—A'fi-i

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

..,. .. ..‘.._...,.._H.‘_.

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-~ suns-qr, "n“nu um

 

 

 

   

   

 

 

 

 

 

m LIBRARY
' 3 ,_ Michigan State
2905 University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

URBAN SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP
PREPARATION: PERSPECTIVE OF URBAN SCHOOL
PRINCIPALS

presented by

JAMES DAVID SMITH

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

PhD. degree in Educational Administration

 

 

' Major Professor’s Signature
(” ,
2:) ~ 2. - ZQ’E’

Date

 

MSU is an affinnative-ection, equal-opportunity employer

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

DATE DUE

    
       

       

DATE DUE DATE DUE

_:.\- .,

URBAN SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP PREPARATION:
PERSPECTIVE OF URBAN SCHOOL PRINCIPALS

By

James David Smith

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements '
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Educational Administration

2008

 

ABSTRACT

URBAN SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP PREPARATION:
PERSPECTIVE OF URBAN SCHOOLPRINCIPALS

By
James David Smith

The primary objective of this qualitative research study is to understand, What does
it mean to be prepared to be an urban school principal with a majority African American
student population? Eight research findings emerged from analysis of focus group,
interview, and case study data collected from the director of school leadership training
and nine African American K-12 urban school principals — all working in the same urban
school district in Michigan.

The first research finding provides evidence that between 2006 and 2016 a
significant number of highly experienced baby boom generation principals will be leaving
the principalship due to retirement, promotion, or career change. The second finding is
that leadership training is not a program it is an on-going process that employs seven
genres of training to develop participants skills, knowledge, and capacity for urban school
leadership. Third, elementary, middle and high school principals place a different priority
on the school leadership issues and challenges they face. Fourth, urban principals must
focus on a myriad of diverse "nuts and bolts" issues and challenges affecting their urban
school. The fifth finding is that principal preparation for urban school leadership is a
continuous process with six distinct preparation activities. Sixth, principals in my
participants school district are only measured, evaluated, and receive performance
improvement feedback on three out of six critical areas of urban school leadership. And

seventh, leadership training and preparation programs offered by school districts,

universities, and private sector organizations have significant differences in their
leadership training and preparation activities, structure, and outcome objectives.
Synthesizing these seven findings provides an answer to my research question.

My eighth finding is being prepared to be an urban school principal with a majority
African American student population means having the skills, knowledge, opportunity,
and resources necessary and sufficient to provide leadership in seven critical areas of
urban school leadership: implementing instructional, operational, staff, and student
support strategies that help educate urban children; actively participating in preparing
aspiring urban school leaders; meeting school stakeholder expectations; minimizing the
effects of external forces on students and school staff; addressing multiple needs of urban
students; and demonstrating a professional and personal commitment to urban education.

Unfortunately, only a scant amount of research literature is focused on preparing
principals specifically for urban school leadership. This paucity of research suggests a
fallacious operating assumption for school leadership training and preparation that the
urban, suburban, or rural setting of the school does not matter - that K-12 school
principals can and should be trained and prepared to address school issues and challenges
and provide necessary and sufficient school leadership in any context. Based on the
findings that emerged during this research, I offer a three point counter argument that,
first, the urban setting and contextual school leadership does indeed matter. Second,
training and preparation for urban school principals can and should be theoretically
grounded, delivered, and practiced in an urban school setting. And third, based on my
assumption that a significant number of baby boom generation urban school principals
will be leaving, I believe a significant number of aspiring principals can and should be

expeditiously trained and prepared for K-12 school leadership in an urban setting.

~

 

 

DEDICATION

This Ph.D. dissertation is dedicated to my parents George and Irma Smith,
who taught me to love reading and the value of life-long learning.

To my brothers and sisters Celestine, George, Ina and Hannibal,
all of whom loved books and learning.

To my wife Maryetta,
my two sons Julian and Jamil,
and my daughter-in—law Kenia Smith,
all of whom I love and value.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To my wife Maryetta:
Thank you for your love, support, understanding, and patience as I pursued my dream of

completing my Ph.D. program.

