = 33) of mentor teachers. Mentors rated item 25 the least essential. An Educational Organization informed me of my rights as an educator and oered legal support was believed to be absolutely essential by 37% (n = 17) of mentor teachers. Table 4 Mentor Responses to Resource Materials Items by Percentages
41
Absolutely
20.
Requirements
Essen-
Mostly
Essential
Somewhat
Essen-
Not
tial %age
%age
tial %age
%age
73.9
21.7
2.2
0.0
47.8
39.1
8.7
2.2
58.7
21.7
13.0
4.3
71.7
23.9
2.2
2.2
for a teacher certi cate as an educator
have
been
ful lled. 21.
Information
was
provided
the
school
trict
by dis-
about
the
teacher-mentoring program. 22.
The
dis-
trict
provided
nancial
or
com-
pensatory for
time
mentors
ticipating
par-
in
the
teacher-mentoring program. 23.
Technol-
ogy
(computers,
TV/VCR, head was
over-
projectors) provided
assist
in
menting nology
to
impletech-
into
the
classroom.
continued on next page
Essential
42
CHAPTER 2.
24.
Regular com-
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
56.5
34.8
2.2
4.3
37.0
41.3
15.2
0.0
63.0
32.6
0.0
4.3
munications about the
district
campus through such
vehicles
as
ters,
and
occurred newslet-
memos
or
e-mails. 25.
An
Edu-
cational Organization informed me of
my
an
rights
educator
oered
legal
as and
sup-
port. 26.
The district
provided
a
cur-
riculum guide with clear and
objectives timelines
required to teach.
2.2.7 Mentor Teacher Responses to Open-Ended When asked to respond to the following statement, My school has been most supportive of me this year in the following areas, mentor teachers gave the following answers: I was given the time needed to evaluate the new teacher. The new teacher was assigned fewer students in the classroom with fewer responsibilities. I was selected to be a mentor based on proximity, class subject, and given time to spend with the new teacher. I was given a schedule that allowed the new teacher to have the same conference period to work together on planning and to provide the needed support for the new teacher. I was given the time to observe and give feedback to the new teacher. We had excellent communication between the mentor, mentee and administrator to work on issues and nd solutions. I was given praise and appreciation for what I did as a mentor. According to mentors, their school was most supportive in giving them time to evaluate the new teacher. Mentors reported they were selected to the program based on criteria of proximity, class subject and allowed time to visit with the new teacher. Mentors also felt appreciated for the work they provided to new teachers. They had excellent communications with the new teacher, and administrators to work on issues and nding solutions. Concerning the question, What has been the most di cult part of your duty in the teacher-mentoring program?, mentor teachers responded that: Con icting schedules with mentee, and administrators providing information on how I would be compensated. At times I felt little support from my administrator since they were more concerned about TAKS scores. I was not given any guidelines or training for what I was to do or what was expected of me. I was given too much paperwork on the program and was provided sta development for the mentor and mentee that was not bene cial.
43
Mentors commented that the most di cult duty of the teacher-mentoring program was con icting schedules between the mentor and the mentee. It made meeting time di cult for both. Mentors stated that they did not know how they would be compensated for their time and felt little support from administrators because they were more concerned with TAKS scores.
Other mentors also reported they were not given
guidelines, training, or expectations of what the program was about. Regarding the question, In what areas would you have appreciated more support from your school for the teacher-mentoring program?, mentors commented: More scheduled formal meetings with new teacher to review classroom management, grading polices and procedures, and time for planning lessons would have been appreciated. Increase in bene ts for the mentor and better coordination for planning from the certi cation program would have helped. More instruction on curriculum alignment, observation time to evaluate the new teacher, and more time for the new teacher to observe the mentor were needed. Communication between mentor, mentee, and administrators needed to occur. Expectations of my responsibilities as a mentor should be explained. Mentors would have felt more appreciated from their school if administrators had scheduled more formal meetings. They would have liked more time to review classroom management, grading policies and procedures, and more time for planning eective lessons. Mentors responded that better communication between the new teacher, administrators, and the mentor was needed for the teacher-mentoring program. Finally, mentors were encouraged to contribute additional comments on the current teacher-mentoring program at your school. The following additional comments were made: There was a time when mentors had the time to help the new teachers. a few years to improve.
New teachers were allowed
Now with the state measures school accountability through TAKS scores, it has
become di cult to help new teachers with no experience. New teachers who have low TAKS scores from their students are at risk of not getting their contract renewed.
The state testing has hurt our schools.
Schools do not have the time to nurture a new teacher. I have trained over 24 student teachers in my 27 years of teaching experience. My administrators are highly competent and allow me to take charge of new teachers. I was allowed to train new teachers on PDAS evaluation with my administrators providing support. There was a lack of administrative support, resource materials, and no curriculum guide or explanation of what was expected of me as a mentor. District administrators should meet regularly with mentor and mentee to discuss progress, setbacks, and concerns. Alternative certi cation program was confusing with multiple requirements and too much paperwork. Mentors added that state testing had harmed their schools. Administrators are too concerned with state exam scores and have little time to support new teachers. According to mentors, new teachers are at risk of not getting their contracts renewed if their students have low TAKS scores. Other mentors added comments and stated that there was a lack of administrative support, resource materials, and no curriculum guide or explanations of what was expected of the mentor. Mentors reported that district administrators should meet regularly with mentors and mentees to discuss progress, setbacks, and concerns.
2.2.8 Discussion Mentor teachers responded to questions regarding four factors: teacher involvement/support; sta development; administrator support; and resource materials. On the factor of teacher involvement/support, almost all of the mentor teachers believed a teacher-mentoring program with well-de ned goals was absolutely essential to retain beginning teachers. On the factor of sta development, slightly more than half of the mentor teachers considered that sta development that provided strategies to serve students in special populations better was absolutely essential to the retention of beginning teachers. Concerning administrator support, slightly more than half of the mentor teachers believed that mentors needed to have their duties and responsibilities in the mentoring program to be absolutely essential for the retention of beginning teachers. Regarding resource materials, almost three-fourths of the mentor teachers deemed that requirements for a
44
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
teacher certi cate as an educator had to have been completed to be absolutely essential to retain beginning teachers. Concerning the open-ended questions, mentor teachers commented that they were given time to evaluate the new teacher, and their selection to be a mentor was based on criteria such as proximity and class subject.
The most di cult part of their duty was con icting schedules with mentee, little support from
administration, and no guidelines or training in what they were expected to do. Mentors would have felt more appreciated with more scheduled meeting time with the new teacher and an increase of bene ts for their work. They would have liked more instruction on curriculum alignment and observation time with the new teacher. The additional comments made by mentors consisted of the need for more time for the new teacher to grow professionally with less emphasis on TAKS scores. They also stated that standardized state testing was hurting schools because too much time was being spent on student test scores. Implications of our ndings are that school districts need to prepare mentor teachers for their role in the teacher-mentoring program.
According to this research study, and the studies of other researchers,
mentors must be provided with certain criteria for a teacher-mentoring program to be successful. Mentors responded that it was absolutely essential a teacher-mentoring program have well-de ned goals. First-year teachers must feel encouraged to seek assistance when needed, in an accepting school climate. Explanation of duties and responsibilities assigned to mentors must be reviewed. According to mentors, time must be given to allow observations of the mentor and mentee giving instruction along with administrators respecting the con dentially between the mentor and the rst-year teacher.
Mentors responded that orientation on
PDAS, training on technology implementation into the classroom, and requirements for a teacher certi cation ful lled are absolutely essential for the retention of rst-year teachers. The incidence and in uence of the factors given in the study are factors in a successful teacher-mentoring program, which relate to the retention of rst-year teachers.
2.2.9 References Andrews, B. D., & Quinn, R. J. (2005).
The eects of mentoring on rst-year teachers' perceptions of
support received. The Clearing House, 78(3), 110-116. Andrews, S., Gilbert, L., & Martin, E. (2007). The rst years of teaching: Disparities in perceptions of support. Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 4-13. Archer, J. (2003). Increasing the odds. Education Week, 22(17), 52-55. Berry, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002, December). Assessing and supporting new teachers: Lessons from the southeast. Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Teaching Quality. Retrieved May 18, 2006, from
4
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/Induction.pdf
Black, S. (2001). A lifeboat for new teachers: Without mentors and other support, new teachers are left to sink or swim. American School Board Journal. [online]. http://www.asbj.com/current/research.html
5
Bowen, D. (1985). Were men meant to mentor women? Training and Development Journal, 39(1), 30-34. Brown, T., Hargrove, S., Hill, R., & Katz, L. (2003). Promoting quality teachers through a supportive mentoring environment for pre-service and rst-year teachers. Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the Association for Teacher Educators (Santa Fe, NM, August 9-13, 2003). ED 480 857. Bullard, C. (1998). Quali ed teachers for all California students: Current issues in recruitment, preparation, and professional development. Sacramento: California Research Bureau. Certo, J. L., & Fox, J. E. (2002). Retaining quality teachers. High School Journal, 86(1), 57-75. Claycomb, C., & Hawley, W. D. (2000). Recruiting and retaining eective teachers for urban schools: Developing a strategic plan for action. National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. Washington, DC. Croasmum, ning
out?
J.,
Hampton,
University
of
D.,
North
&
Hermann,
Carolina
at
S.
Chapel
(2000). Hill
http:www.horizon.unc.edu/projects/issues/papers/hampton.asp/
4 5
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/Induction.pdf http://www.asbj.com/current/research.html
Teacher
(on-line).
attrition:
Accessed:
Is
time
November
run2000.
45
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-13. Davis, O. L., Jr. (2001). A view of authentic mentorship. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17(1), 1-4. Evertson, C., & Smithey, M. (2000). Mentoring eects on protégés' classroom practice: An experimental eld study. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 294-304. Feinman-Nemser, S. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25-29. Fideler, E., & Haselkorn, D. (1999). Learning the ropes: Urban teacher induction programs and practices in the United States. Belmont, MA: Recruiting New Teachers. Flynn, G. V., & Nolan, B. (2008). The rise and fall of a successful mentor program: What lessons can be learned? The Clearing House, 81(4), 173-179. Fuller, E. (2003).
Beginning teacher retention rates for TxBESS and Non-TxBESS teachers.
Paper
presented for the State Board for Educator Certi cation, Austin, TX. Fulton, K., Yoon, I., & Lee, C. (2005, August). Induction into learning communities. Retrieved May 15,
6
2006, from http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_Induction_Paper_2005.pdf
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research; An introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Gold, Y. (1999). Beginning teacher support. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 458-594). New York: Macmillan. Heberlein, T. A., & Baumgartener, R. (1981). Is a questionnaire necessary in a second mailing? Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 102-108. Hirsch, E. (2006). Recruiting and retaining teachers in Mobile, Alabama: Educators on what it will take to sta all classrooms with quality teachers. Chapel
Hill,
NC:
Center
for
Teaching
Quality.
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/al_recruitretain_mobile.pdf
7
Retrieved
May
21,
2006,
from
Holloway, J. H. (2001). Who is teaching our children? Educational Leadership, 58, 1-3. Holloway, J. (2001). The bene ts of mentoring. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 85-86. Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? A Research Report. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy and Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Washington, DC. Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003).
The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.
Educational
Leadership, 60(8), 30-33. Johnson, S. M., Berg, J. H., & Donaldson, M. L. (2005, August). Who stays in teaching and why: A review of the literature on teacher retention. Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003).
8
Pursuing a sense of success: New teachers explain their
career decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 581-617. Krantrowitz, B., & Wingert, P. (2000).
Provide teacher mentoring at its best.
9 www.leadershiphelp.com/10
The Master Teacher.
Retrieved on September 5, 2007 from http://
Madison, J., Watson, K., & Knight, B. (1994). Mentors and preceptors in the nursing profession. Contemporary Nurse, 3(3), 121-126. Markow, D., & Martin, S. (2005). The MetLife survey of the American teacher: Transitions and the role of supportive relationships: A survey of teachers, principals, and students. Retrieved May 20, 2006, from http://www.metlife.com/WPSAssets/ 34996838801118758796V1FATS_2004.pdf
6 7 8 9 10
http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_Induction_Paper_2005.pdf http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/al_recruitretain_mobile.pdf http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf http://www.leadershiphelp.com/ http://www.leadershiphelp.com/
46
CHAPTER 2.
MENTORSHIP AND LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to America's children. Retrieved May 12, 2006, from http://www.nctaf.org/
11
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Protheroe, N., Lewis, A., & Paik, S. (2002, Winter). Promoting quality teaching. ERS Spectrum, 20(1), 3-9. Provasnik, S., & Dorfman, S. (2005). Mobility in the teacher workforce (NCES 2005-114). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing O ce. Reaves, B. (2002, January). Texas schools face continued shortage of certi ed teachers. Paper prepared at the meeting of the Institute for School-University Partnerships, Byran/College Station, TX. Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (1998).
Teachers, schools and academic achievement.
National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper Number 6691. Sanchez, S. (2003). Characteristics associated with successful mentoring and induction programs in South Texas. Ed.D. dissertation, Texas A&M UniversityKingsville, United StatesTexas. Retrieved September 23, 2004 from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. (Publication No. AAT 3099255). Scherer, M. (Ed). (1999). A better beginning: Supporting and mentoring new teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Sindelar, N. (1992). Development of a teacher mentorship program: High professionalism and low cost. ERS Spectrum, 10(2), 13-17. Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the eects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714. State of South Dakota (2000).
Administrative memorandum.
Department of Education and Cultural
12
Aairs, p. 16. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from http://www.leadershiphelp.com Stedman, J. B. (2004).
K-12 Teacher quality:
Issues and legislative action.
Congressional Research
Service. The Library of Congress. Washington, DC. Weiss, E. M. (1999). Perceived workplace conditions and rst-year teachers' morale, career choice commitment, and planned retention: A secondary analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(8), 861-879.
11 12
http://www.nctaf.org/ http://www.leadershiphelp.com/
Chapter 3
The Role of the Principal 3.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field
:
1
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of the
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration
3.1.1 Toward a Leadership Practice Field: An Antidote to an Ailing Internship Experience by Theodore Creighton The eld of education leadership has long been criticized for the ways in which men and women are prepared for school leadership positions.
In 1960, The American Association of School Administrators
(AASA) characterized the preparation of superintendents and principals as a dismal montage.
Later,
Farquhar and Piele (1972) described university-based preparation programs as dysfunctional structural incrementalism. In 1990, Pitner discussed the zombie programs in education leadership. As recently as 1999, McCarthy addressed the issue of change in education administration by stating, Congeniality and complacency are woven into education administration programs, and the majority of faculty do not perceive a need for radical change that would bring about a transformation in education leadership.
Now, forty
years after AASA's alert, Murphy (2001) points to the profession's continued focus on technical knowledge, placing the university in the center of the eld.
He posits, Trying to link theory and practice in school
administration has been, for the last 30 years, a little like attempting to start a car with a dead battery: The odds are fairly long that the engine will ever turn over. Murphy identi es the central problem as our fascination with building an academic infrastructure of school administration, which has produced serious distortions, in what is primarily an applied eld. The traditional internship presently serves as the vehicle for aspiring principals to practice their problem-solving and instructional leadership skills. Though there has been emphasis from the professional organizations (AASA, NAESP, NASSP, NCPEA, UCEA) for extending the internship experience over more time (e.g., one-year) and weaving the internship throughout preparation coursework, the internship still remains a weak experience with a minimal practice eld at best. For some
1
This content is available online at
48
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
time, I have argued for the implementation of a leadership practice eld in our preparation programs. The conceptual notion at work here is that of creating a bridge between the performance eld (working in the system) and a practice eld (working on the system).
This model is based on the work of Daniel
Kim, a colleague of Peter Senge (The Fifth Discipline) and cofounder of the MIT Organizational Learning Center, where he is currently director of the Learning Laboratory Research Project.
Te central idea is
that a leadership practice eld provides an environment in which a prospective leader can experiment with alternative strategies and policies, test assumptions, and practice working through the complex issues of school administration in a constructive and productive manner.
2
3.2 The Long View
:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of Pro-
fessors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a signi cant contribution to the scholarship and practice in educational administration.
In addition to publication in the Connexions Con-
tent Commons, this module is published in the International Journal of Educational Leadership
3 and available as a Print on Demand copy.
Preparation.
2 3
This content is available online at
49
Figure 3.1
50
.
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
..............................................................CONTENT.............................................................. .
4
Prologue
Martha McCarthy
CREDITING THE PAST
5
The Discipline of Education Administration: Crediting the Past Rosemary Papa
6
The Standards Movements in Educational Administration: A Quest for Respect John Hoyle
7
Re ections:Crediting the Past Betty Alford
CHALLENGING THE PRESENT Drama in Education administration: A Farce or a Morality Play?
8
Charles Achilles Educational Leadership for Sale: Social justice, the ISLLC Standards, and the Corporate Assault on Public Schools
9
Fenwick W.English
CREATING THE FUTURE Strengthening Research on the Preparation of School Leaders Joseph Murphy
10
11
The Future is Now
Robert Beach and James Berry Taking Back Our Profession: Revisited
12
Theodore Creighton and Michelle Young
13
Epilogue: The Intersection of Past, Present and Future James Smith About the Authors
14
15
3.3 The Principalship: Manager to Leader
3.3.1 Bureaucratic Manager Schools have traditionally been managed by a bureaucratic management style principal.
In this method
principals rely on a rational set of structuring guidelines, such as rules and procedures, hierarchy, and a clear division of labor (Allen 1998). Principals using this style receive lots of credit for an e ciently run school. Over time this style of management eventually back res as creative teachers and students become unsettled. These types of principals tend to be control freaks who nd it di cult to let go of the detail and are particularly threatened by the idea of empowering other leaders for fear of diminishing their own power base.
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
These principals soon forget that schools exist for students and not for administrators (Prideaux,
http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/3prologuesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/4papasmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/5hoylesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/6alfordsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/7achillessmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/8englishsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/9murphysmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/10beachberrysmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/11creitheonsmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/12epiloguesmall.pdf http://cnx.org/content/m12868/latest/authors.pdf This content is available online at
51
2001). As new decision making models emerge with research backing their success, the role of the principal begins to change.
3.3.2 Changing from Manager to Leader Principals are no longer strictly managers; they are expected to be leaders.
Leaders that can take their
school to a higher level of academic achievement, where all students are successful learners and all teachers engage their students in learning. To become such a leader, principals need to leave behind their bureaucratic management styles and rede ne themselves as a moral leader. Principals that are leaders not just managers will be able to move their school forward. These new principals allow teachers to be leaders in developing better curriculums to reach the needs of all students. For a principal to maintain this type of leadership, he will need to learn how to serve his sta not just manage it. Principals are beginning to value the important role that teachers play in the success of their school. Recognizing their value, principals are beginning to work with teachers to achieve goals that will contribute to the schools success. Principals are looking for a leadership style that welcomes the cooperation of others and values their input. One such leadership style is that of a servant leader. In servant leadership one serves the needs of their sta (Sergiovanni, 2000).
By serving one's sta instead of serving one's own needs, a
principal is able to create change within the school. Principals can practice servant leadership in the three ways that Sergiovanni (2000) describes: purposing, empowerment, and leadership by outrage.
3.3.3 Purposing In purposing it is the principal's responsibility to develop a set of core values that serves the school and present these values to the school (Sergiovanni, 2000). The principal receives input from other sta members so that everyone shares in the development of these values. Principals can receive input from sta members by meeting with them in a variety of ways:
as departments, as individuals, and as a whole.
In these
meetings, principals should work to establish dialogue, stressing the point that we are in this together and their opinions are valued. In these meetings the principal and sta can address the problems of the school that need immediate attention, identify ways of improving the school, and ways to head o future problems. Ultimately the goal will be to create a set of core values to serve as their purpose.
When developing
these values do not forget to incorporate academics, moral and character values, history, tradition, and the community. By establishing the purpose for the school, standards are being set to help guide the school's vision. Equally as important as setting the purpose for the school, the principal is creating a collaborative group that will be a valuable part of school decision making.
3.3.4 Empowerment "Empowerment is exactly what happens in a collaborative group, in terms of how everybody's opinion is valued and everybody is allowed to express themselves and be heard"(McMahon, 2001, p. 5). As a servant leader a principal constantly incorporates ways to empower their teachers.
Some of these ways include
freeing people to "do their thing," delegating with full responsibility, oering and receiving feedback, and the encouragement of self-evaluation (McMahon, 2001).
The more a principal uses these strategies the
more individuals become empowered and develop leadership qualities. This development becomes vital to improving the school. With additional leaders to make right decisions in the interest of the school, the core values will become the school norm. For example, imagine the simple task of coming to school. Each teacher leaves from a dierent house and drives down dierent roads. In time they arrive at school. Think of this in terms of reaching the shared goals of the school. Each teacher may be at dierent starting points (homes) and may take dierent paths (roads) to reach the goals, but each one has a vision of where to head (school) and arrives there. Imagine the power of having all of these people working to achieve the same goal, working to change the school, and working to make the core values a normal part of the school's culture. This is why the empowerment of a
52
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
sta becomes so valuable to a principal. A principal should allow his sta to make their own decisions for reaching the schools goals, as long as they stay within the standards of the school's core values.
3.3.5 Dependency Unfortunately in a principal's attempt to empower his sta, he will have teachers who think negatively. Some teachers do not want to be involved, accept responsibility, or practice self-management. These teachers have become dependent on the administrative sta to tell them what to do and how to do it.
How did they
get this way? They learned it from a bureaucratic managing principal. "When a principal-rather than the school community members- consistently solves problems, makes decisions, and gives answers, dependency behaviors on the part of sta actually increases" (Lambert, 2003, p.
48).
Remember the simple event
of coming to school, how getting everyone working towards a common goal is so powerful. principal unfortunately obtains just the opposite, never achieving such power.
A controlling
Suppose the day before
school started the principal visits each sta member's house and give them speci c directions on how to get to school. He even tells them what time to leave, how fast to drive and what car to drive. Can you imagine how insigni cant the sta feels after this is done? Right away the principal is showing his sta that he has no con dence in their ability to make decisions. As a principal continue to control every aspect of the sta 's job they become dependent on the principal to tell them what to do and when to do it. All self-initiative is taken away.
3.3.6 Breaking the Dependency In reality, a principal never controls how sta members come to work, just as a principal should not control every aspect of the teacher's job. "Directive or command-and control behavior may get the immediate task done, but it undermines the growth and development of those who are subjected to it, diminishing teacher leadership and the leadership capacity of the school" (Lambert, 2003, p. 44). A principal never gives up complete control, but needs to be acutely aware of ways that they increase dependency. As the leader, the principal needs to break this dependency. To do this he should continue working to empower the sta, ". . . releasing the full potential of [his] employees in order for them to take on greater responsibility and authority in the decision-making process and providing the resources for this process to occur" (Cartwright, 2002, p.6). The principal can ask individuals to take on the responsibility of researching problems and coming up with possible solutions.
People nd ".
.
.
that challenge,signi cance, and the
need to solve problems are important attributes of work that [they] nd interesting, enjoyable, and, in a word, motivating" (Owens, 2004, p. 330). When teachers become a signi cant part of the solution, their motivation and enthusiasm rises. They regain their self-initiative and are less dependent.
3.3.7 Building Leaders As teachers become less dependant they are no longer approaching the principal with problems that need to be solved, but rather they are presenting him with solutions to problems they are experiencing. They are asking for support and guidance rather than answers. A principal needs to continue to serve his sta and build servant leaders among them.
Spears list ten characteristics of a servant leader: listening, em-
pathy,healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and building community.
These characteristics are what a principal will try to build in his sta.
"Servant leaders will listen to what is being said and what is not being said"(Spears, 2002, p. 5). A servant leader is not only aware of what is happening around them, but is also self-aware. Servant leaders should rely on persuasion, rather than on one's positional authority to make decisions (Spears, 2002). A servant leader needs to have vision and have a grasp of the "big picture". All of these things help prevent a school from being stagnant and keeps it moving forward.
Even with well-established core values, a school may
need to revisit and possibly update the core values in order for the vision to continue moving forward. A principal needs to be aware of the importance of foresight to head o possible problems.
The principal
should introduce the idea of stewardship to his leaders to reinforce the commitment of serving others and
53
helping others to grow. Together a principal and his leaders can work to build community within the school by developing unity among the sta.
3.3.8 Leadership by Outrage With more and more leaders in the school,norms are established. One of the greatest norms is the response when the core values of the school are ignored. When this happens, the response of the school leaders and the whole school community is one of outrage. If no one shows that falling short of the school's expectations bothers them then the school, by default, lowers its values. This "leadership by outrage" stops the lowering of values and keeps the school moving forward.
3.3.9 Conclusion Setting the purpose of the school, empowering the sta to carry out that purpose, and being outraged when that purpose is ignored should set the basis of a principals leadership style. The link between servant leadership and moral authority is a tight one. Moral authority relies heavily on persuasion. At the root of persuasion are ideas, values, substance, and content, which together de ne group purpose and core values. Servant leadership is practiced by serving others, but its ultimate purpose is to place one self, and others for whom one has responsibility, in the service of ideals (Sergiovanni, 2000). This ideal of serving the core values of the school is what leads a school. The administrators are rst to embrace the ideal, then the teachers, and eventually the students. When the whole school community starts serving the core values the school's climate changes. Students begin to care about their education, and higher expectations are set and met. Teachers believe in students and work to provide them with the best learning environment possible.
Principals that follow servant leadership over a bureaucratic style of
management will lead schools to achieve their fullest potential.
3.3.10 References Allen,
G.
(1998)
Supervision:
Management
modern.
Retrieved
June
20,
2005,
from
16
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/1overview/management_history/mgmt_history.htm Cartwright, R. (2002) Empowerment. Oxford, United Kingdom: Capstone Publishing Ltd.
Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership Capacity for Lasting School Improvement. Alexandria, VA: Assoc. for Supervision and Curriculum Development McMahon, K. N. (2001). An Interview with Helen S. Astin. In Developing Non-hierarchical Leadership on Campus (p. 8). Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Owens, R. G. (2004). Organizational Behavior in Education. (8th ed.) Boston: Pearson Education Prideaux, R. (2001).
The Eective and Democratic School Principal.
Retrieved June 14, 2005, from
http://www.cybertext.net.au/tct/papers/week4/printable/prideaux%20-%20printable.htm
17
Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005).The principalship: A re ective practice perspective 5th ed. Needham Heights, Maryland: Allyn and Bacon. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). Leadership as Stewardship. In The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Spears, L. C. (2002). Tracing the Past, Present, and Future of Servant-Leadership. In Focus On Leadership: Servant-leadership for the Twenty- rst Century (pp. 1-10). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
16 17
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/1overview/management_history/mgmt_history.htm http://www.cybertext.net.au/tct/papers/week4/printable/prideaux%20-%20printable.htm
54
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.4 Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: 18
Continuous Learning for Professional Roles
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration.
3.4.1 Introduction Leadership in school organizations mattersjust as it does in most private or public enterprise. Educational administration is not just a bureaucratic function and a left over convention of post-modern management theory; rather, it is an evolving professional discipline with distinct elements of practice linked to the outcomes of education, i.e. student learning. Recent bodies of research and meta-analyses of that research identify speci c ways in which leadership in K-12 education can be linked with student achievement at both the school and district levels (Marzano, Waters, and Mc Nulty, 2005 & Marzano & Waters, 2007). As the eld engages with the evidence that leadership not only matters, but constitutes a professional practice (Elmore, 2000), state and federal policy makers are beginning to respond. The recognition of leadership as a distinct and important element of educational reform and adaptation has become a highly noted and actively addressed issue in K-12 education renewal and reform work at the state, university, and local levels. This focus has led to a rethinking of traditional means and processes for recruiting, training, developing, and supporting school leaders for K-12 careers in educational administration. It has also led to a rethinking about leadership as an essential element of a vital educational system and the link between organizational outcomes and leadership capacity distributed across roles and responsibilities in K-12 organizations (Lambert, 2003). This paper examines how changing assumptions about K-12 educational leadership are playing out in state level policies and practices shaping the training, development, and credentialing of K-12 school leaders. New trends are emerging in K-12 administrator certi cation and endorsement systems nationwide, and these trends have implications for those institutions that provide both initial training and ongoing professional development for school leaders.
Signi cantly, many of these trends focus upon improving the quality of
educational administration training at the pre-service level at the university and include post-university professional development throughout one's career as a practicing school administrator.
3.4.2 The Evolution of Administrator Certi cation By 1701, the General Court of Massachusetts decreed that every grammar-school master to be approved by the minister of the town, and the ministers of the two next adjacent towns or any town of them, by certi cate under their hand (Cole, 1957, p. 72). Woellner (1949) stated there were two main areas of competence that were implied by certi cation: academic preparation and professional preparation (p. 251). A framework was established early on by government in relation to standards of quality for teachers. In so doing, it reinforced a responsibility that the state had in governing American education. A system of licensing quali ed educators to teach, and later administer, schools can be traced to the simple need to ensure competent teachers and administrators. The certi cated educational administrator was a slowly evolving state expectation for those who would lead and manage K-12 schools and school districts. The issue of administrator certi cation was closely linked
18
This content is available online at
55
to the rise of university preparation programs. Columbia University became the rst program of study in educational administration at the beginning of the twentieth century. States, in establishing a credentialing system for principals and superintendents in the early 1900's, turned to the newly emerging discipline of educational administration to deliver the training component required of the certi cation system. By the close of the 20th century, over 500 colleges and universities oered a course of study in the eld of educational administration (Levine, 2005).
3.4.3 Requiring Professional Training in Educational Administration Over the course of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, states gradually assumed responsibility for standards of quality for teachers and administrators.
It was during the 20th century, however, that administrator
certi cation became a requirement in all fty states. For a brief amount of time in the 1990s principals and superintendents had to present state approved certi cates in all 50 states that showed evidence of pre-service university training before they could be hired in local public schools. The certi cation of school administrators became a state monitored standard of quality that emanated from the people through its state departments of education. What was once a local need to ensure mastery of academic knowledge and professional ability in teaching became a comprehensive system of review that grew with each state's widening responsibility to educate its citizens and insure educational quality. Local communities were not equipped to handle the bureaucratic oversight of a credentialing system. Departments of education centralized certi cation under the state umbrella at about the same time programs in educational administration began to proliferate in order to support the state credentialing system. Administrator certi cation had a very slow trajectory of growth and acceptance during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In 1854, only Pennsylvania required superintendents to have a certi cate of quali cation.
By 1900, it was still the only state with such a requirement.
From 1900 to 1957, however, 45
states issued certi cates for superintendents, 46 for high school principals, and 45 for elementary principals (Howsam & Morphet, 1958, p. 79). As states embraced their responsibility to establish standards of quality through certi cation of school administrators, programs of preparation were established within universities. Universities were the logical source of training to ensure that the quality standards established by the states were met through the educational administration curriculum. Columbia University began oering courses within its teacher training program in 1899 (Teachers College Record, 1919, p. 276). Prior to that time, educational administration was considered part of teaching and incorporated into a general responsibility for managing the aairs of schooling. Thus, at the beginning of the 20th century, the eld of educational administration existed as an idea that took shape as a specialized program of study. From this beginning educational administration evolved and grew into a professional eld of study that shaped how principals and superintendents approached the task of leading America's schools. Establishing a program of preparation through the university was a logical, and practically speaking, the only viable approach to training educational administrators as an extension of state certi cation. Educational administration followed the same path many other professions took to gain academic and professional credibility by becoming a university-based program. Howsam and Morphet (1958) indicated that by the late 1950's, state certi cation regulations generally called for a person to have a teaching certi cate, experience in teaching or other educational work, and college courses in educational administration and supervision before he can qualify for an administrative certi cate (p. 81). University preparation and increased credit requirements for state certi cation accelerated during the 1940's and 1950's spurred by the post war generation that emphasized education. By 1957, the bachelor's degree had become the minimum accepted level for an administrative certi cate, and only a few states accept it as adequate. Most states are requiring the master's degree for the superintendent and approximately half are requiring it for the high school and elementary school principal (Howsam & Mophet, 1958, p.
88).
The rise of the professional educational administrator can be linked to the intent of the state to create the conditions for quality in the leadership capacity of educators who became principals of schools and superintendents of K-12 school districts. As more universities oered educational administration, the curriculum evolved and expanded to include in-depth study of organization, nance, instruction, personnel, school law, and content related to leading
56
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
and managing schools. Courses in knowing how to perform the roles of principal and superintendent were lled with practical knowledge and necessary skills which were then sanctioned by state certi cation. Michigan, as the last state to adopt administrator certi cation in the United States in 1991, was the high water mark for the singular pursuit of certi cated administrators as an indicator of quality for educational leadership. It was about this time, however, that educational administration certi cation, within the context of educational reform across the U.S., was assailed as a state supported barrier keeping otherwise quali ed and successful leaders from serving as reformers in the nation's schools. Michigan became the last state to adopt administrator certi cation in 1991 and, within ve years, it had repealed the requirement of state certi cation for principals and superintendents. The e cacy of a closed credentialing system that focused primarily upon the pre-service training of principals and superintendents was described by Levine (2005) as an unworkable training model in need of reform. Thus, the stage was set for rethinking school administrator preparation.
3.4.4 Preparation in Educational Administration: New Expectations and Pressures At the beginning of the twenty- rst century, the issue of certi cation by university preparation programs in educational administration was being questioned in regard to its overall relevance to the job of leading complex educational organizations. Howsam and Morphet (1958) wrote that states had come to rely completely upon evidence of satisfactory institutional preparation as the basis for granting administrative certi cates (p. 86). Although the university-based program of study was the foundation for educational leadership training in the United States for over one hundred years, the issue of a relevant knowledge base that could be transmitted to aspiring, as well as experienced administrators, challenged university programs of preparation to look at course content and curriculum delivery. As educational administration entered its second one hundred years as a professional eld there was a decided shift in thinking about the long term career value of educational administration training with a pre-service focus. A pre-service emphasis in training through university programs in educational administration (typically at the Master's degree level) was never considered the comprehensive answer for preparing and continuing the professional development of school leaders. With a national baby boom bubble of retirees in the rst decade of the twenty- rst century from K-12 administration came unprecedented rates of turnover in building and district level leadership positions. This turnover, and an increasing desire to reform education through the board room, created opportunities for political agendas favoring the recruitment of school leaders from business, military, and other elds. The eld of educational administration was confronted with the challenge of adapting a knowledge base for aspiring educational leaders who came from both truncated career paths within education and from alternative degree and experience backgrounds outside education. As the ratio of experienced to inexperienced school administrators and educators tipped, the ranks of school leaders became more diverse and the more traditional systems of internships, mentoring, and coaching on the job began to falter. This, coupled with pressure for change in how school leaders performed their roles, created a void in the ways and means for the profession to continue maturing beyond the foundation laid down by university preparation programs. School leaders emerged from their university degree preparation only partly prepared to assume their new roles in K-12 administration and with signi cant need for ongoing focused professional development to deal with the demands of their jobs.
The jobs were becoming more
complex and the stakes for meeting those challenges driven by new state and federal accountability systems. University preparation programs could only reach so far into school leaders' actual performance and were on their own to apply a body of knowledge, theory, and practice in a constant state of ux.
3.4.5 Changing the Paradigm of Preparation The need for training educators for lifetime roles as educational leaders has, thus, evolved beyond an emphasis on merely preparing educators to assume roles in school administration to one of transmitting an evolving and maturing knowledge base in educational administration practice.
This required a model and process
for preparation and ongoing development that began with a solid foundation of research backed knowledge
57
skills, competencies, and dispositions (Waters & Grubb, 2004) and builds on that foundation in ways that enhance the performance of educational leaders over a career. Educational leaders, however, were assuming roles in schools that did not always conform to the traditional educational administration curriculum. School administration and leadership were no longer uniformly de ned sets of responsibilities designed for a stable context; rather, they were an amalgam of dynamic and rapidly changing roles for a system under stress and under signi cant pressure for fundamental change. As a result, there were two main areas that the eld of educational administration began to address to improve educational leadership training. First, university-based preparation did not fully address meaningful ongoing professional growth over the course of a career even when school leaders pursued post-masters level graduate work.
University-
based educational administration programs, in the United States, were primarily designed for pre-service introduction and academic overview of knowledge, skills, competencies, and dispositions needed by those who aspired to move into, or advance to, a new administrative role in K-12 education. As such, university preparation programs were organized around core elements of general school administration at the building or district level but not tailored to given contexts, not agile at addressing current issues, and not designed to follow, assist, and continue to develop school leaders in the course of actual professional practice in given school leadership roles. Second, states continued to rely on universities as the primary provider and venue for credentialing school leaders; yet, they were also concerned about standards of practice, quality of performance, improving competency, increasing eectiveness, and stimulating continuous growth and adaptation among school leaders once they entered the eld. These concerns rose directly out of the needs of school districts facing unprecedented challenges and high-stakes accountability. University-based courseware and programs were well suited for preparing individuals (especially trained educators) for speci c levels and functions of school administration, but they were not designed to address the myriad ways in which school administrators with varied backgrounds and career paths must adapt to and address increasingly unstable conditions in the speci c contexts and circumstances they administer. State level initiatives targeted at improving school leader eectiveness in the eld were beginning to look beyond the universities for school administrator continuing education. The traditional university graduate programs in educational administration assume a grounding in teaching and learning and do not adapt easily to alternatively degreed and/or experienced individuals who were making a career shift into school administration.
These and other factors, such as high turn-over in ad-
ministrator positions and new research ndings linking principal and superintendent leadership to student achievement (Marzano, Waters, & Mc Nulty, 2005; Reeves, 2006; Marzano & Waters, 2007), increasingly demanded more pre- and post-credentialing options for training, updating, coaching, and mentoring school leaders. The expansion of public school alternatives (charters) and a range of pressures for change, adaptation, and reform in the public school system began to stimulate a rethinking of school leader recruitment, training, development, and credentialing at the local, state, and federal policy levels (e.g. NCLB). The eld of educational administration recognizes the importance of ongoing career training postmaster's, post-specialist, and post-doctoral in considering the education of our nation's school leaders. Local boards and legislators look both within and beyond the ranks of traditionally prepared educators and educational leaders for the leadership needed to reform schools with poor student achievement track records. New technologies and new research are reshaping the practice of school leadership, and state credentialing systems are beginning to respond with both higher standards for initial certi cation and additional requirements beyond initial certi cation based on evidence of continued learning and, in some cases, actual performance in the job.
3.4.6 Rede ning Leadership Roles As these responses take shape and translate into statutory changes in state credentialing systems, common themes begin to emerge.
States are beginning to expand the professional development requirements for
school leaders, at all levels, so that training is ongoing and continues throughout a career; thus supporting change and adaptation as the American education system evolves.
Additionally, the eld of educational
administration in the twenty- rst century is beginning to recognize the critical role of the teacher as leader giving rise to teacher leadership as part of the continuum of recognized school leadership roles. Educational
58
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
administrationand especially the core of instructional leadershipconsists of training and skill development around a knowledge base that has relevance for all educational professionals involved in decision-making for the improvement of educational outcomes.
Therefore, a dynamic knowledge base must be learned and
mastered by those wishing to enter the profession as leaders and by the teacher leaders who will play a critical role in any reform and improvement eort. The notion that a leader from another profession could assume the role of an educational leader without a thorough grounding in the educational administration knowledge base was, and continues to be, a faulty assumption. The information age has re-connected teacher leadership to the teacher's historical professional role as a leader by providing teachers with access to better technologies, better strategies, better understanding of the teaching and learning process, and better understanding of the educational organization. The reform movement of the past forty years has broadened the role of the teacher to encompass instructional improvement at both the classroom and school levels. Building and district administrators are no longer viewed as the sole authority and source of leadership and direction in schools; rather, they are considered the shapers of focus and the developers of capacity. They are expected to function as learning-leaders (Reeves, 2005) who build a culture that supports inquiry discovery, professionalism, and collegiality all in the service of student learning and unprecedented expectations for universal pro ciency in core learning competencies. The concept of distributed leadership (Spillane, Halverson, and Diamond, 2004) has gained acceptance as a practice that is stretched over the social and situational contexts of the school (p. 5). As such, a model of school leadership training must encompass teachers, aspiring principals and superintendents, as well as those transitioning into education from business, the military and other professions.
3.4.7 Emerging Continuous Models of Leadership Development and Credentialing On the heels of the charter movement, state policy makers became more ambivalent about school administrator preparation, licensure, and career paths. Pressures to open school leader positions to non-educators and alternatively degreed and experienced candidates led to changes in state credentialing statutes to open up the system. Shortly after 1990, a number of states altered or even eliminated their administrator licensing and certi cation requirements.
By 2001, ve states had dropped the licensure requirement altogether for
superintendents and two had repealed the requirement for building administrators to be state certi ed as well (National Task Force on School Leadership, 2002).
During the same time period, another seventeen
states amended their certi cation requirements to open the door for alternative preparation and experience in lieu of degrees in education and education administration. The Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law helped accelerate reform of state credentialing systems because of the pressure to improve standardized test results. While some states implemented minimal or relaxed administrator certi cation, other states began a round of state licensure amendments that included expanded continuing education requirements, new or revised professional preparation and practice standards for internships and/or mentoring (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2001). By the fall of 2006, twelve states were classi ed as, mandating a two or three-tiered process that requires. . .provisional or initial certi cation...another level or two in order to also receive advanced certi cation (Illinois Commission on School Leader Preparation, August 2006). As the trend continued, a few of the advanced certi cation systems even required performance based evaluations (Alabama, Arizona, Illinois, and Ohio) while eight of the advanced certi cation states required school leaders to develop a portfolio to qualify for either a continuing or advanced certi cation.
As a
nal indicator in the trend to create advanced or enhanced state credentialing systems, four states (Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Virginia) instituted an endorsement for teacher leaders as well (IL-SAELP Report, 2006). Running parallel to the growing legislative support for two-tiered state credentialing systems was another trend: revisiting the ways school leaders were recruited, trained, developed, and sustained or supported over an entire career in K-12 administration. In 1987, the National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration (NCEEA) published its recommendations for credentialing systems to address the dierence
59
between entry-level preparation for successful performance in the eld of educational leadership and posttraining of practicing school administrators (IL-SAELP Report, 2006).
This led many states to adopt
credentialing requirements in two phases or tiers, the second of which was linked to evidence of continued education and (in a few cases) growth in areas of research supported and standards-based practice. These two-tiered or advanced systems spawned a greater interest in state policy initiatives that picked up where the traditional university preparation programs left o, i.e. intentional systems of continuing education coupled with systematic accrual of performance evidence. To implement these advanced systems of school leader licensure and credentialing, states turned to funding and research partners for help in establishing policies, programs and processes whereby emerging, developing, and practicing school leaders could be engaged in a more intentional and coherent continuum of professional training, development, and application experiences that yielded stronger performance results.
In the early 2000's, the Gates Foundation funded a major initiative for training
school leaders to utilize information technologies more eectively in carrying out their leadership roles (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/UnitedStates/Education/Grants/Grant-6958.htm).
The Broad Founda-
tion initiated a national program to recruit, develop, and place tested school leaders in some of the nation's most challenged urban school districts. Around the same time, the Wallace Foundation began its State Action Educational Leadership Project (SAELP) working with state departments of education, major research and school administrator preparation university programs, and independent researchers to impact state policy and practice for developing and supporting school leaders with high-yield leadership practices (including data-informed decision making) at the building level. Future work will focus on district level leaders. Under Bill Gates' leadership, Microsoft also stepped directly into the work of reshaping state level systems for school leadership development with its Partners in Learning initiative utilizing leadership practices that correlated with raising student achievement and/or emulated proven leadership strategies from the private sector (MI-LIFE Project, Michigan Department of Education, 2007). These and other similar public/private partnerships surfaced around the countrysome aimed at creating a national model for redesigning the way the educational system recruits, trains, continually develops, and supports school leaders at all levels from the teacher ranks to the superintendent and board levels. Other, more modest eorts are emerging at the state, regional, and local level to help practicing school leaders create more coherence between the requirements of federal and state accountability systems and the systems and processes that are shaping local schools. These emergent school leader development projects have some important common elements that distinguish them from the historical model of (1) preparation through university programs (i.e. MA, EdS, EdD, and PhD); (2) permanent certi cation through state credentialing systems, and (3) varied state continuing education requirements resulting in disconnected, widely varied, and inconsistently accessed professional development experiences and opportunities thereafter. Some of the new elements are:
•
Increased partnerships and coordination between universities, regional service centers, departments of education, local districts, regional laboratories, and private foundations and corporations (DarlingHammond, et al, 2007).
•
Stronger coherence and coordination around state leader preparation and practice standards, national accreditation standards, and research ndings (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2007).
•
Greater emphasis placed on identifying and recruiting potentially stronger and more eective leaders (Knapp, et al, 2006).
•
Greater emphasis placed on the importance of leadership at all levels (teacher leaders, school leaders, district leaders, and state leaders) coupled with an emphasis of continuous evolution and development of leadership capacity (Knapp, et al, 2006 and Lambert, 2003).
•
Stronger focus on instructional leadership and leadership for change, improvement, and reform (Leithwood, et al, 2004).
•
Stronger use of both informal and formal internship and mentoring features as speci c components of both initial preparation and continuing education programs (IL-SAELP Report, 2006).
•
Emphasis on acquisition and continued enhancement of knowledge, skills, competencies, and practices
60
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
(Grogan & Andrews, 2003).
•
A greater emphasis on and stronger allocation of resources for applying the major ndings of research that connects school leadership (teacher, principal, and superintendent) with positive changes in student success (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Marzano and Grubb, 2004; Reeves, 2006).
In a special report prepared by the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute and commissioned by the Wallace Foundation in 2007, the authors (Darling-Hammond, et al) identi ed ve ndings associated with exemplary leadership development programs: (1) There are important common features for both pre-service and in-service programs; (2) People who participate in exemplary programs are better prepared and engage more consistently in eective practices; (3) Leadership, partnerships, and nancial support are all critical for building exemplary programs; (4) Designing and delivering eective programs requires creative and exible funding strategies; and (5) Both state and district policies in uence program design and impact. The authors of this same study (Darling-Hammond, et al, 2007) go on to include the following in their list of policy implications: Durable partnerships between districts and universities, as well as state supports, facilitate consistent, coherent professional development. . .where links are weak and where professional development is not coordinated with preparation, the eects on leaders' attitudes and behaviorno matter how eective the programare more likely to fade with time, particularly in challenging school contexts (Executive Summary, p 21). The assumption for expanding and improving educational administration professional development was that universities would just expand their role past the initial credentialing and deliver additional tier credentialing requirements through the traditionally structured and delivered degree and certi cation system , e.g.
courses and credit hours.