To my Ph.D. committee members Dr. Maenette Benham, Dr. Christopher Dunbar,
committee chair, Dr. Susan Printy, and Dr. Francisco Villarruel:

I am grateful and forever indebted to each of you for serving as my intellectual adviser,
confidant, Critic, evaluator, shepherd, and mentor. Individually and collectively you
gently, but firmly, nudged me along during my five year journey towards my PhD

dissertation defense.

To Dr.Joyce Piert, my format coach, who provided me with content checks, context

discussions, extensive mark-up, .05 paragraph indentations, and motivation to finish.

Thanks - to all ofyou

vi

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................... x

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................. xi
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1

Statement of the Problem ..................................................................... 3

Purpose of this Research ..................................................................... 4

Research Questions ........................................................................... 5

Definition of Terms ........................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ........................................................ 8

Literature Review Framework ............................................................... 8

History and Evolution of Principal Preparation Programs ....................... 9

Effective Schools Movement ....................................................... 11

School Leadership Standards ....................................................... 14

Why Urban Principal Preparation Programs are Needed ......................... 15

Program Evaluation and research .................................................... 31

Program structure and components ................................................. 36

Program graduates .................................................................... 39

Salient Features of Urban Principal Preparation Programs ...................... 41
CHAPTER 3

METHODS AND PROCEDURES ............................. 47

Research Approach .......................................................................... 47

Participant Selection .......................................................................... 48

Data Collection ................................................................................. 50

Analytical Framework ........................................................................ 54

Data Analysis ................................................................................. 56

CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS ........................................................................................ 58
Case Studies of Nine Urban School Principals ......................................... 58
Ruby, Principal [(-5 Elementary School ................................................. 59
Mary, Principal K-8 Elementary School ................................................. 69
Robert, Principal K—8 Elementary School ............................................... 76
Paula, Principal K-8 Elementary School ................................................. 82
Daniel, Principal 6-8 Middle School ..................................................... 91
Kathy, Principal 6-8 Middle School .................................................... 101
George, Principal 9-12 High School .................................................... 112
Henrietta, Principal 9-12 High School .................................................. 128
Marietta, Principal 9-12 High School ................................................... 137

CHAPTER 5

FINDINGS ....................................................................................... 145
Participant Profile ......................................................................... 147
Leadership Training ....................................................................... 15 1
Leadership Priorities ...................................................................... 161
Urban School Issues ........................................................................ 171
Leadership Preparation .................................................................... 182
Leadership Programs ..................................................................... 207

Urban District Training Program and Preparation Process .................... 208
University Programs ............................................................... 210
New Leaders for New Schools .................................................... 211
Similarities and Differences in Activities ....................................... 213
Similarities and Differences in Structure ....................................... 214
Similarities and Differences in Outcome Objectives ............................ 218

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS ..................................................... 220
Conclusrons221
Implications ................................................................................... 225

viii

APPENDICIES

Appendix A: Participant focus group and interview consent form

and confidentiality agreement ............................................ 229

Appendix B: District director of leadership training interview guide ................... 232
Appendix C: Urban school principal interview guide ................................. 234
REFERENCES ........................ . ............................................................ 2 36

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.0: Percentage and number of Title 1 schools identified for
improvement and improvement status by district type

and size 2004-05 ................................................................... 21
Table 3.0: Participants Career History in Private Sector and Urban Education

as of June 2006 ..................................................................... 49
Table 3.1: Participant’s Estimates of Student Population and School Staff... .........51
Table 3.2: What School Procedures, Functions, or Activities Require your

Involvement or Leadership as an Urban School Principal? ...................... 53
Table 5.0: Estimate of Study Participants Age in 2006 and 2016 ...................... 148

Table 5.1: Participants Career History in Private Sector and Urban Education. . ...150

 

Table 5.2: University and District Leadership Training of Par' ‘, ‘ 158
Table 5.3: Principals Leadership Priorities and Related Research ..................... 163
Table 5.4: Summary of Participants 2005-2006 Adequate Yearly Progress... . ......169

Table 5.5: Summary of Thirty-One Nuts-And-Bolts Issues and
Challenges Affecting Participants Schools .................................. 172