Perhaps the assumption was also, that universities would partner with
local districts and state departments to deliver academies and like experiences for continued professional development. These assumptions make sense, as far as they go. But noticeably absent in such premises is the natural role and untapped capacity associated with an educational administration training model that shapes pre-service credentialing programs with continued or advanced credentialing programs that are not university-based. Michigan's new certi cation and endorsement statute, for example, clearly recognizes the importance of an agile and responsive, yet coherent and intentional continuum of recruitment, training, development, and learning-in-practice experiences that accommodate a variety of career paths to positions of school leadership. Moreover, the new Michigan credentialing system is grounded in the standards of practice that form the basis for university preparation programs and the foundation for the state's school improvement system (the Michigan School Improvement Framework). Between the standards that guide their initial certi cation and the state accountability standards for leading their schools and school districts, school leaders in Michigan now have a credentialing system that will follow teachers, principals, and superintendents throughout a career in school administration and assist them in applying and re ning leadership practices that translate to improved results for their schools and the students they serve.
3.4.8 Summary Educational administration has struggled to nd legitimacy and relevancy as a eld for most of the last one hundred years. The problem was that relevancy was debated around the limits of a university-based pre-service curriculum.
It was within the roles of teacher, principal, and superintendent that the skills,
abilities, and knowledge, were acknowledged and practiced.
That is, the profession long recognized a set
of skills and competencies for educational leadership that integrated knowledge utilized in performing one's role after graduating with a degree from the university. During the latest reform movement the importance of highly trained and competent educational leaders became all too evident to the school districts seeking higher levels of student performance. School districts quickly recognized that training for improved student learning was a necessary requirement for educational leaders charged with making educational improvement. Appropriate training throughout one's career is the missing component of educational administration that, in fact, complements the university-based pre-service
61
program of preparation. The eld of educational administration must recognize that educational leadership preparation spans a career. The dynamic environment associated with leading an educational organization demands a lifetime of learning. More importantly, all educators must recognize this environment as a demanding venue that requires professional development over the course of a career. One can no longer expect a school administrator to know or understand all of the complexity associated with leading an educational organization upon completion of a university-based preparation program in educational administration. Educational administration has become a profession of complexity that requires depth of study and continuous learning throughout one's professional career.
3.4.9 References Broad
Foundation.The
broad
residency
in
19
urban
education.
Retrieved
September
5,
2008
from
http://www.broadresidency.org/index.php
Cole, N. M. (Winter, 1957). The licensing of schoolmasters in colonial Massachusetts. History of Education Journal, 8(2), 68-74. Darling-Hammond, L. Lapointe, M., Meyerson, D. & Orr, M. (2007).
Preparing school leaders for a
changing world. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. Elmore, R. (2000).
Building a new structure for school leadership.
Washington, CC: Albert Shanker
Institute. Gates
Foundation.
U.S.
partners
in
learning.
http://www.microsoft.com/Education/PiLUS.mspx
Retrieved
20 .
September
5,
2008
from
Gousha, R. P., LoPresti, P. L., & Jones, A. H. (1988). Report on the rst annual survey certi cation and employment standards for educational administrators. In D. E. Gri ths, R. T Stout, & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Leaders for America's schools (pp. 200-206). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Grogan, M. & Andrews, R. (2003).
De ning preparation and professional development in the future.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 38 (2), 233-256. Howsam, R. B. & Morphet, E. L. (March, 1958). Certi cation of educational administrators, The Journal of Teacher Education, IX(1), 75-96. IL-SAELP ti cation
(Illinois
structure
State
to
Action
improve
for
Educational
student
www.coe.ilstu.edu/eafdept/centerforedpolicy
21 .
Leadership
achievement.
Project.
Retrieved
Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S., and Wahlstrom, K. (2004).
An
March
advanced
10,
2008
cerfrom
How leadership in uences stu-
dent learning. A Report Commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Levine, A. Educating school leaders. Washington, D.C. EducationSchools Project. Retrieved September
22 .
5, 2008 from http://www.edschools.org/reports_leaders.htm Marzano, fect
of
the
R.
J.,
&
Waters,
superintendent
T.
leadership
(2007). on
School
student
district
achievement.
leadership A
that
working
works: paper
The
available
efat
http://www.mcrel.org/topics/Leadership. Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School Leadership That Works: From Research to Results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. NCSL Task Force on School Leadership (2002).
The role of school leadership in improving student
achievement. Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures.
19 20 21 22
http://www.broadresidency.org/index.php http://www.microsoft.com/Education/PiLUS.mspx http://www.coe.ilstu.edu/eafdept/centerforedpolicy http://www.edschools.org/reports_leaders.htm
62
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2001). Recognizing and encouraging exemplary leadership in America's schools: A proposal to establish a system of advanced certi cation for administrators. Arlington, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration. Reeves, D. (2006). The learning leader. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., and Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. Wallace Foundation. State Action for Educational Leadership Project. Retrieved, September, 5, 2008
23
from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/GrantsPrograms/FocusAreasPrograms/EducationLeadership/SaelpProgram.htm . Waters, T. & Grubb, S. (2004). The leadership we need: Using research to strengthen the use of standards for administrator preparation and licensure programs. Aurora, CO: McRel. Woellner, R. C. (June, 1949). Teacher certi cation. Review of Educational Research, 19(3), 250-253. Russell, J. E. (January, 1919). Teachers College Record, XX(1), 276.
3.5 Reality Check: 21st Century
Note:
Designing a New Leadership Program for the
24
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. School improvement cannot occur without good leadership, and leadership knowledge and skills cannot be developed without sound school leadership preparation programs.Today, the best school leaders have cultivated their craft through many years of experience, dependent upon trial and error and self-re ection, and professional development.
However, this method does not meet the need to produce the quantity of
quality school leaders needed to turn around poor and failing schools and school districts. A report by the Southern Regional Education Board (2006) stated, Given the urgency for increased student achievement, it would seem that redesigning principal preparation programs around leadership practices that have a high impact on students' learning would be a high priority at every university. Yet, it is not (p. 2). The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (U.S. Department of Education, 2000) and research substantiates both a scant supply of talented candidates to lead schools and the importance of these individuals in improving student achievement (Mazzeo, 2003). For the past decade, university school leadership preparation programs have been under vigorous scrutiny by such researchers as Levine (2005) and Murphy (1992). For example, Levine (2005) claimed the quality of most preparation programs for school leaders ranges from inadequate to appalling (p.24). In the Accidental Principal, Hess and Kelly (2005) stated that when the contents of 31 programs across the United States were studied, researchers concluded that principals are not mastering the skills necessary to lead school improvement and increase student achievement in the 21st Century. The Research Base of School Leadership Preparation Programs Recent research has focused on the need to redesign principal preparation programs to select the best and brightest teacher leaders, provide skills to lead teachers in increasing student achievement, and meet
23 24
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/GrantsPrograms/FocusAreasPrograms/EducationLeadership/SaelpProgram.htm This content is available online at
63
the challenges of standards-based accountability (Grogan & Andrews 2002; Portin, Knapp, Murphy & Beck, 2003) According to Murphy (1992), the most potent forces for leadership development occur in the context of ongoing eld work rather than formal classroom settings. When colleges teach subject matter in isolation of eld experience, this knowledge has little or no transference to practice (Murphy, 1992). Consequently, the concern of school leaders and researchers is that the knowledge graduate candidates learn in university classrooms is inapplicable to real-life situations and challenges for school improvement. In order to design an exemplary program, distributed and shared leadership must be practiced at all levelsstate, university, and district. Shared/distributed leadership is neither a top-down nor a total grass roots model.
A shared decision making model is the best for total commitment and sustainability.
This
has prompted the use and development of partnerships, especially at the university/district level. Successful partnerships have been developed in places such as East Tennessee State University (West, 2003), University of Kentucky (Browne-Ferrigno, 2004) and other universities across the country. During district partnership sessions, East Tennessee based its program on themes rather than distinct subjects (West, 2003). The University of Kentucky Partnership identi ed the lack of knowledge and dispositions for instructional leadership as one of the main needs of preparation and professional development programs (Browne-Ferrigno, 2004). The goal of this paper is to discuss the lessons learned and challenges faced in developing a partnership program at Southeastern Louisiana University in hopes of helping others in their quest to improve school leadership preparation program. Louisiana's Redesign of School Leadership Preparation Programs In 2001, the state of Louisiana formed a partnership with the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) that has been instrumental in the development of school leader preparation programs.
Support in new
program development and teaching strategies have been oered to help university/district partnerships. In spring 2005 the Southeastern Louisiana Partnership began the recruitment, selection, and implementation process for the new school leader preparation program and professional development of sitting school leaders. This article focuses on the LEAD Southeastern Louisiana Partnership; LEAD is an acronym for Leading, Engaging, Assessing, and Developing (School Leaders) in Southeastern Louisiana. A knowledge and skills base for school leadership preparation has been developed and is constantly being reviewed and renewed with the assistance of such groups as the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) and the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). Two major problems with respect to principal preparation exist: (1) How to bring this new knowledge base to school leaders in the eld through professional development, and (2) How to design and implement leadership preparation programs to eectively teach these skills. The focus here is on the latter, concerned especially with examining the creation and implementation of the new research-based program at Southeastern Louisiana University.
The creation process began in 2001,
implementation with the rst cohort of students in fall 2005, and the collection of the rst assessments and surveys in May 2006.
An example of the design and implementation process of a new school leader
preparation program and the challenges of the change process are presented in this article. Until 2005, the plans had only been on paper, and now the reality check is in the implementation. Leadership Development Framework Leadership occurs at all levels of the learning community. In England, Southworth and Doughty (2006) describe the leadership development framework of the National College for School Leadership as ve stages of leadership from the teacher stage to consultant stage. The ve stages are: (1) Leading from the Middle, (2) National Professional Quali cation for Headship, (3) Early Headship, (4) Advanced Leadership, and (5) Consultant Leadership. Although not as highly developed as England's program, the new program in Louisiana and at Southeastern Louisiana University has recognized three stages where leaders can bene t from knowledge and skill development: teacher leader, school building leader, and district leader. Each stage of educational development trains school leaders during real eld-based experience with district and university mentors. The goal is to prepare exemplary people who can make immediate use of their newly learned skills in the school in which they are leading or in a new leadership position. The state of Louisiana, the university, and school districts are working together to align every aspect of the process. Endorsements, certi cations, and/or degrees result at the successful completion of each level, with ongoing support and training guidance from the LEAD Southeastern Louisiana Partnership and the state. The purpose of LEAD
64
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
is to recruit and select exemplary educational leaders at all levels of leadership identi ed in our state. Three
1
core programs (described in full at the state's website, www.leadlouisian.net ) are designed to prepare teacher leaders, entry-level principals, and superintendents. Teacher Leader Endorsement This endorsement re ects the theory of shared and distributed leadership and is designed to assist teachers improve eectiveness in raising student achievement and leading faculty teams.
The goal is to create a
leadership team of two to four teacher leaders with in each school in our service area. At the completion of the program each teacher leader has the option of continuing in the degree program or assuming the role of leading school-based teams. The requirements include a teaching certi cate, 3 years successful teaching experience, and completion of a state-approved Teacher Leader Institute which incorporates: 1. A minimum of 6 graduate hours (90 contact hours). 2. A combination of face-to-face and eld-based professional development activities that may include the use of a cohort approach. 3. Support from and mentoring by current outstanding administrators serving as mentors and facilitators. 4. An electronic component (online or compressed video) to ensure each participant's access to key resources and to build a statewide network of quali ed administrator candidates that may include the development of cohorts. 5. The development and presentation of a culminating portfolio that provides evidence that knowledge gained and skills acquired are aligned with national and state leader standards. Educational Leader Certi cate Level 1 and 2 The Educator Leader Certi cate Levels 1 and 2 are mandated for all who aspire to school and district leadership positions, assistant principal, and principal and includes on-the-job training and mentoring from an advanced school leader. Components of the certi cate include the completion of a competency-based graduate degree preparation program in the area of educational leadership from a regionally accredited institution of higher education; a passing score (168 recommended)on the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA); upon employment, enrollment in a 2-year Educational Leader Induction Program, which must be completed within 3 years. At the successful culmination of this induction, a Level 2 Certi cate is awarded. Educational Leader Certi cate Level 3 Educational Leader Certi cate Level 3 is inclusive of Levels 1 and 2 and is requisite of those who aspire to become a superintendent and may be enhanced by an earned doctorate degree (Ed.D.) from the new Consortium for School Leadership, a joint program from Southeastern Louisiana University and University of Louisiana at Lafayette. To earn this certi cate, students must have 5 years successful experience at the level of principal or above; a passing score (154 recommended) on the School Superintendent Assessment (SSA); and a passing score on the School Leadership Licensure Assessment, which is a new certi cation test from the Educational Testing Service School Leader Portfolio Assessment. To renew any certi cation, each educator must complete a minimum of 150 Continuous Learning Units of Professional Development over a 5-year period that is consistent with Individual Professional Growth Plan and that includes updating the educational leader portfolio. How to Design a School Leader Preparation Program The new school leadership program at Southeastern Louisiana University incorporates the Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC)standards and draws from the best practices of both the transformational and shared instructional leadership models in order to develop the leadership skills of aspiring school leaders (Marks & Printy, 2003). The new preparation program combines the two models of leadership into an integrated approach. Furthermore, the new program blends the critical mass of technical, human, and educational forces, as recommended by Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003), into the professional content (the what) and theory (the why) with practical skills (the how and when) through case studies, simulations, and extensive eld-based experiences. Following the creation of a partnership with the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) in 2003, the state of Louisiana mandated that all universities redesign preparation programs for school leaders be based on
65
the new standards, which are re ected in the state certi cation guidelines. In addition, all university degree programs are required to be National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) certi ed. The LEAD Southeastern Partnership diers from the other Louisiana university/district partnerships in that it is composed of urban, suburban, and rural school districts with dramatic demographic dierences. Leadership is context-speci c, as the National College for School Leadership in England discovered (Southworth & Doughtly, 2006). The program requires diverse eld experience throughout order to qualify graduates to work in a variety of settings. The plan provides professional development for existing school leaders and improving conditions at low performing schools to increase student achievement. Located on the northern shore of Lake Ponchatrain, Louisiana, populations within the partnership districts have grown since the natural disaster of Hurricane Katrina and thus the need for highly quali ed school leaders is of foremost importance. Current issues of culture, diversity, social justice, and various socio-economic groups are prevalent in this area of the Deep South and add to the many challenges faced in this era of high-stakes testing and high expectations. The partnership has attempted to design a leadership preparation program that will foster conditions of success for leadership in a variety of schools. LEAD Southeastern Louisiana has allied with other leadership preparation programs, professional organizations, and related educational groups around the country to maintain a current knowledge base of best practices in principal preparation, related policy issues, and licensure and professional development for school leaders. These schools and organizations include LEAD Fairfax in Virginia, the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), The Gallup Organization, and the SREB. In 1975, Hills (cited in Murphy, 1992) stated that the educational administrator of the future should understand and be able to use the skills of developmental psychology, socialization, cultural variation, teaching and learning, instructional methods and materials, and curriculum development.
Murphy (1992) recom-
mended that the preparation program should becomprised of the creation of learning communities that incorporate the understandings of the human condition; the infusion of content from a greater variety of areas, especially the humanities; and the use of instructional approaches that promote cooperative eort, dialog and re ection (p. 146). According to Murphy, the goals for training school leaders should concentrate on the development of model educators. Each school leader is able to articulate and model the use of (1) an explicit set of values and beliefs, including a strong sense of social justice, to guide their actions; (2) developmental psychology, socialization, cultural variation, and instructional and curricular methods and materials; (3) problem solving and inquiry skills; and (4) shared leadership. Murphy (1992) has encouraged universities to use dierent training models that are thematic-integrated seminars incorporating the capacity to learn. Candidates should seek knowledge as a tool rooted in action and guided by cognition. Reading material should be the most current gathered from original sources. Creating the Plan for School Leadership Preparation During the early stages of the redesign eort, EDL faculty conducted semi-structured informal interviews with area principals. Many of the interviews took place at current practicum sites. The interviews were for the purpose of soliciting speci c input from principals, such as sequencing, scheduling, and delivery of courses, the cohort concept, and the groups' perceptions regarding needed content, skills and eld-based activities prior to assuming an educational administrator role. Principals were asked in which management/leadership areas they felt most prepared as they assumed their rst administrative job and in which areas they felt the least prepared. The purpose was to seek input on the sequencing of courses, scheduling and delivery of courses, the cohort concept, and their perceived needs regarding needed content and activities prior to assuming a school leadership role. Following this, an advisory council was formed and this group conducted focus group interviews within their districts. All levels of input were acquired and critiqued by the advisory council to decide which to include in the plan. The draft of the new program and its rationale was presented by a team EDL faculty and district leaders, followed by small-group activities through which participants helped to incorporate standards into speci c seminars and helped develop competency-based activities.
(See Appendices A, B,
and C for interview questions and additional responses.) Southeastern Louisiana University professor David Stader (2003) constructed and eld tested the Belief
66
CHAPTER 3.
Matrix instrument.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
It was designed to guide discussions of the importance of understanding beliefs in
decision-making and in formulating a shared school vision throughout the program. Candidates completed surveys regarding their perceptions of self e cacy in school leadership by using the instrument in guiding the clari cation and articulation of their beliefs.
The results of the study revealed that continued use of
the instrument could be of bene t to the students and program. Continued research is being conducted on the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003) eectiveness of eld based skill development and impact on PK-12 student achievement. The external critique of the plan for redesign of the school leader preparation program was administered by consultants from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto, Canada. They also met with university and district school leaders and attended focus group presentations, and made two recommendations: One, begin the graduate studies with instruction and eld based work in leading teacher teams in how to review research data as a means of examining school context and selecting research based strategies for school improvement.
Two, introduce the methods for facilitating a high performance
learning culture and integrate these methods throughout the remaining seminars (Hill-Winstead & Stader, 2004). After 5 years of collaborative research and examination of best leadership practices, the new school leadership preparation program was approved for implementation in fall 2005. Master of Education Degree in School Leadership Recruitment and Selection The rst step of the LEAD program was to recruit experienced teachers. District leaders were requested to nominate exemplary teachers with a minimum of 3 years of teaching experience whom they viewed as possessing leadership capabilities as future school administrators. These teachers were invited to apply for admission to the university and enroll in the rst seminar. During this semester, each candidate completes an application portfolio consisting of letters of recommendation, writing samples, artifacts with corresponding assessments from the rst seminar, Graduate Record Exam Scores, transcripts, and teaching and leadership experiences. As part of our partnership with the Gallup Organization, each candidate also is assessed for leadership dispositions online called Principal Insight. The selection process culminates with a formal group and individual interview scored according to a rubric and the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003). The interviewers are a team of district and university leaders who make the nal selections after analyzing the participant pro les. Structure of Seminars As an integral part of the program is a series of seminars with embedded eld-based experiences, culminating in a full internship so that graduates may immediately enter the principalship as turn around change agents. Field-based experiences are planned by university professors with the students and their clinical supervisors/mentors in order to design relevant activities that help the aspiring school leaders develop leadership skills that produce improved teaching and learning. Through the seminar and eld experience, each student maintains a re ective journal. In addition, re ections are self analyzed using the Belief Matrix (Stader, 2003) which has proven successful for the purposes of de ning one's growth and development of skills and dispositions. Finally,rigorous, ongoing assessment is conducted throughout the seminars. For example, students are required to lead a team of faculty members in several activities, which are observed and assessed by the university instructors of record and/or district mentor, using a preset rubric for each. Who developed the rubric and what are some key items on it? Face-to-face class sessions are team taught with other professors and school district leaders. Students proceed through the program as a cohort, sentence is too longmake it two sentences) mirroring the type of learning community that they need to form in their schools as leader. The cohort model facilitates the building of group and individual knowledge and the solving of problems from multiple viewpoints. Thematic seminarsinclude research-based best practices from the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), ELCCStandards, action research, portfolio development, and technology utilization.
The tradi-
tional knowledge base of leadership/management that features educational theory, history, management, school/community relations, human resource management, nance and law are integrated throughout the program.
The curriculum spirals with reviewed concepts, new concepts, discovery, and re ection.
Each
seminar is infused with case study analysis and simulation exercises of technical leadership, instructional
67
leadership, and professional development for school improvement. The seminars build skills gradually, from observing, participating, leading small teams to whole faculty, and nally to leading district teams. Seminar I: Facilitating a high performance learning community. This establishes the foundation of aligning core beliefs with strategic structures and mission and vision of establishing distributed accountability. Along with these skills, candidates are taught to lead teacher teams in discussing school improvement.
They
begin by deciding what kinds of data are needed to depict a clear picture of the school's present level of achievement, collecting the data, and nally planning activities for school improvement. data is readily available from standardized methods of collection.
Some of the
The teams decide what other data is
needed to examine school practices, what students are taught, how they are taught and what is expected of them. The team analyzes data and studies research about teaching methods that have proven successful for students.
This provides an initial plan for school improvement so they will have the skills needed to
exercise the best practices of making data-driven decisions and building a vision. At this point, training in technologyis infused to introduce integration of technology with teaching and learning, as well as to assist with the establishment of a student's electronic portfolio. After successfully completing the rst seminar, participants receive their Teacher Leader endorsement from the Louisiana Department of Education. This is a new certi cate endorsement awarded by the state. Seminar II: Organizational management and legal issues.
The focus here is on the legal and scal is-
sues of organizing the learning environment, building and leading eective teams, and coaching for school improvement. At this point and throughout the program, candidates are required to complete eld-based activities at a variety of school levels and central o ce settings. Through these activities, the candidates lay a foundation for the practices of collaboration and shared decision-making by leading teams through problem-solving, consensus-building, and information-sharing. They are also expected to demonstrate e cient and eective use of time, space, people, and resources to maximize student learning.
Through case
studies, students utilize federal regulations, state laws, and local policies to inform decision-making; through simulations, they make ethical decisionsin various school management situations. Seminar III: Human resources and school-community relations. Here participants explore communication with the learning community, sta ng and induction, and needs-based professional development of teachers. Developing eective interpersonal relationships with faculty, sta, and community is the focus of the course, which lays the foundational skills needed for best practices such as developing relationships and communicating eectively.
Throughout this seminar, students complete eld-based activities of human resource
management, including recruitment, selection, induction, and professional development. Seminar IV: School leader as instructional facilitator.
This program strand concentrates on leading
improvement in literacy and numeracy instruction, as well as methods of dierentiating instruction to meet the needs of all students.
The instructional program is explored through an analysis and evaluation of
curriculum, student assessment, and instruction.
Emphasis is placed on the supervision of the teaching
and learning process as it relates to continuous school improvement. The candidates learn how standards, teaching, and learning are dynamic structures in constant ux; thus, the best practices of mapping and monitoring the curriculum are continuously practiced. Seminar V: School leader as change agent.
School improvement with an emphasis on the importance
of change and the best practices of action research and data analysis is the objective of this course. Each candidate concentrates on leading change by understanding self and others, directing sta in the creation of professional development, and working with others in creating a personalized learning environment. Students make nal preparations for the action research project to be completed by the end of the nal semester prior to graduation. Seminar VI: The internship. The nal seminar is a full internship, with candidates participating in the beginning and ending activities of the school year, totaling 150 hours of eld-based experience.
During
this time, the action research project is completed, in which the students and their respective stakeholders collaborate on a selected topic for school improvement. More advanced technology training is included in this seminar; it is designed primarily to provide guidance in the re nement of the candidates' electronic portfolios and to support their action research projects. Leadership projects and artifacts are maintained in an electronic portfolio that demonstrates individual growth. The prospective leaders work to re ne their
68
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
electronic portfolios for the nal defense in their educational leadership master's degree program.
3.5.1 Selection and Assignment of Field Sites Recent research (e.g., Bottoms, 2004; Davis, 2005) supports the use of practicing administrators in the eld as role models to mentor and help close the gaps among leadership knowledge, theory, and practice. Mentored experiences over an extended period of time provide the opportunity for greater understanding on the part of those mentored and are designed to demonstrate the application of the knowledge and skills emphasized in each instructional seminar. In the School Leader Preparation program, worksites include public and private educational units. Those schools and systems used in the preparation of candidates are diverse in community type, school type, enrollment, grade con guration, race, income level, academic performance scores and/or performance designations. According to Bottoms (2004), educational administration programs need to select knowledgeable, experienced administrators to serve as coaches and mentors. In the program, potential mentors are nominated by their supervisors and/or superintendents. Each mentor is selected based on leadership experience, certi cation type and area, professional activities, personal qualities, successful use of technology, commitment to mentoring interns, and successful participation in a mentor training seminar. The mentor training seminar provides information on tools and strategies to support and supervise eld-based administrative experiences and consists of a program overview, coaching techniques, shared decision-making activities, and assessment and evaluation procedures for assessing program candidates.
3.5.2 Assessment of Candidates Assessment of program participants is accumulated as artifacts in an electronic portfolio platform of PASSPORT, developed by the Louisiana Department of Education.
Artifacts are documents that provide evi-
dence of a standards-based leadership experience and include traditional written narratives and tests, selfassessments, and eld-based observation assessments. Periodically throughout the six semesters of the program, candidates must successfully pass through a series of portals or gates in order to continue to the next program component. They are required to submit a minimum of two artifacts per seminar for their portfolio. These documents are evaluated using standards-based rubrics developed by university faculty and advisory council members. Students are required to cite the relevant standards for school leaders with respect to the evidence submitted. In addition, each portfolio artifact is accompanied by a re ective summary describing how it documents mastery of the related standard. The portfolio documents become part of the formative and summative evaluation process. In addition to traditional methods (e.g., written work, tests) for evaluating and monitoring student progress, the acquisition of skills associated with each seminar is documented by the artifacts and evaluated through the use of rubrics. As students progress through the program, each portfolio entry is evaluated by the professor of record. As part of the summative program assessment, artifacts are formally presented for defense before a committee of graduate faculty members and eld administrators serving as mentors.
3.5.3 Methods for Evaluating and Modifying Program Components Program evaluation regarding the eectiveness of curriculum and eld activities in meeting the needs of their respective school districts is being conducted through surveys completed by program participants, mentors and/or clinical supervisors, and university faculty. Over time, school leadership success factors (e.g., professional development opportunities, student discipline, and teacher satisfaction) that are not measured by traditional accountability reports, notably standardized test scores, are examined to determine the longitudinal impact of the school leadership preparation program and its prospective leaders. For each eld-based project completed and implemented by candidates, a self-developed survey is distributed to stakeholders (e.g., teachers, parents, students [as appropriate], administrators) to determine their level of satisfaction with the overall performance of the candidates during that seminar.
Additionally, follow-up surveys are
69
distributed to school and district administrators to determine their perceptions of the preparedness and eectiveness of program participants involved in eld experiences and internships at their respective sites. Each candidate is surveyed at the end of Seminars II and V to determine individual levels of satisfaction with the program and the quality of instruction. These evaluations are used to provide the data necessary to monitor, evaluate, and modify the program as needed. The data are collected through the PASS-PORT electronic assessment system. Other data, such as student opinions of teaching and exit surveys are used to provide additional information regarding the quality of the program. Analysis of the results is conducted by the university sta and members of the advisory council, who then carry on the processes of program evaluation, formal discussion and dialogue, and collaborative decision making before making recommendations for program improvement. Approved changes are then systematically studied to measure their eects on the program and, consequently, on the leaders being produced by this program. Results from Surveys and Assessments The rst two cohorts completed surveys, some individually and some in focus groups. Mentors and eld site school principals completed an open-ended evaluation of the program. Superintendents wrote letters of opinion. Professors completed an electronic evaluation. Cohort Surveys and Assessments When asked if the rst 6 hours met their expectations, students asked for more eld experiences and less lecture (face-to-face) time, additional assessment during the semester, and extra eld time with their mentors. They felt a lack of district and school recognition, support, and approval. Some felt afraid to talk to their site principal, even when they had a school leader mentor from another site. Some reported that other teachers who had completed another graduate program complained about the attention and release time for cohort members. They reported the need for more communication with mentors and release time for eld experience. The artifacts generated by each student in their electronic portfolios have been, on the whole, judged to be of high quality. (See Appendix D.) Evaluations from Mentors and Field Site School Principals When asked about their impression of the program, school leaders notedthat they really appreciated the attention and skill development for aspiring school leaders and wished that their preparation program had been this intense. They expressed a concern for time spent away from the classroom to conduct eld experience. A need for a thorough mentor preparation workshop was noted. Several respondents expressed appreciation for the advanced learning they received as a result of site visits by the university mentor: as in, You have made me think of my school and student achievement in new ways I never thought of before. I have learned so much from this experience. One principal took the opposite point of view by criticizing the program when he said, I will encourage any of my teachers who want to get a master of education degree in school leadership to go to Mississippi. They don't have this crazy program there. Teachers should be able to get a degree without all of this interference from the university. I don't have time to deal with this. Clarify what this quote means Letters from Superintendents Superintendents expressed concerns of sustainability and wondered if their district could continue the leadership program if funds were reduced.
Others did not want their teachers out of the classroom and
thus were opposed to release time. Some expressed concern about nominating teachers for the leadership program, resulting in perceived favoritism and complaints. One superintendent said, I am proceeding with caution about this dierent way of preparing school leaders. I need to know more. She continued to explain that she had not been active in the design of the program, and had sent a representative in her place. Now, during implementation, she felt like she needed to be more involved in the decision making process. Survey of Professor Views Some professors believed that the new program could make a real impact on PK-12 student achievement and school leadership. A few felt that the most of the workload for design and implementation was being placed on junior faculty, without compensation for tenure and promotion. Other professors were very concerned about the amount of eld work and didn't know how they were going to have time to travel to districts. These professors were concerned about their subject area being covered thoroughly due to the lack
70
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
of real lecture time. Lecturing about subjects such as law, nance, history of education, and other subjects were a very important missing ingredient of the new program. Since the content and method of delivery of many parts of the program had been mandated through the process of state approval and strict curriculum alignment to standards, some professors believed that their academic freedom had been curtailed.
Still,
others believed that their academic freedoms had been breeched due to the. Reality Check: Lessons Learned and Challenges Faced Change is di cult, especially in the implementation stages.
Even though partnerships were formed
to create shared and distributed leadership for the development of the new preparation and development program, at this time some resistance to change is being experienced. Perhaps those who chose not to be involved in the design process may become involved now as the program is modi ed as an outcome of the program evaluations. Not surprisingly, this new process of preparing school leaders through eld experience was a major paradigm shift for area school leaders, especially superintendents. Assurances that this was a partnership and paradigm shift were di cult to accept by many area leaders. In addition, school district leaders were reluctant to nominate exemplary teachers for the program fearing accusations of favoritism from teachers. The shift to the new paradigm at the university level was met with the challenge to include more people in the process. Field experiences are a challenge to manage. Some clinical supervisors and mentors have to experience additional professional development in order to provide appropriate guidance to candidates.
During the
implementation of the program, the university initially struggled with providing appropriate training of mentors as well as university sta. With training and additional support from SREB programs, such as the Training Mentors for School Improvement module, this process was better facilitated. Future plans include addressing the challenges of diversity and social justice, moving away from the status quo, and nding new solutions to unanticipated problems. Murphy (1992) has stated that school leaders were often former teachers residing within a 25 to 50 mile radius of the school they now lead. Additionally, most schools seem to promote from within with little regard to skill. If a broader pool of leaders could be tapped, the educational and skill level may increase. It is hoped that a more national and global leadership community may be developed using the technology of distance learning and capstone experiences. In this way, professors, administrators, and administrative candidates could share and bene t from appropriate eld experiences and unfamiliar perspectives in their region or state. The authors believe that the new program of leadership development and preparation will be successful, even though the program is in its infancy. However, according to a study conducted by Davis (2005), leadership programs that were concept-driven, cohort-based, and eld-based scored higher on the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA), received higher performance ratings by supervisors, and were perceived by teachers as being more eective. It is hoped that this new leadership program will train new leaders to make a notable dierence in school improvement and student achievement in Southeastern Louisiana University's service area. Conclusion The recent focus on the importance of school leadership and its eects on school improvement has put school leader preparation programs under scrutiny and prompted them to redesign.
Even though new
research is being conducted, the task of preparing educational administrators has suered from a lack of clarity and paucity of systematic scholarly inquiry. This examination of Southeastern Louisiana University' new program contributes to the knowledge base for school leadership preparation because it is a leader in the arena of state, university, and school district(s) collaboration to educate all students eectively and equitably. A deeper understanding about the impact of school leadership as a means for promoting social justice and democracy especially in the Deep South are needed. The ongoing outcomes of Southeastern Louisiana University's school leader preparation program may provide better understandings of how to integrate powerful transformative and instructional learning experiences into preparation program design, content, and eld experience to develop leadership capacity. There is much to be learned as these new leadership preparation programs unfold throughout the nation. It is hoped that an ever-evolving research base will help all
71
institutions of school leadership preparation and professional development to learn from each other. References Bottoms, G., & O'Neill, K. (April, 2001).
Preparing a new breed of principals:
It's time for ac-
tion. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board. (01V17) Monograph retrieved April 2, 2006 from http://www.sreb.org/main/Leadership/pubs/01V17_Time_for_Action.pdf. Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2004). Principals excellence program: Developing eective school leaders through unique university-district partnership. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, 5 (2), 24-36. Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Stanford, CA: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute in conjunction with the nance project commissioned by the Wallace Foundation. Fry, B., O'Neill, K. & Bottoms, G. (2006). Schools can't wait: Accelerating the redesign of university principal preparation programs. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board. Grogan, M. & Andrews, R. (2002). De ning preparation and professional development for the future. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 233-256. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Re ections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351. Hess,
F.
(No.3).
M.,
&
Hoover
Kelly,
P.
Institution,
M.
(2005,
Leland
Summer).
Stanford
The
Junior
accidental
University.
principal.
Retrieved
Education
May
17,
2006,
Next. from
http://www.educationnext.org/20053/34.html Hill-Winstead, M. F. & Stader, D. (2004, April). Responding to the challenge of reforming leadership preparation programs: A standards based preparation pyramid. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. King, D. (2002). The changing shape of leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 61-63. Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 37-40. Leithwood, K. (2005). Educational leadership (Rev. ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and Education, Laboratory for Student Success. Retrieved April 18, 2006, from www.temple.edu/lss/pdf/Leithwood.pdf. Levine, A. (March, 2005). Educating school leaders. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.
1
Louisiana
cation
Educational
Structure.
Leaders
Retrieved
Network.
May
(2005)
24,
2006
from
Educational
Leadership
Certi -
http://www.leadlouisiana.net/site100-
01/1001669/docs/ed_leadership_certi cation_structure.pdf. Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397. Mazzeo, C. (September 12, 2003).
Issue brief of the Educational Policy Studies Division, National
Governors Association Center for Best Practices. Washington, DC: Wallace Foundation, National Governors' Association. Murphy, J. (1992). The landscape of principal preparation: Reframing the education of school administrators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press. Portin, B. S., Knapp, M., Murphy, J., & Beck, L. (2003). Self-re ective renewal in schools. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2001). The principalship: A re ective practice perspective. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Southworth, G. & Doughty, J. (2006). A ne British blend. Educational Leadership, 63(8), 51. Stader, D. (April, 2003). A framework for re ection and clarifying dispositions. Paper presented at the Louisiana Association of Professors of Educational Administration.
Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond,
Louisiana. U.S. 2001.
Department Washington,
of DC:
Education. O ce
of
(2002,
January
Elementary
and
8).
Secondary
No
Child
Left
Education.
Behind
[Online].
Act
of
Available:
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf. Waters, thirty rora,
J.
years CO:
of
T.,
Marzano,
research
Mid-continent
tells
R. us
Research
J.,
&
about for
McNulty,
B.
A.
the
of
leadership
eect
Education
and
(2003).
Learning.
on
Balanced
leadership:
student
achievement.
Retrieved
April
2,
2006,
What Aufrom
72
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
www.mcrel.org/topics/productDetail.asp?topicsID=7&productID=144. West, R. F. (November 7, 2003). Integrating the SREB modules into the principal preparation program at East Tennessee State University: A progress report. Paper prepared for the University Continuing Education
25 Convention, Learning for Leadership and Leadership for Learning. Portland, OR.
Association
Appendix A Beginning Principals FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW It may have seemed like you were thrown to the wolves when you became principals. Tell us what we need to teach new and aspiring principals. 1. What did you need to be successful? 2. What content in college classes did you need to use? 3. How should we address this content? 4. What types of eld activities do candidates need? 5. How can we best prepare candidates to pass the licensure test? 6. What type of support do you need from the university? Appendix B Survey of Region 2 Superintendents and Administrators in Louisiana The task before us: A RIGOROUS SELECTION SYSTEM A rigorous system that chooses only the best candidates for principal preparation will encourage more talented educators to seek out leadership programs, National Governors Association. How can universities and school systems work together to tap or select the right individuals for leadership preparation? Here are some ideas gathered from brainstorming sessions at the SREB Leadership Initiative summer conference. Please check the ideas that you will support for recruitment and selection in your district. WHAT SHOULD WE CONSIDER? _ Demonstrates success in raising achievement for all students _ Shows leadership in coaching other teachers to raise student achievement _ Recommended by high-performing principals _ Implemented innovative learning strategies in their classrooms _ Challenges all students through rigorous, standards-based teaching _ Integrates technology into daily teaching _ Good communications, human relations and organizational skills _ Ability to motivate _ National Board certi ed _ won awards and recognition _ earned a master's degree in a content area _ Active in professional organizations _ Provide professional development for other teachers _ Worked collaboratively on teaching/learning issues _ Written successful grant proposals focused on student achievement _ Works successfully on teaching teams _ Can analyze research and apply it to practice _ Uses student data and work samples to make instructional decisions _ Shows leadership in the larger community _ Articulates and implement a vision _ Committed to continuous improvement HOW SHOULD WE SCREEN POTENTIAL CANDIDATES? _ Joint screening by university and school system leaders _ Nomination by principals, peers and parents
25
http://www.ucea.edu/
73
_ Assessment tools like Myers-Briggs, leadership style inventories, 360-degree competency-based instruments _ Self-assessment _ Portfolios documenting teaching and leadership skills _ Screening protocols based on the SREB leadership success factors _ Direct interviews and conversations with peers _ Observations and videos of classroom and peer teaching _ Simulations and role plays _ Biographical sketches _ Demonstration of eective oral and written communications skills _ Candidate analysis of case studies _ Willingness to work in high-need schools _ Mini-courses that expose potential candidates to the challenges of leadership _ Gateway internships to gauge leadership potential _ List other ideas
3.5.4 Block 1- Organizational Management 1. Bring the school vision to life by using it to guide shared-decision making about students and the instructional programs enhancing sta/ school and community relations. 2. Monitor
and
evaluate
school
operations
and
use
feedback
appropriately
to
enhance
eective-
ness/manage scal resources/time management. 3. Apply laws, policies, regulations and procedures fairly, consistently, wisely and compassionately that promotes positive school environment. Additional Activities: must have the ability to organize, oversee, and promote special education.
3.5.5 Block 2 - Building Management 1. Maintain open communication with the school community, and eectively convey high expectations for student learning to the community. 2. Work collaboratively with the school community to develop and maintain a shared school vision. 3. Use research and data from multiple sources to design and implement professional dev. act. 4. Provide incentives for learning and growth and encourage participation in professional dev. activities at national/ state and parish levels. 5. To eectively use teacher evaluation. Additional Activities:
•
· · ·
Scenarios to role play. Attend two similar parental involvement activities and compare. Add: Con ict Resolution .
Concerns: 1. $$ - new limitations on funds. 2. Assessments: individual or group?
74
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.5.6 Block 3- Community Relations 1. Write a mission statement. 2. Communicate mission statement to school community. 3. Understand techniques/strategies for shared decision making and team building. 4. Identify organizational structure and team members and the role of each. 5. Develop an instrument to survey the school community foster and strengthen the vision.
3.5.7 Block 4 - School Leader as Instructional Facilitator 1. Analyze test scores individual, grade level, school wide, district wide. 2. Observe, assess and evaluate instruction. 3. Analysis of lesson plans. 4. Knowledge in curriculum development by grade level and subject area. 5. Implement and follow through with the evaluative process. Concerns: Time/ support from the university
3.5.8 Block 5 - School Leader as Change Agent 1. Strategies for monitoring progress. 2. Methods of data collection. 3. Research, measurement, and assessment strategies. 4. Technological use. 5. Security and allocating resources. 6. Interview process for new teachers (design the school process0. Include interpretation of SAM. 7. Question: Timeline for cohorts.
3.5.9 Block 6 - Internship 1. Each system will be responsible for their own interns. 2. Concern over the number of contact hours: 2/6 hours. 3. Dierent setting important. 4. Involved in the opening and closing of schools. 5. Financing the interns? 6. How much involved in personal? Legal Question. Appendix D FOCUS QUESTIONS AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS COHORTS 1 and 2 This is the protocol for your focus group discussion. None of your professors will be present. This ensures that your discussion and responses will be private. You will need to select a facilitator and a recorder. Discuss each question and provide your input. Thank you for your participation. Did the rst seminar meet your expectations?
• • • • •
need more practical, real-life eld experience need less lecture-type presentation of information more hands-on we liked our mentors and appreciated eld experiences, especially shadowing can SLU do more to encourage district participation? more feedback from instructors throughout the semester
75
What does a Teacher Leader need?
• • • • •
district recognition, support and approval district communication with principals principal support and encouragement (afraid to talk to their site principal) greater communication time o from teaching position (release time)
What would you like to learn in Seminar 2?
• •
focus on legal issues what is coaching?
What would you like to learn in remaining seminars?
• •
what I need to know to be an eective, licensed administrator we are concerned about being prepared for the position of administrator our degree will imply knowledge that we must have
What other comments do you have?
• • • •
additional assessment during the semester extra eld time with their mentors lack of district and school recognition, support, and approval other teachers who had completed another graduate program complained about the attention and release time
3.6
THE
CULTURE
ASSESSMENT
AND
AUDIT:
STRATEGIC
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
Note:
A
LEADERSHIP PLANNING
TOOL
IN
FOR
DIVERSE
26
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Schools and colleges around the world must be culturally competent in order to prepare students to succeed in an increasingly diverse and globally interconnected environment. Generally de ned, culturally competent educational organizations value diversity in both theory and practice and make teaching and learning relevant and meaningful to students of various cultures (Klotz, 2006).Educational leaders must be equipped with the necessary tools to assess how well policies, programs, and practices align with the needs of diverse groups and prepare people to interact globally.The culture audit is a valuable organizational assessment tool to guide strategic planning for diversity and global competence. Potential domains of focus and data collection strategies for schools and colleges are illustrated here.
26
Cultural competence assessment strategies could
This content is available online at
76
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
be included in graduate educational leadership programs to better prepare educational administrators to eectively manage diverse schools and colleges. What is a Culture Audit? Researchers agree that school culture is an important, yet often overlooked, component of school improvement (Freiberg, 1998; Peterson & Deal, 1998). Wagner and Madsen-Copas (2002) stress the value of culture audits in determining the quality and health of school cultures and recommends using a ve step auditing process that includes: interviews, observations, surveys, checklists, and presentations to community stakeholders. The concept of school culture is further complicated by the multiplicity of racial/ethnic cultures that are typically represented in schools and colleges. For this reason, organizational culture assessments are essential to ensuring the development of cultural competence in schools (Lindsey, Robins, & Terrell, 2003). Culture audits examine how diverse cultural perspectives are re ected in the values and behaviors manifested in the overall school culture (National Center for Cultural Competence, 2005). Just as a nancial audit reveals strengths and gaps in nancial procedures and practices to inform strategic plans for nancial improvement, a culture audit focuses on how well an organization incorporates perspectives of diverse groups to inform comprehensive school improvement. Primary Domains of Analysis in School and College Settings Practicing educational leaders frequently want to know what a culture audit really looks like.
While
auditing formats may vary depending on the speci c school, college, or district, there are some key areas that can be examined to determine strengths and needs. To help educational leaders visualize how a culture audit might look, the diagram below re ects ten potential domains of focus for conducting culture audits in schools and colleges. The domains are not meant to be exhaustive and may be expanded or reduced to accommodate the needs and interests of the individual organization.
77
Based on professional experience, research, and literature on organizational cultural competence and pro ciency (Bustamante, 2005), examples of culturally competent practices are listed under each domain to provide a better sense of the kind of factors that can be observed in a culture audit. 1. Vision/Mission
• •
Stated commitment to diversity. Integrated global perspectives.
1. Curriculum
• • •
Literature selections re ect a variety of cultural perspectives. Integration of world views, geography, and history. Linguistic and content objectives are addressed for second language learners.
1. Students
78
CHAPTER 3.
• •
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Balanced racial/ethnic representation in advanced placement, honors, gifted programs. Regular meetings held with randomly selected groups to obtain feedback and consider student voice in decision-making.
• • • •
Variety of student leadership development opportunities for all students. Observed inter-racial/inter-ethnic social integration among students. Support programs to promote achievement and retention of lower achieving groups. Student-initiated community service.
1. Teachers/faculty
• • •
Conscious recruitment of diverse groups. Mentoring and support programs for new teachers. Vertical and horizontal teacher teaming according to individual strengths, leadership abilities, and interests.
• • •
Conscious integration eorts to diverse teacher teams. Professional development that addresses race, culture, and language opportunities and challenges. Focused, long term professional development.
1. Teaching and learning
• • • • • •
Dierentiated instruction. Researched strategies that account for various learning styles. Technology integration. Connections to student culture and prior knowledge. Second language learning and teaching strategies. Service learning.
1. Communities
• •
Outreach to various local community constituency groups. Inclusion of all potential stakeholder groups in community-building forums through use of parent liaisons.
• • •
Parent involvement programs for all culture groups. Established national and global ties through partnerships with similar organizations. Realization and utilization of the electronic community for relationship building and sourcing best practices.
1. Con ict resolution
• • •
Recognition of the inevitability of intercultural con ict. Peer mediation and proactive approaches to con ict resolution. Practices to ensure classroom and school safety for all.
1. Evaluation and Assessments
79
• • • •
Authentic student assessments to complement standardized tests. Formative and summative program evaluations. 360 degree teacher and administrator evaluations. Ongoing organizational assessments aimed at continual improvement.
1. Sta
• • • •
Opportunities for sta input into policies and procedures. Professional development opportunities on attitudes and behaviors toward diversity. Recognition of informal leadership roles. Focus on sta growth and integration.
1. Events/celebrations/traditions
• • • •
Examination of organizational traditions to check for exclusive/inclusive practices. Diverse representation at events and celebrations. Celebrations that re ect various cultures and introduce the community to new cultures. Integration of experienced and entry-level personnel in change management.