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.0: Michigan Geographic Areas Considered Urban ............................. 6
Figure 2.0: A Typical Masters of School Administration Program

in Mid 1990’s ................................................................... 23
Figure 2.1: Urban-l 3 Universities Offering Doctorate Level Degrees ................ 24

Figure 2.2: Cleveland State University Urban Education Ph.D.
Conceptual Framework ........................................................ 25

Figure 2.3: New Leaders for New Schools - Urban principal
Preparation Program ............................................................. 28

Figure 2. 4: Three Categories of Principal Preparation Program Evaluation
and “ 17

Figure 2.5: Common Features of Five Urban School

 

Leadership Preparation Programs .............................................. 45
Figure 5.0: Seven Genres ofUrban School Leadership Trarnrng152
Figure 5.1: Summary of Urban School Principal’s Grade Level

Leadership Priorities... . . . . . .. 165
Figure 5.2: Percentage of Time Participants Spend on Instructional

or Administrative Leadership Activities .................................... 167
Figure 5.3: Six Categories of “Nuts-And-Bolts” Issues and Challenges

Mentioned by Participants .................................................... 174
Figure 5.4: Urban School Personnel Classifications ...................................... 180
Figure 5.5: Urban school district leadership preparation process ..................... 183
Figure 5.6: Urban School Principals Leadership Capacity ............................ 193

Figure 5 .:7 Urban School Principal Leadership Preparation Process
and Leadership Capacity Outcome Matrix. .2.....06

Figure 5.8: Program and Process Activities, Structure, and
Outcome Objectives of Three Different Provider of
K-12 School Leadership Training and Preparation............. ..............209

Figure 6.0: What Does it Mean to be Prepared to be an Urban School
Principal With a Majority Afiican American Student Copulation ...... 225

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Instructional leadership provided by the school principal is a critical success factor
for implementing academic reform and sustaining school improvement (Blase & Blase,
1998; Bruss, 1986; Chell, 1995; Fullan, 2001; P. Hallinger, 1992; Hoy & Hoy, 2003;
Lashway, 2002; K. Leithwood, 1993; Levine, 2005; J. Murphy, 1991; Osterrnan & et al.,
1993; Yukl, 1982). This notion of the leadership efi'ect of the school principal is central to
school effectiveness research that argues effective schools are more likely to have an
instructional leader who sets high expectations for student achievement, maintains a
school-wide focus on academics, creates a safe and orderly school environment, and
clearly communicates the school vision and goals (Boysen, 1992; Cuban, 2001;
Edmonds, 1979; Gooden, 2002; P. Hallinger & Murphy, 1986; Reynolds, 2001;
Sarnmons 2006; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003).

Researchers specifically focused on understanding the leadership role,
responsibility, and effect of principals of a K-12 public school located in an urban
setting have concluded that, in addition to instructional leadership, urban principals must
be trained and prepared to provide leadership on a plethora of political, economic, racial,
psychological, physiological, and environmental issues and challenges facing their
students, student families, the school, and school community (Carlin, 1992; Center on
Education Policy, 2005; Cuban, 2004; Edmonds, 1979; Gooden, 2002; Jackson, 2005;
Kozol, 1991; Ladd & Yinger, 1989; Levine, 2005; Lipman, 1998; Payne, 2005; B. S.
Portin, 2000). Examples of issues and challenges facing urban principals include

accountability for adequate yearly progress in student achievement despite insufficient

financial and human resources; less experienced or poor performing teachers; fi'ustrated
or angry parents; old school buildings in need of frequent repair and maintenance;
inadequate professional staff support in the school; implementation responsibility for
complex policy mandates that are under-funded; and not having enough time for
important instructional leadership activities due to a myriad of operational activities and
administrative procedures that require their involvement (Boysen, 1992; Dantley, 1990;
Eikenberry, 1930; Kimball & Sirotnik, 2000; Lipman, 1998; Reynold J. S. Macpherson,
1998; Reves, 2004; Shen, Rodriguez-Campos, & Rincones-Gomez, 2000; Taylor, 2002).
A recurring theme emerging from research focused on the urban school principal is that
university educational leadership programs and urban school district professional
development are not training and preparing K-12 urban school principals for their
changing role, complex leadership challenges, expanded responsibilities, and increased
accountability as urban school leaders.
Statement of the Problem