Data Collection Approaches In conducting a culture audit, data collection methods would ideally include mixed methods that combine traditional quantitative and qualitative methodology. Some suggestions for data collection include:
•
Document Analysis of internal/external communications, written curriculum, policies, newsletters, websites, correspondence, brochures, etc.
•
Statistical analysis of demographic and achievement data (existing) to ID gaps and need areas.
•
Checklists
•
Focus Groups and Interviews with various stakeholder groups (include students).
•
Structured Observations of meetings, gatherings, artifacts, décor, social events, to check out actual behavior.
•
Diagrams of informal leaders (teachers, students, sta members) group interactions.
•
Surveys combined with other methods to triangulate perceptional data.
Data collection may be periodic or ongoing and may be incorporated into already existing assessments (e.g., school climate surveys, community meetings, etc.). Culture audits do not require extensive time or resources. They require the consideration of culture as a factor in student achievement and overall school improvement. Educational leaders and organizations must make a paradigm shift in order to develop culturally competent and pro cient policies, programs, and practices. The paradigm shift involves recognition of the role of culture in human existence and its in uence on organizational and individual values, attitudes, and behaviors. Culture audits help make cultural factors in schools more tangible so that appropriate and eective school improvements can be more appropriately targeted.
80
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Click Here to access The School-wide Cultural Competence Observation Checklist (Bustamante and Nelson, 2007; all rights reserved)
27
References Bustamante, R.M. (2005). Essential features of cultural pro ciency in American international schools in Latin America: A Delphi study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of San Diego. Freiberg, H.J. (1998). Measuring school climate: let me count the ways. Educational Leadership, 56(1), 22-26. Klotz, M.B. (2006).
Culturally competent schools: Guidelines for secondary school principals.
NASP
Journal, March, 11-14. National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). Lindsey, R., Robins, K., & Terrell, R., (2003). Cultural Pro ciency: A Manual for School Leaders (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. National Center for Cultural Competence (2005). Cultural and linguistic competence: De nitions, frameworks, and implications. Retrieved from www.nccccurricula.info/culturalcompetence.html. Peterson, K.D. & Deal, T.E. (1998). How leaders in uence culture of schools. Educational Leadership, 56(1), 28-30. Wagner, C. & Madsen-Copas, P. (2002).An audit of the culture starts with two handy tools. Journal of Sta Development, Summer, 42-53. National Sta Development Council. Rebecca McBride Bustamante is an Assistant Professor in the Educational Leadership Department at Sam Houston State University in Texas, USA. [email protected]
28
3.7 A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés
Note:
29
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Introduction Much has been written about the importance of mentoring for newcomers to school leadership positions (Daresh & Playko, 1992, 1994).
However, a review of the literature on mentoring reveals that much of
the written discussion is from the mentor's point of view or for the bene t of the mentor. Research exists on what makes a good mentor (Galbraith, 2001; Johnson, 2006), the stages and phases of the mentoring relationship (Chao, Walz & Gardner, 1997; Kram, 1985; Mertz, 2004), and successful mentoring programs (Kochan, 2002; Sprague & Hostinsky, 2002). There appears to be less emphasis placed on helping a protégé prepare for a mentoring relationship (Daresh & Playko, 1995; Mullen, 2006). Many newly hired principals can expect to enter into a mentoring relationship. At least 32 states currently have legislative policies that support mentoring programs for new administrators (Alsbury & Hackman, 2006). Some will be assigned to a more experienced principal in a formal mentoring program. Others will informally pair up with someone they look up to in their district. As they enter into mentoring partnerships, they will need to be prepared to be successful as protégés in those relationships. It is essential that
27 28 29
http://cnx.org/content/m13691/latest/Culture_Audit.pdf [email protected] This content is available online at
81
educational leadership courses prepare future principals for those mentoring relationships.
Traditionally,
educational leadership professors instruct students in leadership theories, decision-making, school law and nance, curriculum design, public relations, and school management basics.
However, it is questionable
whether the traditional curriculum in educational leadership preparation programs provide future administrative candidates with the tools for being successful as protégés in their future mentoring relationships. Zachary (2000) has characterized mentoring as a mutual learning partnership; however, she emphasizes the importance of the protégé taking the initiative in the relationship. In her book, The Mentor's Guide: Facilitating Eective Learning Relationships, Zachary encourages the protégé to intentionally pursue a mentor. She provides re ective activities that help the protégé identify the qualities desired in a mentor, as well as articulating the protégé's learning needs. The learning partnership proposed by Zachary suggests a move away from the concept of `mentor as superior' and `protégé as passive subordinate' to more of a two-way, power-free, and mutually bene cial relationship. In this conceptualization, the mentor's role shifts from sage on the stage to guide on the side. The mentor takes the role of a facilitator. The protégé takes responsibility for outlining the learning goals, setting priorities, and becoming increasingly self-directed. Mentor and protégé share accountability and responsibility for achieving the protégé's learning goals (Zachary, 2000). Rationale for Mentoring Aspiring Principals Highly skilled school leaders are not born, nor do they emerge from traditional graduate programs in school administration fully prepared to lead (Southern Regional Education Board, 2007).
It is generally
recognized that they will need guidance from a more experienced school leader in their early years of administration. The National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP, 2003) in Making the Case for Principal Mentoring, reported that principals are traditionally thrown into their jobs without a lifejacket (p. 8), unprepared for the demands of the position, feeling isolated and without guidance. Workplace mentoring is critical for inexperienced school leaders so as to provide a bridge between theory learned in graduate school and the complex realities of contemporary school leadership. Although formal mentoring processes are often designed primarily to ful ll organizational needs, mentoring is essentially about learning. Zachary (2000) states one of the principal reasons that mentoring relationships fail is that the learning process is not tended to and the focus of learning goals is not maintained (p. 1). There is a need to help aspiring principals cultivate the disposition of embracing mentoring as an opportunity to further their professional learning goals. Furthermore, it is imperative that educational administration students understand that they play a critical role in preparing themselves for this future adult learning partnership called mentoring (Zachary, 2000). From a learning perspective, future principals need to have the ability to assess both the strengths and weaknesses of their leadership skills, re ect on these, and then make adjustments as needed. As they enter into the mentoring relationships that will assist them in this process, they should demonstrate the selfdirection that is characteristic of adult learners (Knowles, 1980).
A healthy mentoring relationship is a
prime example of adults engaging in a learning endeavor together. As Zachary (2005) points out: Mentoring is the quintessential expression of self-directed learning. At the heart of self-directed learning (and mentoring) is individual responsibility for learning. Self-responsibility means the learner accepts ownership and accountability (individually and with others) for setting personal learning objectives, developing strategies, nding resources, and evaluating learning. In a mentoring relationship, the responsibility is mutually de ned and shared (p. 225). I believe that future school leaders, as adult learners who know their own learning needs best, should take the initiative to engage in mentoring relationships and I emphasize this to graduate students preparing to be school principals.
In the course titled Mentoring for Educational Leadership, one of my goals was
to focus on the importance of mentoring relationships in the life of a leader.
I discovered through class
discussion that students held two common opinions of how to nd a mentor: (a) one should wait to be assigned a mentor in a new job, or (b) there would be someone who would seek them out and volunteer to mentor them. My own knowledge of adult learning, combined with this eye-opening feedback from the students, strengthened my rationale for creating an assignment in this course that would prepare the students to be proactive protégés, taking the initiative to seek their own mentors. I reorganized the curriculum in a Mentoring for Educational Leadership course in the educational leadership preparation program at the
82
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
University of XXXXXX in an eort to assist future school principals in developing the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of eective protégéship. The Assignment: Seek A Mentor Students in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, oered during the 2007 summer term were informed that their major assignment was to (a) choose someone they would like to have as a mentor, (b) approach that individual with the request for mentoring, and (c) conduct an initial mentoring session. When this assignment was announced on the rst evening of class, the looks on the faces of the students, and their ood of questions, told me that they never predicted such a requirement in the course. The syllabus description emphasized that they would be learning about mentoring new teachers. However, I chose to teach this course around the concept of the mentoring constellation (Stanley & Clinton, 1992). Stanley and Clinton propose that every individual should have a mentoring constellation, which includes an upward mentor, peer mentors and a downward mentoring relationship with a protégé. Thus they believe that we all need a mentor and we all need to be mentoring someone. When it comes to peer mentors, we need two types: an ally within our organization, and a con dant who is outside our organization (Searby, 2007). Based on this model, I organized each class session to address the various levels of the mentoring constellation. One third of the class time was devoted to preparing the students to approach their upward mentor. One third of the time was spent in peer mentoring sessions with pairs of students in the class using prompts designed to help them gain self-knowledge and to be re ective. The remaining time was spent on material pertaining to downward mentoring, speci cally, mentoring new teachers. This article, however, will focus only on the portion of class that prepared students to ask for a mentor and become eective protégés. The Protégé Preparation Process Students were made aware that there are preparations they should make before entering into a mentoring relationship. In order to take the initiative in forming a learning partnership, students needed to be armed with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that would enable them to be eective protégés (Searby & Tripses, 2007).
Daresh and Playko (1995) suggest that the skills of protégéship can be acquired.
In
the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, I addressed the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that students should develop in order to be eective protégés through a variety of learning activities.
The
framework for protegeship developed by Searby and Tripses (2007) and illustrated here, gave guidance to the process.
Characteristics for Eective Protégéship Knowledge
Basic understanding of the teaching processBasic understanding of school leadershipUnderstanding of various types of mentoringAwareness of potentials and pitfalls of mentoring
Skills
Goal settingCommunication skillsCapacity to seek out and act upon feedbackRe ection
Dispositions
Willingness to learn. Self-knowledgeDemonstration of initiativeMaintaining con dentialityAwareness of ethical considerations
Adapted from Daresh & Playko, 1995; Mullen, 2005; Portner, 2002; Searby & Tripses, 2006; Zachary, 2000. Developing Knowledge for Protégéship In the area of knowledge acquisition, the students in this course gained an overview of the various mentoring models, an awareness of the potential bene ts and pitfalls of mentoring relationships, and howto information for approaching someone to be a formal mentor.
Dr.
Mark Searby, whose expertise is
mentoring in the business and non-pro t sector, delivered the initial overview lecture.
He covered the
history of mentoring, the need for mentoring, the crucial dynamics of mentoring, what mentoring is and is not, the challenges to protégés, and an overview of the mentoring process. This lecture set the stage for the
83
course (Searby, 2007). In an online discussion on Blackboard following this introductory lecture, students almost unanimously said that they had not previously considered their need for a mentor until this lecture, but afterward nearly all expressed a change in perspective and an awareness of their need for a mentor. Subsequent class sessions focused on gaining additional knowledge of the mentoring process and the nutsand-bolts of mentoring. Students learned how to set ground rules for the mentoring relationship, how to identify when a mentoring relationship has become dysfunctional, and how to accomplish closure to the formal arrangement. They prepared a mentoring agreement that would be signed by their mentor and themselves. As mentioned previously, material from Zachary's (2000) book, The Mentor's Guide: Facilitating Eective Learning Relationships, provided helpful activities for preparing for the process of mentoring. Developing Skills for Protégéship Skills necessary for becoming an eective protégé include goal setting, communication, the capacity to seek and act on feedback, and re ection (Searby & Tripses, 2007). Special attention was given in class to the development of these skills. Goal setting was an important component for the students preparing to enter a formal mentoring relationship. Before setting their personal and professional goals, students practiced their re ective skills as they conducted two self-assessments. They took the DISC personality inventory and re ected on how it compared with a Myers-Briggs personality inventory previously taken in another course. They conducted a personal strengths and weaknesses inventory and discussed it with their peer partner to bring forth areas that could be addressed in the future upward mentoring relationship. After these activities, they composed their goals for the mentoring relationship that they were about to enter. Several class sessions focused on learning the skills of Cognitive Coaching (Costa & Garmston, 1997) which emphasizes active listening and giving re ective prompts. Students practiced these skills with their peer mentors in class using structured scenarios, and oered feedback on the eectiveness of one another's coaching skills. This exercise provided additional practice with the skills of seeking feedback and re ning communication skills. Constant personal re ection was an element of each course activity. portance of re ection in the learning process.
Zull (2002) emphasizes the im-
He states that while experience is necessary for learning,
re ection is required because re ection is searching for connections -literally. Thus, dialogue that promotes re ection is a natural way of learning (p. 164). Zachary (2005) also point out the importance of re ection in the mentoring process, stating that transformational learning is facilitated through a process of critical self-re ection (p. 225). As protégés become aware of their existing assumptions, self-awareness begins. As their existing assumptions are challenged, increased self-understanding can prompt them to let go of selflimiting and often unrealistic assumptions that may be holding them back. When this transformation takes place, the protégés have experienced learning which results in more productive thoughts and behaviors. In this leadership course, then, re ection was crucial for protégés to develop and practice. Every assignment included a requirement of written re ection of the students' emergent learning about mentoring. In addition to the important re ective activities, however, there were also some key dispositions that the protégés needed to develop. Developing Dispositions for Protégéship The dispositions necessary to become an eective protégé are willingness to learn, self-knowledge, taking initiative, maintaining con dentiality, and being aware of ethical considerations in the mentoring relationship (Searby & Tripses, 2007). In the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course, students had an opportunity to participate in a number of exercises designed to enhance self-awareness. As mentioned previously, they took the DISC personality inventory and wrote a re ective paper on the relationship of their personality pro le to their future role as a protégé. Each student kept a re ective journal on the peer mentoring sessions conducted in each class period. In Blackboard online discussions, they were asked to share their personal re ections on each class assignment. Students demonstrated their willingness to learn through practice of the newly introduced Cognitive Coaching skills. In addition, they were assigned to read and discuss articles pertaining to mentoring, and were asked to apply each reading to their present life situation or identify how their perspectives had changed as a result of exposure to new knowledge.
84
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
The disposition of `taking initiative' was demonstrated by students' willingness to be courageous by approaching a person they respected and admired and asking that person to enter into a mentoring relationship with them. This proposition, without a doubt, was daunting for nearly all the students, and many admitted they would not have completed this task had it not been a class assignment.
As a part of the
mentoring agreements formed with their mentors, and also with their peer mentors in class, the disposition of maintaining con dentiality was discussed and con dentiality pacts were made. Ethical dilemmas that could arise in the mentor-protégé relationships were covered in class and in online discussions. Examples included how to handle a breach in con dentiality, what to do if a mentor starts to take advantage of the protégé's subordinate status, how to handle issues regarding cross-gender mentoring, and how and when to graciously back out of a mentoring relationship that has gone sour or is no longer satisfactory. Discussion of the Results of the Mentoring Assignment Students were very responsive to the in-class activities designed to help them develop their knowledge, skills, and dispositions for eective protégéship. However, despite their preparation for seeking a mentor, students still had reservations about the major assignment which was to seek out and approach a mentor and participate in an initial mentoring session. Protégés Have Fears When this assignment was explained on the rst night of class, looks of fear and apprehension were observed on the faces of the students. Some students shared candidly that they were being asked to move out of their comfort zones.
However, as the students learned that they would be led through a process
of preparation for approaching a desired mentor, their initial reticence appeared to subside. Each student began sharing names of leaders they admired, considering those they could approach as a mentor. Although the students were apprehensive of engaging in a possible mentorship in the beginning of this course, they were generally surprised that the mentors they approached were so willing to meet with them. The following comments are excerpts from their re ective papers: I was really nervous before making the initial phone call. I wasn't sure that my mentor would have time to really sit down and talk with me this summer. I am happy that I chose her as my mentor. She was very excited about the process and I feel that it will be a rewarding experience. I was immediately apprehensive when I learned that I had to approach someone to become my mentor. I remember feeling very vulnerable at the thought of having my insu ciencies exposed during this process. Nevertheless, I had to complete the assignment. When I made my initial contact with Dr. Parker about meeting with me concerning this assignment for class, she was very glad to be of assistance. I was feeling a little nervous because our meeting had to be more structured than informal. I arrived 10 minutes early, as I remembered my mentor's favorite quote was to be early means to be on time, to be on time means to be late, and to be late is unacceptable. I did not want to start o on the wrong foot. When I arrived at his o ce, he was smiling, pointing to his watch. He told me he was glad that I remembered his biggest pet peeve. I then recited his being on time quote and he laughed. My nervousness seemed to go away. After about 15 minutes of small talk, I brought up the purpose of our meeting. He told me he felt honored that I chose him to be my mentor. Because we had a history of working together, I had mixed emotions about approaching Diane to be my mentor during this next phase in my career. To say I was afraid is truly an understatement! As I sat and pondered this idea, I came up with every excuse why I did not need a mentor. I was afraid that she would turn me down, or think that I wanted her to be my mentor to assist me in getting a job. Selecting a mentor was not as easy as I thought. For fear of rejection, I did not ask my potential mentor directly. I emailed her. She replied and agreed to meet with me, but had to cancel for good reason. I had a second person in mind, so I immediately called my second choice. She graciously accepted and told me she was honored that I asked her because she values the mentoring process. The First Mentoring Session After participating in several class activities designed to clarify their professional learning objectives, each student entered the rst mentoring session with a list of thoughtful and speci c goals for the mentoring relationship. Examples of the goals are too numerous to list here, but in general, it was noted that goals
85
centered on each student's desire to receive guidance from an individual who had proven to be eective in leadership.
Students were also required to discuss the protocols for future mentoring sessions with their
mentors and suggest ground rules for the meetings. Using the template found in Zachary's (2000) Mentor's Guide, students and their mentors lled out a Mentoring Agreement Form which outlined the agreed upon protocols and ground rules.
Students were not required to continue the relationship beyond the initial
meeting for the class assignment, but the majority did ask for and arrange regular mentoring sessions for a speci ed time, ranging from 6 months to 1 year. The Bene ts to the Protégé Toward the end of the course, students were asked to write a re ective paper about their mentoring experience. When asked what the mentoring experience had meant to them and what they learned about becoming a better protégé, the students in the course responded with comments that revealed new insights about mentoring. There were three major themes that emerged in their re ections: (1) seeing their need for a mentor and facing their fears about obtaining one, (2) developing new knowledge, skills and dispositions of protegeship, and (3) gaining awareness of the mentor's role and the protégé's role. Each of these themes will be explained brie y and illustrated with excerpts from the students' re ective journals. Theme 1:
Seeing Their Need for a Mentor and Facing Their Fears.As a part of the Mentoring for
Educational Leadership course, students were asked to identify their own learning goals as they prepared themselves to be administrators.
This activity heightened each student's awareness of his/her need for a
mentor. However, this awareness did not come without the realization that there was a somewhat daunting assignment that their professor was asking them to complete. There were some initial fears expressed about approaching someone to be a mentor to them. After completing the assignment, however, students realized the growth that had come as a result of facing their fears. A sample of their re ections follows: As a protégé, the class has caused me to see the need for a mentor. It has also helped me in addressing the fears of approaching a prospective mentor and in developing a professional attitude of interacting with someone in a mentor relationship. I recognize the fact that I need help and I am willing to accept this assistance. Having to do the assignment decreased some of my apprehensions about securing a prospective mentor. I now understand that mentors usually have a sincere desire to help the protégé. Theme 2:
Developing New Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions of Protégéship.
In the Mentoring for
Educational Leadership course, I designed the learning activities in agreement with Daresh and Playko's (1995) premise that protégéship skills and dispositions can be learned. Knowledge about the many aspects of mentoring was shared in a variety of formats such as lectures, text readings, and guest speakers. Development of skills such as goal setting, learning to communicate eectively, and seeking and re ecting on feedback became the objectives for class assignments and in-class peer mentoring and role playing.
Throughout
the course, students demonstrated their increasing acquisition of the dispositions of protégéship such as willingness to learn, self-knowledge, taking initiative, maintaining con dentiality, and becoming aware of ethical considerations in a mentoring relationship. Sample journal entries reveal this: This class helped me to become a better protégé by allowing me to achieve a greater understanding of myself and the impact I have on others in a leadership role. This class taught me to listen more eectively. This class provided me an increased awareness of how to seek mentors for a speci cgoal or direction for professional and personal growth.I now have added con rmation that "risk-taking" can be enriching in relationships and knowledge development. I will make sure that I set ground rules along with the length of time of the mentoring relationship. I have learned valuable information that I can use in every facet of my life. Theme 3:
Gaining awareness of the mentor's role and the protégé's role.
Students were required to
conduct an initial mentoring session with a chosen mentor, and all did so. Most students stated that they planned to continue meeting with their mentor, and that they were pleased with the prospect of developing a longer term relationship with the mentor. Several students expressed a new understanding of mentoring and an appreciation of what mentoring could mean to them in their professional careers. Fresh insights emerged
86
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
from seeing themselves in the role of proactive protégé in relationship to a new-found mentor: I will make sure that I follow the leadership of my mentor and know that she will lead me in a positive direction. I have advanced tremendously by choosing an in uential mentor who has helped me have a more positive impact on the performance, motivation, job satisfaction and self-esteem of those with whom I work. I have learned that the mentor is not responsible for me; the decisions I make are ultimately mine. The mentor is not God and is not perfect; not omnipresent; not omnipotent; not omniscient. So, I must be honest, transparent, and willing to move on if the trust gets breached. There is a need to help future school leaders learn how to become empowered, eective protégés. One way to aid students in this process is to intentionally design educational leadership course activities that will prepare them to initiate mentoring relationships. There are several bene ts to facilitating the development of the skills of protégéship with educational leadership students. First of all, the students gain an awareness of the dierent types of mentors, learning that there are often multiple mentors in their lives. Second, they come to understand the dierent responsibilities of a protégé and a mentor. A third bene t is that students become aware that not all mentor-protégé relationships are productive, and therefore the students learn how to bring closure to such relationships. Fourth, a productive mentoring relationship helps graduate students bridge theory from educational leadership courses to practice in the real world of school leadership. Finally, empowered protégés ideally take more and more responsibility for their own learning (Searby & Tripses, 2007). Intentional training in protégéship provides graduate students with greatly enhanced capacities to engage in what could be their most powerful learning experience. Implications and Conclusions Educational leadership preparation programs are in a position to make a dierence in a critical aspect of the learning and development of future principals. All new principals will need mentoring, and all will need to know how to be eective protégés. We can enhance their preparation for this role. Although the identi ed knowledge, skills and dispositions of protégéship (Searby & Tripses, 2007) may be found between the lines of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards for educational leadership, intentional teaching about mentoring and the responsibility that students have as protégés in the mentoring relationship may not occur to the extent that would be bene cial to students. In revising the content of this leadership preparation course, I became intentional about teaching future principals about the importance of preparing themselves to be eective protégés as they transitioned into school administration. Students who were in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course hopefully now have a mentoring mindset. They have learned how to prepare themselves to be eective protégés and have overcome reservations associated with acquiring and maintaining a mentor-protégé relationship. As protégés, they are no longer in a passive role, waiting for the mentor's call. They are now positioned to be proactive in seeking a mentor.
Armed with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of eective protégéship, they are ready to
capitalize on the bene ts that can be obtained in a mentoring relationship. I oer my own experience in preparing educational leadership students for mentoring relationships as a possible model for other graduate courses, and would welcome dialogue with others involved in mentoring in higher education, as these concepts apply to other professional elds. I would like to close with the comments of one student, whose re ections captured the common perspective conveyed by students in the Mentoring for Educational Leadership course. The student said: This particular mentoring experience has been absolutely invaluable to me. I have learned so much about the ways to improve my own leadership abilities, as well as how to eectively communicate by using trust and honesty in a mentor/protégé meeting situation. This experience gave me the opportunity to step outside of myself and re ect on several ways to improve my abilities and skills. I ultimately ascertained that we can all learn a great deal from those who have gone on before and `know the ropes' if we will simply be willing to open our eyes. Author's Note: IRB approval at the University of University of Alabama at Birmingham has been given for using student quotes which appear in this article. References
87
Alsbury, T. L., & Hackmann, D. G. (2006).
Learning from experience:
Initial ndings of a mentor-
ing/induction program for novice principals and superintendents. Planning and Changing, 37(3/4), 1690189. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1224424311). Chao, G. T., Walz, P.M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with nonmentoring counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, 619-636. Coerdeiro, P. A. & Smith-Sloan, E. (1995). Apprenticeships for administrative interns: Learning to talk like a principal. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 385 014). Costa, A., & Garmston, R. (1997). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools, 3rd Ed. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1995, April). Mentoring in educational leadership development: What are the responsibilities of the protégés? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. ED 381 874. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1994). Mentoring for school leaders: A status report. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Daresh, J. C., & Playko, M. A. (1992).
Leaders helping leaders: A practical guide to administrative
mentoring. New York: Scholastic, Inc. Galbraith, M. (2001).
Mentoring development for community college faculty.
Michigan Community
College Journal: Research and Practice, 7(2), 29-39. Hertting, M., & Phenis-Bourke, N. (2007). Experienced principals need mentors, too. Principal, 86(5), 3639. Johnson, S. (2006). The neuroscience of the mentor-learner relationship. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 110, Summer 2006. Knowles, M.S. (1980).
The modern practice of adult education (revised and updated) Chicago, IL:
Chicago Association Press. Kochan, F. K., (Ed.). (2002). The organizational and human dimensions of successful mentoring programs and relationships. Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Kram, K. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Mertz, N. T. (2004). What's a mentor, anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40 (4), 541-560. Mullen, C. A. (2006). Making the most of mentoring: A graduate student guide. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education/ Rowman & Little eld. Searby, L. and Tripses, J. (2007, August). Preparing future school administrators for meaningful mentoring relationships: A comparison of processes in two universities. Paper presented at the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration. Chicago, IL. Searby, M. A. (2007, June).
Mentoring: Investing in our future.
Lecture delivered in Mentoring for
Educational Leadership graduate course, University of Alabama at Birmingham. Southern Regional Education Board. (2007). Good principals aren't born they're mentored: Are we investing enough to get the school leaders we need? Atlanta, GA: Author. Sprague, M. & Hostinsky, V. (2002).
Model mentoring.
Principal Leadership High School Ed.
3(1),
365-340. Stanley, P. D. & Clinton, J. R. (1992). Connecting: The mentoring relationships you need to succeed in life. Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress. Zachary, L. (2005). Creating a mentoring culture: The organization's guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Zachary, L. (2000). Jossey-Bass.
The mentor's guide:
Facilitating eective learning relationships.
San Francisco:
88
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.8 An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and 30
Communities
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a signi cant contribution to the scholarship and practice of education administration.
In addition to publication in the Connexions Content
Commons, this module is published in the International Journal of Educational Leadership Prepa-
31 , Volume 4, Number 1 (January - March 2009).
ration
3.8.1 Introduction Public dissatisfaction with student learning outcomes in PK-12 educational programs has resulted in calls for improvement in the quality of educational leaders serving students, schools, and communities. This dissatisfaction with the state of US educational systems has resulted in demands for change and accountability in school administrator preparation programs at the university level. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act: No Child Left Behind of 2001 responded to these demands by requiring greater accountability in the performance of school administrators (U.S. Government, 2002). Universities have responded by analyzing and implementing changes in educational leadership preparation programs. Professional organizations such as the American Association of School Administrators (AASA, 1993), Council of Chief State School O cers (CCSSO, 1996; CCSSO, 2008), National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA 1993; NPBEA 2002a; NPBEA 2002b; NPBEA 2008), National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE, 2002), and the Education Leaders Constituent Council (ELCC, 2002) among others, along with individual state education agencies have responded by reviewing and revising standards for practicing school administrators and educational leadership preparation programs. The high unemployment rate and downsizing of industries has prompted the increased development of alternative educational executive leadership programs with an eye on providing positions in schools for the newly unemployed.
These movements are blurring the lines of professional preparation between schools,
business, industry, nonpro t, and governmental agencies.
One result of questioning the eectiveness of
educational leadership preparation programs has been a philosophy adopted by some that the training of corporate leaders and military personnel to ll leadership positions in schools will result in improved school operation, instruction, and student learning outcomes. An example of this type of program is The Broad Foundation's Superintendents Academy which prepares CEOs and senior executives from business, nonpro t, military, government, and education backgrounds to lead urban public school systems. As explained by Quinn (2007): Nontraditional superintendents, who are accomplished leaders in other arenas, bring critically needed strengths and experiences to the job, including:
• • • 30 31
Experience managing large, complex, diverse operations; Experience leading large-scale systems change and culture changes; Skills in strategic visioning, planning and accountability;
This content is available online at
89
• •
Expertise in nancial management; and Skills in systems and operational management (p.5).
Executive management programs such as those oered by The Broad Foundation are also blurring the lines of professional leadership preparation between education, business, industry, nonpro t, and governmental agencies.
Educators question whether the lack of pedagogical knowledge in instruction and learning will
have a negative eect on the ability of non-educators to be a success as a school administrator; they question the ability of corporate and military personnel and retirees to lead schools and educational systems; and academicians have both challenged and accepted the rationale of integrating educational theory with organizational management theories in the training of educational leaders (Beyer, 2006).
3.8.2 Structure, Philosophy, and Curriculum of Preparation Programs University programs directed toward the preparation of candidates for roles as educational leaders should be instrumental in the development and implementation of preparation programs that have prepared graduates to serve the unique needs of students and the communities which they will serve. They should be trained to understand, interface with, and incorporate parent and community resources in support of PK-12 educational programs. One way to accomplish this is through the integration of programs, courses, and preparation content that combines the best of educational, business, public sector, social service, and nonpro t leadership theory and practice. Combining these entities in leadership preparation and professional development programs enhances the ability of school and community leaders to work together more eectively toward the support and improvement of educational systems and the development of integrated services for children and youth. Theoretical preparation of educational leaders has long been based in general organizational management and leadership theory. As pointed out by Owens and Valesky (2007), theories of educational administration have their roots in the study of public administration. Administrative practices in public governance such as those of the Egyptians, Chinese, and Greeks; military leadership practices from Alexander the Great and Caesar to modern day military organizations; and the far-reaching and international organizations such as the Roman Empire, Catholic Church, United Nations, World Bank, and the European Union, are all pointed to by Owens and Valesky (2007) as models of public and nonpro t administration practices that form the foundation for the study of educational leadership and administration. Only by knowing the contributions of those who came before us, those who pioneered in building the knowledge that we have for thinking about organizations and leadership, can you prepare yourself to make the strategic and tactical decisions that will undergird your leadership with steadfast purpose, consistency, and eectiveness (Owens & Valesky, 2007, p.84). The incorporation of historical leadership and management theory in literature and in leadership classrooms used as a basis for the preparation of educational leaders, supports the premise that schools like other service organizations utilize a shared knowledge base of organizational management and leadership theory in the development and maintenance of administrative practices. This can be seen in the similar bureaucratic and management practices of these organizations such as the chain-of-command, hierarchy of authority, rules and regulations, application of organizational behavior theories, product development, quality control through assessment and evaluation of products and processes, the use of power and in uence to reach organizational goals, maintenance of records, organizational change processes, development and maintenance of organizational cultures, and in human resources management. How the structure, philosophy, and curriculum of educational leadership preparation programs are developed and presented has a profound and long-lasting impact on how schools will function and how future educational leaders will address the varied and unique needs of students and the communities they serve. Most university programs oer three types of educational administration preparation programs: one to prepare aspirants for PK-12 school administrator roles; one to prepare school administrators for educational leadership roles in school district central o ce positions; and, another to oer professional development opportunities for practicing school administrators. PK-12 administrator preparation programs generally encompass organizational administration topics such as human resource management, budgeting and nance, management
90
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
and leadership skills, legal and regulatory issues, curriculum planning and development, problem-solving and decision making, ethics, applications of technology, school and community relations, assessment of learning, and program evaluation. Programs in central o ce leadership build upon this knowledge base and stress the development of a knowledge and skill base in a variety of areas related to organizational leadership, organizational structures and development, strategic planning and needs assessment, policy and governance, public relations, organizational change processes, facilities management, labor relations, instructional management, resource allocation, and research, measurement, and evaluation of educational programs. Educational leadership preparation programs can be enhanced by integrating theories, courses, and students from educational, government, nonpro t, and social service organizations together in the same program (Beyer, 2006; Rodriguez, 2000). Professional development programs for practicing administrators can also bene t from the integration of information and practices of those organizations that have an impact on schools and schooling.
University inter-departmental and inter-college collaboration between education,
management, business, and public policy schools can result in a better understanding of how each area of research and study in uences organizational knowledge and practices and the management of school systems. This integration of programs provides present and future school administrators with a better understanding of the interrelationships of schools and the community and gives them the added opportunity to develop networking relationships that can be utilized in future collaboration between schools and community agencies. Hugh Price (2008) suggests enlisting the support and involvement of local businesses, nonpro t agencies, community organizations, the media, and faith-based groups in such areas as nancial assistance, celebration of student accomplishments, and providing educational opportunities and support for students that can result in improved student academic achievement and preparation for employment and the world beyond school. Generally, preparation programs remain segmented in topical categories such as nance, leadership, law, and curriculum. Life does not proceed that way, nor does the day-to-day job of a school administrator. Administrators seldom have the luxury of segmenting their day and spending one hour strictly on legal issues and then the next on student issues, curriculum, or personnel concerns. All these topics are intertwined in the fast-paced administrative problem-solving and decision-making processes of the day. For university programs to relate more closely to actual administrative practice there should be an integration of topics across the curriculum and the incorporation of actual eld experience assignments throughout the program, as opposed to only the use of case studies in the classroom setting, or when a student is assigned to an internship in a local school or district upon completion of required program coursework.
3.8.3 Performance Standards and Expectations: Past and Present Standards provide a guide to organizations, programs, and individuals. Great emphasis has been placed on the development and maintenance of educational leadership standards which foster educational leadership policy development, performance expectations for practicing school administrators, standards for preparation programs, state educational leadership policy and standards, and tools for leadership assessment and evaluation (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008). Examples of professional organizations that have been instrumental in the development, review, and implementation of professional standards include the Council of Chief State School O cers, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration, the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, the American Association of School Administrators, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the National Council of Elementary School Principals, and state educational agencies. As stated by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration upon publication of the new Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008, Standards serve dierent purposes. The new standards are designed to serve as broad national policy standards that states use as a national model for developing their own standards. The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELLC) Program Standards guide planning, implementing, and accrediting of administrator preparation programs (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2008). In 1993 the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) Commission on Standards for the Superintendency developed a set of professional standards related to the roles and responsibilities of school
91
district superintendents that were categorized as: Leadership and District Culture; Policy and Governance; Communications and Community Relations; Organizational Management; Curriculum Planning and Development; Instructional Management; Human Resources Management; Values and Ethics of Leadership (American Association of School Administrators 1993). That same year, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) published Principals for Our Changing Schools: Knowledge and Skill Base (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thompson, 1993).
Prominent educa-
tional leaders and practicing principals contributed to development of this publication, sharing knowledge and expertise gained through research and practice.
The knowledge and skill base as presented was de-
scribed as necessary for successful school administration and was categorized into the following four domains of leadership with sub-sections:
Functional • • • • • • •
Leadership Information Collection Problem Analysis Judgement Organization Oversight Implementation Delegation
Programatic • • • • •
Instruction and Learning Environment Sta Development Measurement and Evaluation Resource Allocation Application of Technology
Interpersonal • • • •
Motivating Others Interpersonal Sensitivity Oral and Nonverbal Expression Written Knowledge
Contexual • • • •
Philosophical and Cultural Values Legal and Regulatory Application Policy and Political In uences Public Relations
(National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thomson, 1993) In 1996, the Council of Chief State School O cers published the ISLLC Standards for School Leaders (Council of Chief State School O cers, 1996), containing knowledge, skills and dispositions for successful school leadership, established a guide for state departments of education and university preparation programs in the development of educational leadership preparation programs and performance expectations for practicing administrators. This was followed in 2002 by The Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) Standards for Advanced Programs in Educational Leadership published by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2002a). In 2008, the Council of Chief State School O cers published the Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (hereafter referred to as ISLLC 2008). These standards are the result of the collaborative eort of professional education organizations, leaders in the eld, a state education agency representative, and
92
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
members of university preparation programs, convened together to develop policy standards that can be used to in uence leadership practice and policy.
(Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.6). The
ISLLC 2008 utilized the 1996 ISLLC Standards for School Leaders as a foundation and guide for development of the new Standards and Functions. In developing the new standards, CCSSO strongly points out that these are policy standards that will contribute to a coherent vision and system of leadership that can guide state policies and leadership programs and further states: The following principles set the direction and priorities during the development of the new policy standards: 1. Re ect the centrality of student learning; 2. Acknowledge the changing role of the school leader; 3. Recognize the collaborative nature of school leadership; 4. Improve the quality of the profession; 5. Inform performance-based systems of assessment and evaluation for school leaders; 6. Demonstrate integration and coherence; and 7. Advance access, opportunity, and empowerment for all members of the school community. (p. 8) ISLLC 2008, Provides a framework for policy creation, training program performance, life-long career development, and system support (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.13). The standards have been developed to in uence and drive system-wide change in training programs, licensing and induction, performance evaluation, support of ongoing training and professional development, and improvement in working conditions, with the desired nal outcome of, Eective instructional leadership that positively impacts student achievement (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p. 13). A key change in the wording used in ISLLC 2008 standards diers from the 1996 ISLLC Standards particularly in the phraseology used to state the standard. The 1996 ISLLC Standards begins the description of each standard with the phrase, A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by. . . ISLLC 2008 begins each standard with the phrase, An education leader promotes the success of every student. . . (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p. 18). Following the publication of ISLLC 2008, The State Consortium on Education Leadership (SCEL), representing state education agency personnel, convened under the auspices of CCSSO, and developed and published Performance Expectations and Indicators for Education Leaders: An ISLLC-Based Guide to Implementing Leader Standards and a Companion Guide to the Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (Sanders & Kearney, 2008).
This publication is the result of collaboration between SCEL,
CCSSO, and representatives from state education agencies, the District of Columbia, and American Samoa. This guide presents performance expectations and begins the description of each expectation with the phrase, Education leaders ensure. . . rather than Education leaders promote. . . as used by ISLLC 2008. There is a vast degree of dierence between promote and ensure. The expectation is higher. When one promotes they encourage. When one ensures they guarantee that it will be achieved. As with higher expectations for student performance, state agencies are seeking the same higher expectations for education leader performance. The evolution of standards and guidelines has developed considerably from responses to the outcries of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), to the NPBEA Principals for our Changing Schools: Knowledge and Skill Base in 1993 (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Thomson, 1993), to clearly stated high performance expectations in 2008 to be met by education leaders. As stated by Sanders & Kearney (2008), Emphasizing performance expectations helps make policy standards operational by presenting them as they might be observed in practicein dierent leadership positions and at dierent points of a career. The performance expectations and indicators use observable and measureable language that describes current responsibilities of leaders (p.2). In a review of the performance expectations, there is no single expectation that holds any greater importance than another.
They are all important and become interwoven with each other as part of the
daily practice of educational leaders and their service to students and communities. Sanders and Kearney (2008) have placed the six standards of performance expectations into the general categories of: Vision and
93
Goals; Teaching and Learning; Managing Organizational Systems and Safety; Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders; Ethics and Integrity; and, The Education System.
As stated by Sanders and Kearney
(2008),
. . .the
guiding principles used in developing the ISLLC Standards were important considerations for
developing the Performance Expectations and Indicators.
Therefore, the performance expectations and
indicators
• • • • •
re ect the centrality of student learning acknowledge the changing role of the school leader recognize the collaborative nature of school leadership are high; upgrading the quality of the profession inform performance-based systems of assessment and evaluation for school leaders. (p. 10)
3.8.4 Meeting Needs of Students and Communities In addition to the basic curricular topics oered in university preparation programs, strong consideration should to be given to providing educational leadership candidates with a knowledge base that includes skills to develop and support educational programs that will serve the special and often unique needs of students and communities.
The inclusion of addressing special student programs and services across the
graduate program curriculum in law, principalship, internship, budgeting, curriculum, strategic planning, organizational development, and human resource classes is an imperative for programs when preparing candidates for school leadership positions, to enable successful transition from the university classroom to the school or school district administrative o ce. Currently, some states and university programs require one or more courses addressing compensatory education and special services and programs to prepare candidates with a knowledge base that can be used in service to the unique and individual needs of children and youth in schools. Texas is a good example of one state that requires potential and practicing school administrators to possess knowledge of special and compensatory programs and school student services, and how these programs can be eectuated in school settings. Title I and special education laws and programs are often emphasized in university courses much to the detriment of exploring and learning about other programs and services available to all PK-12 students such as guidance and counseling, bilingual and ESL programs, student services and activities, dropout and drug/alcohol abuse prevention programs, among many more that should also be part of the university curriculum. Sadly, this is an area of study that graduates, when reporting back to the university, say they had to learn on the job. It is important that educational leadership candidates gain an understanding of the importance of all these programs and understand the planning, development, and implementation of special programs to better serve the needs of students and communities. As stated by Beyer & Johnson (2005), The role of educator has expanded beyond the original concept of student and teacher working together toward academic achievement. [Supplemental services and programs] are essential to ensure that students are ready to learn and that teachers, support sta, and school administrators are providing the essential services and support systems to ensure that all students have the best opportunity possible to achieve academically and become well-prepared, active, contributing members of society in the world beyond school (p. xii).
3.8.5 Performance Expectations and the Link to Special Programs and Services Each policy standard presented in Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008) and as presented and detailed in the companion guide, Performance Expectations and Indicators for Education Leaders: An ISLLC-Based Guide To Implementing Leader Standards And A Companion Guide To The Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 (hereafter referred to as the ISLLC-Based Guide) (Sanders & Kearney, 2008), carry equal weight and importance in informing policy development, university preparation programs, and the assessment and evaluation of school site administrative practices. With this in mind, it is important to look brie y at how meeting needs of students and communities through special programs and services is linked to each standards and performance expectation.
94
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
3.8.6 Vision, Mission, and Goals Standard 1 An education leader promotes the success of every student by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders. Element A. High Expectations for All. Sanders & Kearney (2008) state, The vision and goals establish high, measurable expectations for all students and educators. (p.14). Indicator 4 under Element A states a leader, Advocates for a speci c vision of learning in which every student has equitable, appropriate, and eective learning opportunities and achieves at high levels (Sanders & Kearney, 2008, p. 14). This indicator does not say some students should receive these learning opportunities, it states all students. All students encompasses a wide range of students in need of special programs and services including: ESL/bilingual students; those identi ed in need of special education services; students at-risk of academic failure or dropping out of school; abused, abandoned, and neglected children and young adults; those with health and human service related issues; those falling within the identi able Title I category; as well as those identi ed as gifted and talented. Element B. Shared Commitments to Implement the Vision, Mission, and Goals, provides leadership Indicators which address the importance of sta, community, and diverse stakeholders to be engaged in the commitment to build shared understanding, decision-making, support, responsibility, and Advocates for and acts on commitments. . .to provide equitable, appropriate, and eective learning opportunities for every student (Sanders & Kearney, 2008, p. 14).
3.8.7 Teaching and Learning Standard 2 An education leader promotes the success of every student by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and sta professional growth. Teaching and learning opportunities are not only con ned to the classroom but can also be provided through programmatic development, support, and funding to encourage and support students to be involved in athletics, student council, mentoring, Junior Achievement, work-study programs, development of school policy, in eld trips, before and after school programs, focus groups, leadership challenge programs, community service, and in any number of other clubs and instructional related activities.
The list is endless
and all can be eectuated through the collaboration of stakeholders utilizing school, business, parent, and community support and involvement. A function of teaching and learning as stated in Standard 2 of ISLLC 2008 is to, Create a personalized and motivating environment for students (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.14). The ISLLC-Based Guide (Sanders & Kearney, 2008) provides indicators for practice which state, a leader. . . 1. Develops shared understanding, capacities, and commitment to high expectations for all students and closing achievement gaps. 2. Guides and supports job-embedded, standards-based profession development that improves teaching and learning and meets diverse learning needs of every student (p.17). Once again the terms, all students and every student, stand out in the performance indicators as a reminder that regardless of the disability, circumstance, or uniqueness of students' needs, in response to teaching and learning standards and expectations, all must be served equally.
3.8.8 Managing Organizational Systems Standard 3 An education leader promotes the success of every student by ensuring management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, e cient, and eective learning environment. Operational management is a broad category covering a myriad of overlapping and on-going functions of education leadership and administration within educational systems. It is the area in which leadership
95
intermixes with administration and often draws the organizational leader away from pursuing the ultimate vision and goal of instructional leadership and ensuring the academic success of every student. The important questions for educators to remember when making operational decisions are how does a particular decision relate to students, and how will a decision or action help every student achieve academic success? Operational management encompasses tasks and responsibilities such as scheduling, budgeting and resource management, personnel selection and retention, legal and regulatory issues, transportation, food services, facility management and maintenance, student and personnel safety and security, and human resource management and development. All these decision-making tasks must be directed toward meeting the ISLLC 2008 Standard 3 goal of creating and maintaining an eective and e cient learning environment. Keeping an eye on this goal contributes to eective administrative management in problem-solving and decision-making. Sanders & Kearney (2008) remind us that, Education leaders need a systems approach to complex organizations of schools and districts. In order to ensure the success of all students and provide a high-performing learning environment, education leaders manage daily operations and environments through e ciently and eectively aligning resources with vision and goals.
Valuable resources include nancial, human, time, materials, technology, physical plant, and
other system components (p.19). Ensuring quality instruction will positively impact the opportunity for every student to learn and advance academically. It begins with the selection of quality teachers and support service personnel and providing the time and funding for on-going professional development for everyone. Operational management activities such as developing class schedules, strategic placement of students and teachers, and inclusion of opportunities for student support programs and activities within the regular schedule provides a basic structure for instruction and meeting students' special needs. Management of the operational budget should include providing equitable funding for all instructional programs and student service activities such as eld trips, before and after school programs, academic tutoring, athletics, student counseling services and support programs, transportation to accommodate exibility in program schedules, or funding and incentives for development of creative academic and student support programs and activities. Seeking grant funding to supplement the budget can provide nancial support for the development of special services and programs. Legal and governmental considerations include meeting federal and state rules and regulations as they related to areas such as ADA requirements, ensuring safety of students and sta, meeting special education and Title I requirements, serving the needs of ESL and bilingual students, meeting the instructional requirements for migratory, delinquent, and at-risk student populations, or supporting due process for students and sta.
3.8.9 Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders Standard 4 An education leader promotes the success of every student by collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources. The development of collaborative partnerships with parents and community organizations provides an additional support and resource for education leaders in schools and school districts as they move to develop and implement special services and programs to meet the needs of every student. Collaboration and development of partnerships with families and community service organizations can result in development and support for programs serving students with special needs.