School principals are being held publicly accountable for providing instructional
leadership that result in both annual and sustained improvement in academic achievement
for all students in their school. The Center on Education Policy (2005) reports that an
increasing number of urban school principals, all across the country, are not providing the
instructional leadership schools may require to achieve the adequate yearly progress
objectives of their schools. One issue urban principal’s face is the lack of a consistent or
commonly accepted definition of instructional leadership. Another issue is principals may
have difl'rculty translating a research-based theory of instructional leadership into their
leadership practice in an urban school environment. An urban principal may have been

exposed to instructional leadership theory during their university training; professional

development offered by their district; from mentoring experiences; or perhaps from their
instructional leadership experience while a classroom teacher, department head or
assistant principal. Many researchers believe the principal’s training and experience, both
before and after assuming the principalship, may not have prepared the principal to
provide instructional leadership that is necessary, appropriate or sufficient for a public
school situated in a lower income or high poverty urban environment (Anderson, 1991;
Baker, 2004; Blase & Blase, 1998; Broad Foundation & Fordham Foundation, 2003;
Cleveland State University, 2003; Cuban, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1998; Lee, 2004;
National College for School Leadership, 2004b; National Policy Board for Educational
Administration, 1989). These two issues surrounding instructional leadership - the lack of
common definition and insufficient training and preparation for urban school
instructional leadership - may affect how a principal comes to think about and perform
his or her job role as an instructional leader of an urban public school.

Another issue facing all urban school districts is the potential threat of losing a
large number of highly experienced principals who are members of the baby boom
generation. Principals born between 1946 and 1964 are considered to be members of the
baby-boom generation and are referred to as baby-boomers. For example, in a report
published by the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO, 2006) the
authors discussed the financial and healthcare implications of baby boomer retirement:

The first wave of the baby-boom generation, the 78 million Americans born between 1946 and
1964 and alive as of 2005, will turn age 62 and become eligible for Social Security benefits
beginning in 2008. The retirement of the relatively large baby-boom generation, combined with
other demographic trends, is expected to strain the nation’s retirement and health systems.

When baby-boom urban school principals do retire and leave urban education, the

challenge for many urban school districts will be having enough candidates who aspire to

be an urban school principal. The question will be are the candidates adequately trained
and prepared to assume the difficult, complex, and challenging role and responsibility of
an urban elementary, middle, or high school principal. Baby boom school principal
retirement may not be a cause for immediate concern in some urban districts, while in
others, the issue may become evolve fi'om a concern to a crisis. In either case, the results
of this research will hopefully be of interest to all urban school districts interested in
better understanding, improving, or developing and implementing a principal leadership
training program and preparation process within their urban school district.

Purpose of this Research

The primary objective of this study is to understand how urban school principals,
in one urban school district in Michigan, perceive their training, experience and
preparation for leadership in urban schools with majority Afiican-American student
population. Patton (2002) advises that, “When a person, group, organization, or country
is the unit of analysis qualitative methods involve observation and description focused
directly on the unit" (p.228). Continuing, Patton argues that, “the key issue in selecting
the unit of analysis is to decide what it is you want to be able to say something about at
the end of the study” (p. 229). Following Patton's advice, for this research project the
urban school principal will be my unit of analysis.

Based on my decision to focus on the K-12 urban school principal, during the
course of this study I conducted focus group, one-on-one structured interviews, document
analysis, and cross case study analysis. This combination of data collection and analysis
helped me to examine, understand, and explicate how a group of nine urban school
principals - who work in the same urban school district in Michigan - perceive and

understand their training and preparation for urban school leadership.