The cultural, racial, socio-economic, and
ethnic make-up of communities served by schools are an important resource for education leaders in the development of programs and services created or maintained to meet the unique needs of the families and communities. Developing lines of communication with families and stakeholders in their native language can result in better understanding of educational programs and partnerships in support of teaching and learning. Both school district public relations programs and communication channels developed at individual school sites help parents understand and support their student's learning. Schools are at the center of community activities. Parents choose communities in which to live based on the academic achievement of students in
96
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
local schools. Families choose school districts based on the special services and programs available to meet the educational needs of their children.
3.8.10 Ethics and Integrity Standard 5 An education leader promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner. Education leaders are under public scrutiny as a group and are expected to foster and exhibit ethical behavior in their day-to-day work. They are expected to exhibit ethical behavior through professionalism, concern for and responsibility to others, and consideration of the community as a whole in their decisionmaking (Beyer, 2004). The education leader functions set forth under this standard address accountability for the academic and social success of all students, moral principles for self-guidance, democratic values, potential legal consequences for unethical decision-making, and social justice for every student in meeting their education needs (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008). It is imperative that university preparation programs prepare all education leaders to act in an ethical manner in program planning, resource allocation, curriculum development, human resource management, providing a safe and secure learning environment, and oering the special programs and services that will support the academic and social success of every student.
3.8.11 The Education System Standard 6 An education leader promotes the success of every student by understanding, responding to, and in uencing the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context. An understanding of local, state, and federal policies, rules, and regulations is essential to the successful leadership of schools and school systems. Knowledge of laws pertaining to the social and academic success of all students is required for successful leadership. Accurately interpreting policy and laws and acting to in uence education policy in a way that will advocate and bene t all students is an essential role of an education leader. Performance expectations described by Sanders & Kearney (2008) state, The education leader believes in, values, and is committed to:
• • • • •
Advocate for children and education In uence policies Uphold and improve laws and regulations Eliminate barriers to achievement Build on diverse social and cultural assets (p. 28).
This Standard speaks to the necessity of education leaders to engage in on-going inquiry and professional development to remain current educational research and keep abreast of changes in policies and laws that aect the educational rights of children and families to the programs, services, and opportunities that will meet unique and special needs of every student.
3.8.12 Implications for Practice How does all this relate to preparation and practice? Education leader practices suggested and discussed under each standard are not unique and many are implemented each day in schools across the nation. It is important for universities to regularly review the structure and curriculum of leadership preparation programs to determine whether there are any gaps in the preparation provided to candidates. Are candidates su ciently prepared in the knowledge and skills necessary to develop and implement special programs and services at the PK-12 school level that will ensure quality educational programs for every student?
The
imperative and challenge for leadership preparation programs is to ensure that graduates have been prepared
97
to meet the special and unique needs of the students, schools, and communities which they will serve. ISLLC 2008 provides a policy framework and guide for practicing administrators, school districts, university preparation programs, and state and national education agencies that can be utilized in the evaluation and assessment of education leadership across the nation. It provides a framework for university programs that can be directed toward the preparation of candidates with the knowledge and skill base to meet the unique needs of students and the communities they will serve. These skills can be applied to the development and maintenance of essential special programs and services to ensure academic achievement and success for all students. CCSSO clearly states that the ultimate goal of these policy standards and the nal outcome of the implementation of the ISLLC 2008 standards is eective instructional leadership that positively impacts student achievement (Council of Chief State School O cers, 2008, p.
13).
This intended outcome of
the standards should guide and drive decision and policy making in university education leader preparation courses, in national, state, and local educational agencies, and must be the goal toward which every education leader strives.
3.8.13 References American Association of School Administrators.
(1993) 1994 Platform and resolutions.
Arlington, VA:
American Association of School Administrators. Beyer, B. (2004). Applying Ethical Standards in Leadership Practice. NCPEA Educational Leadership Review.
National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.
Sam Houston State University:
Huntsville, TX. Beyer, B. (2006). Combining forces in the development of programs and services: Bringing education, government, and nonpro t agencies together. NCPEA Connexions. The Connexions Project: Rice University. Available: http://cnx.org/content/m13614/latest/ Beyer, B. M. & Johnson, E. S. (2005). Special programs & services in schools: Creating options, meetings needs. Lancaster, PA: Pro>Active Publications. Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. R. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint. Council of Chief State School O cers (1996). Interstate school leaders licensure consortium (ISLLC): Standards for school leaders. Washington, DC: Author. Council of Chief State School O cers (CCSSO). (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008 as adopted by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.ccsso.org/publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=365. Hoyle, J.R., English, F.W., & Stey, B. E. (1998).
Skills for successful 21st century school leaders:
Standards for peak performance. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators. Milstein, M., & Associates (1993).
Changing the way we prepare educational leaders: The Danforth
experience. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. National Commission on Excellence in Education.
(1983).
A nation at risk.
Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing O ce. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (2002).
Professional standards for the
accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (1993). Principals for our changing school: The knowledge and skill base. Alexandria, VA: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002a). The Educational Leadership Constituent Council standards for advance programs in educational leadership. Washington DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002b). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008. Washington DC: Author. Available: http://www.npbea.org/projects.php. Owens, R. G. & Valesky, T. C. (2007). Organizational behavior in education: Adaptive leadership and school reform. 9th edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
98
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Price, H. B. (2008). Mobilizing the community to help students succeed. Alexandria VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Quinn, tor.
T. (2007).
Preparing Non-Educators for the Superintendency.
Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
The School Administra-
Retrieved June 30, 2008, from
http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetailtest.cfm?ItemNumber=9255
32 .
Rodriguez, F. J. (2000, Spring). Interdisciplinary leadership in the Americas: Vision, risk, and change. Journal of the Intermountain Center for Education Eectiveness. 1(2), 64-71. Sanders, N. M. & Kearney, K. M. (Eds.) (2008). Performance Expectations and indicators for education leaders: An ISLLC-Based guide to implementing leader standards and a companion guide to the educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School O cers. Available: http://www.ccsso.org/publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=367 Thompson, S. (Ed.)(1993).
Principals for our changing schools: Knowledge and skill base.
National
Policy Board for Educational Administration. Roman Little eld Publisher. U. S. Government (2002). The no child left behind act of 2001. (PL 107-110, 107th Congress). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing O ce.
3.9 It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty: Implementing Triangu33
lar Mentoring Relationships
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. Those who have torches will pass them on to others (Plato, Republic) This scholarly essay features a formal mentoring program for new faculty in its rst and crucial year of development in a research university culture. We are two mentoring leaders, a professor (program director) and dean (program sponsor), who focus on the program's inception, implementation, and evaluation. Our emphasis is on the collective support and growth that allowed the program to take root and transition into its second year. The village of present is changing in the state of Florida and across the nation, with increased expectations for faculty scholarly productivity, as well as relevance and impact, within America's major research universities like our own: The point [has been] made clear: faculty who want tenure and promotion must do (and publish) research, preferably research that meets the needs of the university (Brown, 2006, p. 51). Knowing that newcomers experience signi cant challenges and dramatic change within the rst year of their tenure-earning lives and that stress levels tend to escalate thereafter (Rice, Sorcinelli, & Austin, 2000; Sorcinelli, 1994), we are invested in the belief it takes a village to raise new faculty. In order to help new professors feel a sense of community in their workplaces and to learn how to maneuver the ambiguities of tenure systems, we heed the lessons of salient studies that underscore this dual problem in the academy (e.g., Boice, 1991; Rice, et al., 2000; Sorcinelli, 1994). Toward this end, mentoring and collegiality can go a long way to support tenure-earning faculty in understanding their complex environments and in adjusting and experiencing success more quickly (Bode; 1999; Ostro & Kozlowski, 1993). While formal mentoring
32 33
http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetailtest.cfm?ItemNumber=9255 This content is available online at
99
programs have increased in popularity nationwide, greater awareness and more documentation are de nitely needed (Gibb, 1999), a goal this writing supports. The College of Education (COE) at the University of South Florida (USF) is a public doctoral/research university. The primary aim of the New Faculty Mentoring Program (NFMP) is to promote the professional development and academic success of new faculty in their rst two years.
A second, equally important,
purpose is to provide seasoned faculty with opportunities to share their expertise with a new colleague and within the college's rst mentoring network of new and established colleagues (for more information, consult the COEUSF's NFMP website: http://www.coedu.usf.edu/main/faculty/mentoring.htm). The COEUSF New Faculty Mentoring Program Program Vision and Goals The NFMP encapsulates joint decision-making, triangular mentoring relationships, and faculty leadership. It grew out of Carol Mullen's initiative as a tenured faculty member and Dean Kennedy's enthusiastic support of her proposed mentoring program for all new faculty.
The program was rapidly developed by
consulting the literature on formal faculty mentoring programs and processes, and through interactive, joint decision-making. Speci c goals of this formal mentoring program are assisting faculty members and departments in actively mentoring new professors; enabling the scholarly development of newcomers through triangular mentoring relationships that support the retention and advancement of all new faculty, and that sustain collegewide mentoring through ongoing practice. NFMP Structure and Activities The new faculty who join us function as the center of a mentoring triad, assigned to both a mentor in their department and another in the college. Academic protégés bene t more from multiple relationships focused on their interests and needs (Higgins, 2000), so we followed this established mentoring protocol. Department chairs identify department mentors, and in addition, the mentoring director makes the college matches, with input from the Dean's o ce. The department mentor is likely to have close contact with the new academic, serving as an invaluable resource and sounding board. The college mentor is a go to person for discussing any concerns in con dence and an outsider to the mentee's department, this mentor can oer fresh perspectives. For the inaugural year in which this piloted program was tested, the following activities were implemented: fall orientation, meet and greet luncheon for new faculty, end-of-the-year luncheon, and a research and scholarship panel. The current year of 20062007 of the NFMP is characterized by more sophisticated as well as inclusive mentoring strategies, which will be outlined later. This brief report focuses on the processes and outcomes of the rst year of 20052006 of this program. What We Learned During the Pilot Phase The 30 participating facultythat is, 10 new faculty participants joined by their department mentor and their college mentor to form a triad were surveyed both fall 2005 and spring 2006. 2 For the preliminary study, the 30 faculty members were surveyed twice (fall and spring) with 10 participants per group (new faculty, department mentor, college mentor). The overall return rate of survey responses was 63% for the fall semester and 57% for the spring semester. The new faculty response rate was 80% in both the fall and spring. Department mentors had a 60% return rate in the fall, with 80% the following semester. Relatively speaking, the college mentor response rate was modest50% (fall) and 30% (spring), but overall a healthy return rate can be reported. We learned that new faculty needs in our college typically ranged from entry-level concerns such as learning the functions of key personnel, to academic agendas such as securing resources, to performance reviews such as clarifying requirements for annual evaluations. Additional ndings concerning faculty mentor support and improvements for the second year follow. Faculty Mentor Support Most established faculty members were willing to provide the new professors with much-needed guidance and support. In relation to their academic careers, faculty mentors provided protection and visibility, for example. Mentors also provided guidance and support in terms of psychosocial aspects, such as role modeling and counseling functions as well as providing for their direct interests, such as grants development and
100
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
teaching feedback (see Kram, 1985/1988). The quality and regularity of mentoring varied across college and departmental mentorships. Meetings with internal mentors were, as could be expected, less formal, more frequent, and more unit-focused. O ce and campus proximity was identi ed as crucial to the regularity and success of mentoring. A dierent level of expectation should probably be held for the o-campus or college mentor role. The college and department mentoring arrangements functioned somewhat dierently.
As con dantes, college
mentors mostly oered a safe haven, providing objective viewpoints on issues involving promotion and personalities, while department mentors focused on relationship-building and problem-solving. Over time, then, the college mentors served more of a careerist, preparatory function embodying a long-term view, whereas department mentors seemed more local in their emphasis, helping with daily or weekly survivalist approaches to their work. However, the mentoring functions of both college and department eorts naturally overlapped, regardless of physical location, with all serving as functional mentors, oering career and psychosocial bene ts ranging from help with adjustment to a new place to assistance with scholarly development. Certainly, both mentoring groups fostered the career and psychosocial functions of mentoring. Perhaps because a mentoring mindset and climate were established in the college, nonappointed faculty and chairs also provided assistance in at least two cases uno cially assuming the role of mentor. Validation of the program and its centerpiece, the triangular mentoring relationship, was con rmed and, signi cantly, a budding mentoring culture was established. Importantly, both college and department mentors reported that a growing sense of collegiality with their mentees signi cantly in uenced the relationship. Mentoring parties located at a distance, then, could feel genuine concern for one another, which in turn built a sense of collegiality and helped to ensure support. On the other hand, physical distance and time stood out as signi cant barriers to successful mentoring for some parties.
Distance had less to do with whether the mentor was situated outside the new professor's
unit, and more to do with whether this individual was located at a dierent campus. The new professors who were situated at the regional campuses, as opposed to the main campus, were inevitably challenged. As one solution, most of the newly hired regional faculty agreed to be mentored by three mentors, with at least one from their own site and another from the main campus. Because promotion and tenure for all a liated regional faculty are handled through the main campus, one of their mentors needed to be located centrally. An end-of-year evaluation is too late to discover interpersonal problems and program pitfalls. Hence, we incorporated new faculty only gatherings in the early fall along with survey assessments and follow-ups with tenure-earning faculty. A policy of con dentiality informed the mentoring director's communications with all participants, ensuring privacy as well as anonymity. Improvements for Year Two For the transitional period at the end of the rst year and for the second year cycle of this program, all recommendations were satis ed. The 2005 spring data were analyzed in time to satisfy the participants' requests for recognition, information, and other program changes; some were made at the end of the inaugural year with additional changes implemented for the second year. The suggestion that mentor training be nancially supported was acted upon, with resources obtained for a luncheon that drew together all mentoring parties. However, no speci cation for payment to mentors was made. Widespread commitment to support new faculty is also expected to evolve with combined eorts on the part of the NFMP leaders and faculty more generally.
Through exchanges with the rst year faculty as
to whether they wanted to continue in the program, recognition came that formal mentoring is essential collegewide and prompted widespread buy-in. In fact, ninety percent agreed to extend their formal arrangements.
Certainly, one test of formal mentoring success in any organization is for new faculty to want to
continue to receive mentoring from senior faculty. These protracted arrangements will be examined at the conclusion of the second year, along with the new mentorships formed. Based on this extended mentoring opportunity, it will be possible to learn more about both formal and informal mentoring within a research university culture and its evolutionary process. Another strategy for soliciting and extending collegewide involvement was to continue some of the same mentors into the second year, while some new mentoring triads were formed. Long-term goals are to involve
101
as many willing and capable senior faculty as possible and to reap the rewards of a robust culture of mentoring not dependent on assigned relationships. Additional improvements introduced in the second year of the NFMP were: (1) a training session identi ed as a meet and greet work luncheon, complete with other inclusive social events); (2) a written mentoring agreement for parties wanting to clarify what is expected, in addition to learning goal statements accompanied by speci c responsibilities for the mentors and their mentees; (3) a new survey item with best-match variables, (4) library sessions focused on advanced database searches and citation indexes, and (5) conversion of the fall and spring surveys into a user-friendly, online instruments. Life in the Evolving Village We found that this formal mentoring experience not only potentially spearheads faculty bonding, but also better positions our village of scholars to generate widespread cultural change.
The facilitation of
collegiality and interdependence via formalized mentorships can even be thought of as a cultural reform strategy. Fullan (2006) persuasively argues in Turnaround Leadership that all successful strategies [aimed at changing educational cultures] are socially based and action oriented (p.
44).
Attention to mutual
commitment and interest, scholarly overlap, proximity, and diversity must be upheld in the making of good faculty matches. Another goal is for us to include the faculty mentors in all events focused on new faculty development, as well as to continue soliciting recommendations for improvement and, when advisable, acting on these. The New Faculty Mentoring Program is obviously evolving. Modi cations continue to be made based on faculty input.
A few recent hires in our College of Education have actually requested, as part of the
negotiating process, that they be allowed to participate in our collegewide mentoring program for tenureearning faculty only to learn that they will automatically become part of it. Universities that function as mentoring organizations oer something that is relatively new (Forret, Turban, & Dougherty, 1996), yet mentorprotégé relationships ensure a bright future so they must be encouraged and facilitated.
Finally,
successful formal mentoring programs make a dierence to new academics and even to seasoned faculty. Such support networks enable the exchange of experience and best practice, as well as desirable cultural change. No doubt, universities implementing formal faculty mentoring should be encouraged to share ideas and tips with respect to research-based faculty mentoring, so as to continue to improve the climate and culture for tenure and promotion of new faculty. Author Notes 1Academic publishers are now recognizing the value of formal faculty mentoring programs, especially as concerns relevance for multiple university colleges, with the rst-ever book on this topic recently appearing in print (Mullen, in press). 2This study received USF's Institutional Review Board approval in 2005. This essay treatment is of a larger empirical work: Mullen, C. A., Feyten, C. M., Holcomb, C., Kealy, W. A., & Keller, H. R. (in press). Birthing a new faculty mentoring program in a research culture. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), The handbook of successful faculty mentoring programs. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. References Bode, R. K. (1999). Mentoring and collegiality. In R. J. Menges and Associates (Eds.), Faculty in new jobs (pp. 118-114). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Boice, R. (1991). New faculty as teachers. Journal of Higher Education, 62(2), 150-173. Brown, S. C. (2006). University research: Con ict between federal and local interests? Florida Educational Leadership, 6(2), 51-53. Forret, M. L., Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1996). Issues facing organizations when implementing formal mentoring programmes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 17(3), 27-30. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Gibb, S. (1999). The usefulness of theory: A case studying evaluating formal mentoring schemes. Human Relations, 52(8), 1055-1075. Higgins, M. C. (2000). The more, the merrier? Multiple developmental relationships and work satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 19(4), 277-296.
102
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Kram, K. E. (1985/1988). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Lanham, MA: University Press of America. Mullen, C. A., Kennedy, C. S., & Keller, H. R. (2006). Establishing new faculty mentoring programs in research institutions. School Leadership News: The newsletter of AERA; Division A: Administration, Organization, & Leadership, 17, 12-15. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from http://www.aera.net/divisions/?id=66 Mullen, C. A. (Ed.). (in press). The handbook of successful faculty mentoring programs. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. Ostro, C., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1993). The role of mentoring in the information gathering processes of newcomers during early organizational socialization. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 170-183. Rice, R. E., Sorcinelli, M. D., & Austin, A. F. (2000). Heeding new voices: Academic careers for a new generation. (Inquiry #7, working paper series). New pathways: Faculty careers and employment for the 21st century. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) and Stylus Publishing. Sorcinelli, M. D. (1994).
Eective approaches to new faculty development.
Journal of Counseling &
Development, 72, 474-479. Tierney, W. G. (2001). Reforming tenure in schools of education. Phi Delta Kappan, 550-554.
3.10 Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in 34
Educational Leadership and Administration
Note:
This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of
the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. This preliminary study asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? Four scholar-practitioners who were the most frequently nominated by fellow academics from 2002 to 2003 were identi ed. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteriasigni cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systemsappear in table form, complete with representative quotes. Importantly, issues of context and tension are raised as dierent perspectives were oered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents. On the one hand, a survey respondent commented, I realize the impossible task of selecting the greatest living scholar in our eld. Some are naturalistic methodologists rather than mainstream educational administration scholars, while others approach scholarship with very narrow or very broad perspectives. On the other hand, another declared, Some scholars do stand out. There is one who I think is simply the greatest mover `n' shaker in the profession. This individual has done more than any to shape the direction of the eldhis work is widely read by both scholars and practitioners, and his contributions to educational leadership are widely recognized. Introduction For this study, academics in educational leadership and administration were asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? The respondents (university faculty constituents) were encouraged to provide an explanation for their votes. The focus here is on the perceptions
34
This content is available online at
103
of nominators relative to outstanding scholarship in educational leadership. Not only the who, but particularly the why, served as the guiding framework for this analysis.
Throughout this survey research
spanning 2002 to 2003, four scholar-practitioners in particular were most frequently nominated, leading to their eventual identi cation. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that are discussed here; these can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteriasigni cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systemsappear in Table 1, complete with representative quotes from the data. Importantly, issues of context and tension were raised as dierent perspectives were oered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents.
The tension evident in the opening quotes
signi es deep, unresolved issues that surfaced during the data analysis. The complexities of this picture are also brie y explored in this article and are open to further interpretation. Conceptual Framework and Research Scaolds In addition to my own curiosity as a professor in this area, four sources inspired this preliminary exploration: (1) the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration's (NCPEA) Living Legend Awards, recognized annually since 1999 (http://www.ncpea.net); (2) Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study of highly productive educational psychologists, which identi ed living legendsRichard Anderson, Richard Mayer, Michael Pressley, and Ann Brownthrough nominators' eyes; (3) Culberton's (1995) seminal work on the University Council for Educational Administration's (UCEA) history that provides insight into the creation of this organizational inter-university system and those pioneering scholars involved; and (4) Murphy's (1999) self-portrait of the profession, informed by professors in school administration programs. Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study bene ted from their ongoing research on productive scholars. They combined a eld-based survey approach with dialogic case study methods, interviewing the most successful nominees. Adapting but also modifying this approach to satisfy my own objectives, I surveyed practicing educational leadership professors in their role of peer nominator. To obtain as many responses as possible and to dilute the in uence of any particular lter on the outcomes, I did not seek sponsorship from an association or funding agency, instead accessing dierent venues over time. Murphy's (1999) study also explored professors' concepts of important markers in the academy over one decade (e.g., reform eorts and publications and presentations within the eld). Interestingly, those authors and works cited as seminal from 1987 to 1996 overlapped with the results of my own study carried out seven years later. Of the top four nominees in my own studyin alphabetical order, John Goodlad (University of Washington, retiree), John Hoyle (Texas A&M University), Joseph Murphy (Vanderbilt University), and Thomas Sergiovanni (Trinity University) all but one (John Hoyle) were listed in Murphy's results. Since my survey question did not specify what con gures a living legend, the possibilities for naming new and dierent individuals extended beyond the use of publications and citations as a traditional marker of excellence in the academy. The results outlined in Table 1 support this perception, as criteria generated by nominees for making these decisions were much more comprehensive and show value for theory/practice links. However, despite these dierences between the two studies (e.g., my own pool of participants was greater, list of nominations longer, and survey question open-ended), the core selections of Murphy's respondents mirrored my own. This suggests outcomes beyond the scope of either of the studies, each reinforcing the other and, perhaps, enhancing validity.
However,
neither Murphy's study nor my own claim to have comprehensively sampled the discipline, opting instead for a purposeful sampling, consistent with a preliminary exploration. This is also the case for Kiewra and Creswell's study. Participant Pool and Study Method Nominated Scholars The many persons forwarded as exceptional by faculty peers may all qualify as scholar-practitioners for whom their academic productivity inextricably links to impact and application within the eld. While most can be described as full- edged scholars who have signi cantly in uenced national trends and policies in addition to local contexts, others were selected for their leadership roles within school districts and the
104
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
community. However, the majority of exceptional scholars nominated work within the academy in various disciplines, primarily educational administration, in one of two respects: (1) broadly representing educational studies within such areas as business, politics, humanities, and philosophy, or (2) specializing in educational leadership with a focus on school leadership, higher education, or teacher education, and in such areas as supervision, schooluniversity collaboration, leadership preparation, policy, and reform.
3.10.1 Survey Methods Pilot and group discourse. For the survey `The Greatest' Living Scholars of Our Time (that some quipped to be a tough assignment) recipients were asked to take a moment to make a dierence by answering this question, to nominate one person, and to brie y jot down the reason(s) for your choice. The form alluded to the necessity of being able to make an informed judgment (this survey assumes that you're in the eld of educational leadership). It was established that any feedback would be anonymously reported. A pilot sampling, conducted in 2002 at a doctoral research-extensive metropolitan university in Florida, involved eight educational leadership professors. The question was openly tested and the interest level gauged. This process further veri ed the value/importance of the question itself, so I broadened my data collection eorts. I also learned that some faculty wanted either to nominate more than one person or to vote with reservations, an outcome that foreshadowed an emerging pattern on a larger scale for some respondents. Fuller sampling and distribution. Turning to listserves of professional associations, I accessed those most relevant to my study, including university-based educational leadership departments located through Internet searches. Conference councils and educational leadership editorial teams also received the survey. My goal was to obtain 200 surveys214 (6%) complete responses were received; additionally, 19 electronic messages were returned explaining why a nomination was not possible.
In all, 233 (7%) responses were analyzed.
Approximately 3,500 individuals would have received the survey (some more than once), but this number proved impossible to accurately track. While the goal set for the completed surveys was met, the very low return rate needs to be addressed, especially when one considers that a good response rate of 50 to 60% is generally considered accepted for survey research (Diem, 2002). However, at least one social science research team has found that its traditional paper survey yielded a higher response rate (60%) than the same questionnaire distributed electronically, which dropped signi cantly to 27%; this led them to question whether e-surveys are a reliable means of collecting data from a targeted population (Fraze, Hardin, Brashears, Smith, & Lockaby, 2003). In the long list provided by Newman (2002) for increasing one's response rate from surveys in general, I used most of the suggestionsprovide a salient question, indicate why the respondent's answer matters, keep the survey short and simple, use university identi cation and a personalized note, and follow up with a reminder. I did not make many telephone calls or oer monetary incentives, both optional strategies for maximizing one's response rate. While I do not know why for certain why the response rate was low, several possibilities do come to mind. For one thing, the tensions evident in some of the responses (and non-votes) received suggest that the nature of the topic itself is controversial. Asking who the most exceptional scholar in educational leadership is today may seem confounded for those who question the very notion of greatness, especially among one's living contemporaries, or those who can think of more than one person, or those who can think of no one at all deserving of such status. As Renzetti and Lee (1993) acknowledge, researching sensitive topics poses conceptual, methodological, and imaginative challenges, an explanation that describes my own experience. As another possibility, there is little control that can be exerted over a study that is conducted electronically and where the recipients, although from a targeted population, may question the survey focus or the researcher's motives. This is why I spent additional time collecting the data, re-stating the purpose of the study, eliciting some responses in-person, and emailing reminders to non-respondents, all as strategies for seeking a higher response rate. Speci cally, the survey was electronically circulated to the American Educational Research Association's (AERA) Division A (Administration), which had 820 members in 2002, and AERA's Division K (Teaching & Teacher Education), which had 1,004 (http://www.aera.net).
Additionally, representatives of UCEA's
executive council and member institutes were recipients (http://www.ucea.org), along with NCPEA's 1,622
105
members (http://www.ncpea.org). Thirty- ve leadership professors also represented the Florida Association of Professors of Educational Leadership Association (FAPEL). Deviation from KiewraCreswell study.
Unlike Kiewra and Creswell (2000), who generated a list of
names based on AERA's Division C (Learning and Instruction) membership, I did not preselect scholars to be rated. I strove to avoid tying the results to particular associations and their star leaders, which could have limited and even biased the data. And I did not want to presume what living scholar might mean to others, so I avoided de ning this term. Those respondents who forwarded the names of two exceptional scholars, explaining their reasoning for this decision, had both votes counted. Also, in contrast with Kiewra and Creswell's focus on cognition and learning for their survey and recipient pool, my own form provided no premapping or compartmentalization relative to educational leadership. Reasons for selecting any particular area, such as supervision or policy, seemed arbitrary, serving only to privilege one at the expense of another. I opted for openness, hoping this would promote greater inclusion or representation of the educational leadership eld and hence provide a rich data set of interest to readers. Finally, the Kiewra and Creswell results were based on 41 (out of 113) responses. The 233 I received from nominators also compares with the 105 that Murphy (1999) collected. Saturation and data analysis. The scholars recognized as exceptional in this study achieved this status once the data (i.e., votes cast and reasons provided) revealed clear patterns. Also, the response data (reasons given for selections) were coded, and key words and phrases highlighted, in search of potential themes, applying Miles and Huberman's (1994) qualitative procedures for data management and analysis. Discussion of Survey Results In supplying the reason(s) for their choice, respondents generally emphasized areas of importance, speci c contributions, and lines of work, even areas that personally in uenced their own scholarship. Others noted publications and further scholarly contributions. Four scholars have been identi ed as exceptional in this article.
Although many more names were
forwarded, some with obvious and consistent support by the voting body, a demarcation became evident based on the sheer number of tallies over time.
A top tier consisting of four individuals had emerged in
addition to a second and third tier. Those nalists identi ed here are all white males. A number of females and a few minorities were nominated (and some were nominators), but not to the point of selection. Although there has been a dramatic increase of women in educational leadership, school leadership certi cation programs, and leadership positions in national level associations (e.g., UCEA, NCPEA, and AERA), male scholars may be publishing more frequently (Engstrom, 1999). As McCarthy (1999) speculated, women as a group have been faculty in this eld for fewer years than men, and so have not yet hit their stride in terms of scholarly productivity and impact (p. 202). As another possibility, male scholars may be receiving greater recognition for works disseminated and scholarly eorts made. The same trend probably applies to minority scholars. Obviously, such trends and possibilities should be closely examined in the context of equity, ethics, and policy development in academe, as recommended by Haring (1998) and other scholars. Dierent Readings of the Question The survey question was interpreted in various ways.
While some viewed it from a national policy
perspective, others considered contribution to the scholarly eld, schools, or novice leaders. Selection Criteria and Reasons The criteria of selection and reasons given were numerous; these are summarized in Table 1. The entries (appearing on the left) represent the themes that emerged from the response data and each quote (on the right) provides support from two or more respondents for the corresponding theme; these all characterize the typical comments received. The four scholars selected as leading academics do not evenly ful ll all of the criteria listed, perhaps because each is known for particular spheres of in uence (e.g., leadership standards, administrator program preparation reform, ethics and moral leadership, K12 institutional partnership).
Nonetheless, all were
associated with such dimensions as signi cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systems. The reasons provided extend beyond the traditional association with publication rates and impact via frequency of citation as markers of scholarly
106
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
excellence. The proliferating criteria also t with some of the emerging contemporary trends in our eld, such as the increase since 1986 of university faculty committing to improving relationships with schools and practitioners, developing eld-based components in preparation programs, and focusing more on ethics in professional practice (McCarthy, 1999; Mullen, Gordon, Greenlee, & Anderson, 2002). However, the recurring reasons that were forwarded virtually bypassed contributions in the areas of diversity and social justice as well as alternative paradigms, such as feminism, critical theory, and postmodernism. Perhaps these and other philosophically critical locations will emerge in a more exhaustive sampling or a future one. A critical reader of a draft version of this article asserted that the results re ect a chasm in the eld, which is still very traditional while moving ahead. Going Wide/Deep as Reformers Those who functioned broadly in their work and impact received more tallies within the discipline than scholars who functioned more narrowly. This pattern suggests that those receiving an abundance of votes were perceived as having a higher value. However, those who have made signi cant inroads in an educational leadership domain, such as administrator program preparation reform, were simultaneously associated with speci c change agendas.
Going wide/deep was a salient pattern, then, associated with living legend.
Generally speaking, nominees had appeared to construct their own meaning of exceptional, seeing this as a comprehensive eort closely related to particular reform agendas.
Fullan (1999) explains that large
scaleness is only possible where human contact has been fully established and a multilevel system has been managed on a continuous basis (p. 74). Although Fullan was addressing large-scale reforms per se rather than particular reformers, these can be linked as I have done in this discussion.
3.10.2 Tensions in the Data Analysis As is evident from Table 1, the results proved productive for identifying criteria that some academics currently associate with outstanding scholarship. In contrast, a minority (19 individuals) oered powerful insights into why nomination was simply not feasible to them. For a few, the very use of our eld in the survey question was problematic: I see a problem with your question vis-à-vis your use of the label `our eld. ' Respondents doubtless thought about the heroes in their own areas of study. Granted, the concept of eld is very tricky. English (2003) critiques eld and its cousin knowledge base as leftovers from modernism, denying a plurality of realities, truths, and interpretations. Postmodernism brings context, human agency, and multiplicity into the foreground: Educational leadership, similar to leadership studies, incorporates a broad range of perspectives, from descriptive to social scienti c to humanistic and drawing upon the interpretive methods of history, literature, philosophy, and education (Johnson, 1996, p. 13). Another perception is that educational leadership is changing: The intent to bridge theory with practice has created an emerging discipline that transcends the academy precisely because it is more than mere scholarship; it is scholarship plus (Born, 1996, p. 47). The hybrid or borrowing nature of educational administration has produced a composite eld, arousing concern.
Someone shared, I've been deeply troubled by the many contradictions between American
democratic ideals and the theories and notions borrowed from business, the military, and the social sciences being subsumed within the eld of education administration with little scrutiny. Because of the increasingly amorphous nature of educational leadership, another argued in favor of actually creating a eld that has boundaries and a distinct identity: Without clear, substantive dierences from other academic departments, educational administration as a eld of serious scholarly inquiry has no legitimate grounds on which to defend its continued existence within academe, particularly while higher education is being downsized. For still others, the use of living scholar understandably incited confusion and controversy, as thoughtfully articulated: In good conscience I must say that I nd the term living scholar something of an oxymoron. My de nition may be out of style these days, but I believe before one can be considered a scholar that person's writings or orations must have withstood the tests of time. Interestingly, this decision evoked considerable di culty. Every time I visit your email the same questions prevent an answerdoes `greatest living' mean most frequently cited by other scholars? Most followed by practitioners? Contributed the greatest theoretical insights about leadership?
107
Done most to redirect the eld of study?
Or, added most to the empirical base for understanding
leadership? My reaction to all of these pivotal concerns is that while the survey question is laden with datable, slippery concepts (i.e., the eld, living scholar, exceptional, and even educational leadership), so is the profession itself. Further, the question solicited valuable informationit is useful to see the multiple, disjointed, and even contradictory viewpoints taken.
Areas of consensus also surfaced from this mixed
response, as captured in Table 1. Accounting for the feedback of non-voting members as I have done here has made visible issues of contention.
Those who provided critiques about the nominating process and
suggestively about its validity performed a probing hermeneutic deconstruction that was treated as data and thematically analyzed, with some attention given here. Contextual In uences and Background Issues One crucial insight of survey respondents was, Who is outstanding in educational leadership and administration or any scholarly eld is really framed by the times and the needs.
In many respects, this
resounding message has greater worth than the criteria and even the participants' selections. Certainly, context matters, a reality that keeps the idea of living legend and practice of hero-worshipping in perspective. This admission of temporality and contextuality contrasts with the view that the living legend nalists represent a static, noncontroversial choice. The results, inevitably debatable from almost any angle, are also in uenced by the methods I have selected and the venues surveyed. Regardless of my attempt to appraise the educational leadership eld as comprehensively as possible, a disjointedly con gured domain required piecemeal, pick and shovel sampling. Because no single repository exists to which all leadership professors belong, it is currently not possible to communicate with the complete constituency and at one time. Such systemic barriers make it clear that any such study should not be construed as the last word on the subject of exceptional scholarship. In addition to systemic barriers to data collection, other contextual issues included political alliances, decision-making challenges, and generational biases.
Some scholarly communities hold tight allegiances,
making it di cult to know the extent to which nominations were in uenced by loyalty rather than informed judgment.
In a few instances, junior professors confessed that they had nominated their former major
professors.
Perhaps more exhaustive sampling procedures would have better monitored the in uence of
political entanglements; on the other hand, these seem inherent in the psyche of any discipline.
Other
contextual in uences underscore how challenging it proved for some respondents to make a single selection. This struggle emphasizes just how demanding this decision-making process can be as well asthis is the good newsthe high number of outstanding leaders from which to select. A few participants even postulated that no such scholars currently exist, except as experts within their own domain. But most persons did provide a nomination, even where disclaimers had been announced, an admission that supports the contentious notion that leading scholars for contemporary times can in fact be identi ed, even where tensions and uncertainty are embedded in the conclusions and where debate is inevitable and ongoing. As mentioned, a generational bias entered into the results but once again the degree of in uence is unknown. More senior professors generally know the older or more established generation of scholars, whereas those younger have familiarity with the newer stars. Several nominees addressed this phenomenon, as in: The more scholarly respondents might tend to select someone who is treasured within their eld for the writing they have done. Personally, I am not as up-to-date with names because my own heroes are mostly retirees; in fact, I am ignorant of the mid-career hotshots who are making good waves. Final Remark The issues of complexity raised herein suggest that while nominations of living legends seem possible, especially where constituents have formulated criteria, deeper issues prevail. Nominators forwarded useful and revealing criteria supporting their decision makinga process thoughtfully undertaken, particularly by those sharing re ections and caveats. And the dissenting critiques proved invaluable as well. Nominators provided clues about the patterns of educational leadership they most value, the individuals to whom they have looked for guidance, the status of the eld, and emergent trends. Further research is needed that continues work on the controversial topic of exceptional scholarship in educational leadership. Debate is also encouraged about the topics of signi cance raised: The critical tensions
108
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
explored herein that capture the thinking of some university faculty in addition to the self-identifying criteria for the votes cast would bene t from a community-wide response. References Born, D. (1996). Leadership studies: A critical appraisal. In P. S. Temes (Ed.), Teaching leadership: Essays in theory and practice (pp. 45-72). New York: Peter Lang. Culbertson, J. (1995). Building bridges: UCEA's rst two decades. University Park, PA: The University Council for Educational Administration. Diem, K. G. (2002).
Maximizing response rate and controlling nonresponse error in survey research.
New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension/Resource Center Services.
[Online].
Available:
http://www.rce.rutgers.edu. English, F. W. (2003). The postmodern challenge to the theory and practice of educational administration. Spring eld, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher. Engstrom, C. M. (1999). Promoting the scholarly writing of female doctoral students in higher education and student aairs program. NASPA Journal, 36(4), 264-277. Fraze, S., Hardin, K., Brashears, T., Smith, J. H., & Lockaby, J. (2003). The eects of delivery mode upon survey response rate and perceived attitudes of Texas agri-science teachers.
Journal of agricultural
education, 44 (part 2), 27-37. Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer. Haring, M. J. (1998). Response to A woman's name: Implications for publication, citation, and tenure. Educational Researcher, 27(8), 43. Johnson, P. F. (1996).
Antipodes: Plato, Nietzsche, and the moral dimension of leadership.
In P. S.
Temes (Ed.), Teaching leadership: Essays in theory and practice (pp. 13-44). New York: Peter Lang. Kiewra, K. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2000). Conversations with three highly productive educational psychologists: Richard Anderson, Richard Mayer, and Michael Pressley. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 135-161. McCarthy, M. M. (1999). The changing face of the educational leadership professoriate. In J. Murphy & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform (pp. 192-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mullen, C. A., Gordon, S. P., Greenlee, B., & Anderson, R. H. (2002). Capacities for school leadership: Emerging trends in the literature. International Journal of Educational Reform, 11(2), 158-198. Murphy, J. (1999). The reform of the profession: A self-portrait. In J. Murphy & P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform (pp. 39-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Newman,
M. E. (2002).
`Rounding up' responses to mailed questionnaires.
ation Association/Extension Education Evaluation].
[Online].
Available:
[American Evalu-
http://danr.ucop.edu/eee-
aea/AEA_HearItFromTheBoardJuly2002.pdf Renzetti, C. M., & Lee, R. M. (Eds.). (1993). Researching sensitive topics. London: Sage. Author Notes The respondent quotes appearing on this chart (and in this article) have been synthesized and slightly altered, rendered gender-neutral where possible and anonymous, protecting both the nominees and the nominators.
I am grateful to the faculty nominators who generously shared their perceptions.
Also, I
appreciate the helpful critique provided by the editor and the two reviewers. Acronyms for national standards used by nominators: Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC); Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)
109
110
CHAPTER 3.
THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL
INDEX
111
Index of Keywords and Terms
Keywords are listed by the section with that keyword (page numbers are in parentheses).
Keywords
do not necessarily appear in the text of the page. They are merely associated with that section. Ex. apples, 1.1 (1)
Terms are referenced by the page they appear on.
H I
. A
administration, 1.2(8)
L
Leadership by Outrage, 3.3(50) leadership preparation, 3.4(54)
Best Practices in Online Teaching Course, 1.3(14) blended learning, 1.3(14) Building Leaders, 3.3(50) Bureaucratic, 3.3(50) CHALLENGING THE PRESENT, 50 Change, 3.3(50)
M Manager, 3.3(50) Mentoring, 3.7(80), 3.9(98)
N O
CREDITING THE PAST, 50 cultural competence, 3.6(75)
P
Preparation Programs, 3.8(88) principal preparation, 3.7(80)
Dependency, 3.3(50)
professional development, 3.7(80) protegeship, 3.7(80)
distance education, 1.3(14)
education, 1.2(8)
Purposing, 3.3(50)
S
school improvement, 3.5(62), 3.6(75)
Educational Leaders, 2.1(17)
school leaders, 3.4(54)
educational leadership, 1.1(1), 3.6(75)
Social and Political Acumen, 2.1(17)
Empowerment, 3.3(50) global, 3.6(75)
scholar-practitioner, 3.10(102) school culture, 3.6(75)
educational administration, 3.9(98)
G
policy, 3.6(75) preparation, 3.10(102)
distance, 1.2(8)
E
online learning, 1.3(14) online teaching, 1.3(14)
Curriculum, 3.8(88)
diversity, 3.6(75)
ncpea, 1.1(1), 2.1(17), 3.7(80), 3.9(98)
online pedagogy, 1.3(14)
CREATING THE FUTURE, 50 credentialing, 3.4(54)
Leader, 3.3(50) 3.10(102)
audit, 3.6(75)
D
Higher Education, 3.8(88)
leadership, 1.2(8), 3.7(80), 3.8(88),
assessment, 3.6(75)
C
apples, 1
..............................................................CONTENT.............................................................., instruction, 1.2(8) 50 instructional design, 1.3(14) administrative support, 2.2(33)
B
Ex.
Standards, 3.8(88)
T
teacer mentors, 2.2(33) technology, 1.1(1), 1.2(8)
112
ATTRIBUTIONS
Attributions Collection: Mentorship for Teacher Leaders Edited by: Fred Mednick URL: http://cnx.org/content/col10622/1.3/ License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "e-Based Professional Development (e-PD) for Eective Teaching and Leadership" By: Mary Harris-John, Sherri Ritter URL: http://cnx.org/content/m15069/1.1/ Pages: 1-8 Copyright: Mary Harris-John, Sherri Ritter License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Utilizing Distance Education in Your Professional Development" By: Ed Cox, William Sharp URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14133/1.1/ Pages: 8-13 Copyright: Ed Cox, William Sharp License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Best Practices in Online Teaching - During Teaching - Promote Active Learning" By: Larry Ragan URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14977/1.2/ Pages: 14-16 Copyright: Larry Ragan License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "A Study of Social and Political Acumen in Dynamic Educational Leadership and the Implications for Leadership Development Programs" By: Andra McGinn URL: http://cnx.org/content/m17184/1.1/ Pages: 17-33 Copyright: Andra McGinn License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Mentors' Views of Factors Essential for the Success of Beginning Teachers" By: Arnold Barrera, Richard Braley, John Slate URL: http://cnx.org/content/m18056/1.3/ Pages: 33-46 Copyright: Arnold Barrera, Richard Braley, John Slate License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Toward a Leadership Practice Field" By: Theodore Creighton URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12743/1.8/ Pages: 47-48 Copyright: Theodore Creighton License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
ATTRIBUTIONS
113
Module: "CREDITING THE PAST, CHALLENGING THE PRESENT, CREATING THE FUTURE" Used here as: "The Long View" By: National Council of Professors of Educational Administration URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12868/1.3/ Pages: 48-50 Copyright: National Council of Professors of Educational Administration License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "The Principalship: Manager to Leader" By: Angus MacNeil, Michael Yelvington URL: http://cnx.org/content/m12924/1.2/ Pages: 50-53 Copyright: Angus MacNeil, Michael Yelvington License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Preparing, Developing, and Credentialing K-12 School Leaders: Continuous Learning for Professional Roles" By: Patricia Reeves, James E. Berry URL: http://cnx.org/content/m18260/1.1/ Pages: 54-62 Copyright: Patricia Reeves, James E. Berry License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Reality Check: Designing a New Leadership Program for the 21st Century" By: Bob Smith, Rayma Harchar, Kathleen Campbell URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13690/1.1/ Pages: 62-75 Copyright: Bob Smith, Rayma Harchar, Kathleen Campbell License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "THE CULTURE AUDIT: A LEADERSHIP TOOL FOR ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING IN DIVERSE SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES" By: Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13691/1.2/ Pages: 75-80 Copyright: Rebecca M. Bustamante, Ph.D. License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "A Mentoring Mindset: Preparing Future Principals to be Eective Protégés" By: Linda Searby URL: http://cnx.org/content/m16930/1.2/ Pages: 80-87 Copyright: Linda Searby License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "An Imperative for Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Future Leaders to Meet the Needs of Students, Schools, and Communities" By: Bonnie Beyer URL: http://cnx.org/content/m19029/1.1/ Pages: 88-98 Copyright: Bonnie Beyer License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
114
ATTRIBUTIONS
Module: "It Takes a Village to Raise New Faculty: Implementing Triangular Mentoring Relationships" By: Carol Mullen, Colleen Kennedy URL: http://cnx.org/content/m14546/1.2/ Pages: 98-102 Copyright: Carol Mullen, Colleen Kennedy License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Module: "Perceptions Within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in Educational Leadership and Administration" By: Carol Mullen URL: http://cnx.org/content/m13677/1.1/ Pages: 102-110 Copyright: Carol Mullen License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Mentorship for Teacher Leaders A set of research modules to help selected Teachers Without Borders members best prepare for their active role as mentors for those teachers participating in the ve-course Certi cate of Teaching Mastery program
About Connexions Since 1999, Connexions has been pioneering a global system where anyone can create course materials and make them fully accessible and easily reusable free of charge. We are a Web-based authoring, teaching and learning environment open to anyone interested in education, including students, teachers, professors and lifelong learners. We connect ideas and facilitate educational communities. Connexions's modular, interactive courses are in use worldwide by universities, community colleges, K-12 schools, distance learners, and lifelong learners.
Connexions materials are in many languages, including
English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Vietnamese, French, Portuguese, and Thai. Connexions is part of an exciting new information distribution system that allows for
Print on Demand Books.
Connexions
has partnered with innovative on-demand publisher QOOP to accelerate the delivery of printed course materials and textbooks into classrooms worldwide at lower prices than traditional academic publishers.
Related Documents
Teacher Mentorship
December 2019 4
Alchemy Mentorship Programme
June 2020 2
Teacher
October 2019 29
Teacher
June 2020 11
Teacher
May 2020 18
Teacher
June 2020 13More Documents from "Adrianne Cobb"
Cisco_cvm_case_study_july2007
December 2019 18
Using M&e To Improve Development Strategy
May 2020 18
Gettingitdoneapproachweb
December 2019 22
Twbofferings_digest_ciscodec18
December 2019 5
Appraisal Guidelines March 2006
May 2020 4