Research Questions

The central research question for this phenomenological research study is: What does
it mean to be prepared to be an urban school principal with a majority Afiican-American
student population? Creswell (1998) suggests that the central research or “issue question”
in a phenomenological research study has a dual purpose. One purpose, he believes, is to
uncover major concerns study participants may have with the phenomena being
researched. For example, a major concern of the urban principals in this study is their
leadership training did not prepare them to effectively manage their time. Second,
Creswell believes participant’s responses to questions in a phenomenological research
study should help delineate and expose what he calls, “the invariant structure and
essential meaning” of their individual and group experiences with the phenomena being
examined — in this study, the structure and meaning of their leadership training and
preparation. (Moustakas, 1994) provides a similar explanation of structure and meaning
when he says:

The aim is to determine what an experience means for the persons who have had the experience
and are able to provide a comprehensive description of it. From the individual descriptions general
or universal meanings are derived, in other words the essences or structures of the experience
....The understanding of meaningful concrete relations implicit in the original description of
experience in the context of a particqu situation is the primary target of phenomenological
knowledge (p. 13-14).

Participant’s responses related to the following four research sub-questions
provided critical data and contextual information that explicated “what happened?” and,
“how?” (Creswell, 1998) participants experienced their preparation for urban school
leadership:

(1) How do urban principals of majority Afiican-American schools perceive

and understand their role and responsibilities?

(2) How do principals of majority African-American urban schools

characterize the usefulness of their training, experience and preparation for
urban school leadership?
(3) How does the urban school setting affect an urban school principalship?
(4) What are the implications of principals being trained and prepared for urban
school leadership?
Definition of Terms
In this study instructional leadership and urban are defined as follows: First,
instructional leadership is sustaining a school culture and instructional program
conducive to student learning and staff professional growth (Hoy and Hoy, 2003, p.1
citing from Council of Chief State School Officers, 1996, p.12). Second, the term urban
is a U.S. Census designation applied to a geographical area based on population density.
For example, for the 2000 census the U.S. Census Bureau classified "urban" as all
territory, population, and housing units located within an urbanized area or urban cluster
that have a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile and surrounding
census blocks with an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile. All territory,
population, and housing units located outside of urbanized areas and urban clusters are
considered rural. As shown in Figure 1.0, when that definition of urban was applied to
Michigan during the 2000 Federal census, sixteen geographic areas in Michigan were
classified as urban metropolitan statistical areas or urban metropolitan divisions - based

on their population density.

 

Figure 1.0: Michigan geographic areas considered urban

 

 

Urban Metropolitan Statistical Areas (containing core area of 50,000 or more population)

Ann Arbor, MI - population 83,904

Battle Creek, MI - population 79,135

Bay City, MI - population 74,048

Flint, MI - population 365,096

Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI — population 539,080
Holland-Grand Haven, MI - population 91,795

Jackson, MI - population 88,050

Kalamazoo-Portage, M1 - population 187,961

Lansing-East Lansing, MI - population 300,032

Monroe, MI - population 53,153

Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI — population 154,729
Niles-Benton Harbor, MI — population 61,745
Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, Ml - population 140,985
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-Ml (part) - population 34,201 in Michigan

Urban Metropolitan Divisions (total population approxirnately3,903 377)

Detroit - Livonia - Dearbom, M1
Warren — Troy - Farmington Hills, MI

Source: (US Office of Management and Budget, 2005). Oflice of management and budget: standards
for defining Metropolitan and micropolitan and statistical areas; notice. Federal Register, 65(249), 12.
http://n " ' ' ' mw/Mi/O l607.7-158-36122--,00.htm1
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Battle_crek_25556_7.pdf

 

 

 

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Patton (2002) notes that, “there are decided advantages to reviewing the literature
before, during, or after fieldwork — or on a continual basis through the study” (p. 226).
For this researcher, conducting a review of related literature after developing my research
questions and methodology, but prior to data collection and analysis, provided multiple
benefits. One benefit was the vicarious opportunity to hear the voices and listen to the on-
going conversation of other researchers interested in understanding “Why, what and
I how” principals are prepared for urban school leadership. Second, the multiplicity of
books and peer-reviewed journal articles uncovered that related to school leadership
provided different perspectives, research-based conclusions, alternative arguments, and
several plausible explanations for the “phenomenological themes” emerged fiom my data
analysis. Third, my review of related literature exposed me to research findings and
conclusions that I was able to use as critical lens to examine and make sense of the large
volume of qualitative data collected during this study. The fourth, and perhaps most
important benefit was review of literature helped prepare me to ask my participants better
questions, and then listen with an informed ear as my participants shared their

perceptions of their experiences, training and preparation for urban school leadership.

Literature Review Framework
Seven areas of inquiry helped frame and focus my review of literature related to

urban principal training and preparation:

0 History and evolution of urban school principal leadership programs.

0 How were programs impacted by the effective schools movement?

0 Relationship between school leadership standards and preparation programs.

0 Why urban principal preparation programs needed?

0 How urban school leadership programs are structured?

0 How urban school leadership programs are evaluated?

0 How urban school leadership programs differ from other programs?

Unfortunately, I uncovered only a scant amount of research literature on the topic of

preparing principals specifically for urban school leadership. Consequently, much of the
research literature discussed in this paper discusses school leadership and preparation
programs absent an urban prefix, urban school context or geographical urban setting.
History and Evolution of Principal Preparation Programs

Joseph Murphy (1998), in a journal article entitled Preparation for the School
Principalship, (I998)discusses the evolution of principal training programs from 1820
until 1998. Murphy divides the 178 year period into four distinct eras - “ideological";
“prescriptive”; “scientific"; and “dialectic" — and discusses the dominant school
leadership paradigm and primary preparation program objective for each period. During
each of the four eras, it appears that the content, focus and outcome objectives of
preparation programs attempt to reflect three national priorities for public education.
Thomas Green (1983) argues that these priorities are enduring, conflicting and perhaps
mutually exclusive - “equality, excellence, or equity.” It is important to note that in 2007,
these same three educational priorities continue to permeate and dominate our national

discourse regarding our expectations and aspirations for education in this country —

especially K-12 urban public schools.

Murphy notes that during the “ideological era" from 1820 until 1899,
“educational administration was not recognized as a distinct profession. . .school leaders
were simply learned authority's, whose insights into the truth provided guidance to
teachers, students and the public. . .little [leadership preparation] training was required”
(1998, p.3). During the “prescriptive era” of 1900 to 1946, Murphy argues that
university-based educational leadership programs emphasized instructional leadership
skills and managing schools with a business-like efficiency. University education
professors, he notes,” attempted to prepare candidates for the principalship as it existed,
not as it might be.” (1998, p.3).Murphy characterizes 1947 until 1985 as the “scientific
era." Education professors of this era, he says, were, “discipline-focused specialists with
minimal practical school experience” and a strong afiinity for “theory and research”
(1998, p.4). Principal training during the scientific era focused on data collection and
analysis as a sound basis for rational decision making and school leadership. During the
“dialectic" period between 1986 and 1998, principal preparation programs received
increasing amounts of criticism from, “diverse groups interested in the preparation of
school leaders” (Murphy, 1998, p.4) who collectively advocated establishing standards
for school leadership and changing the structure, curriculum, and content of principal
preparation programs.

Principal preparation programs offered today have evolved from past efforts to
transform and “re-culture” school leadership preparation programs (J. Murphy, 2003).
Given the brevity of this paper, I have selected just two significant educational initiatives
I believe have impacted the current design of principal leadership preparation programs:

(1) the effective schools movement and (2) the development, adoption, and assimilation

10

of Interstate School Leadership Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards into principal
preparation programs and state criteria for principal certification.
Effictive Schools Movement

Taylor (Taylor, 2002), executive director of the National Center for Effective
Schools Research and Development from 1986 until 1989, credits the expansion of the
effective schools movement to the research efforts and contributions of multiple
researchers including, for example, “Ronald Edmonds, Wilbur Brookover, Larry Lezotte,
John Fredrickson, George Weber, Matthew Miles, Daniel Levine and Eugene Eubanks,
and many others.” Taylor believes that by the mid-19803 [the tail-end of the “scientific
era" posited by Murphy] the correlates, or characteristics, of effective schools had
become widely accepted as valid educational objectives and, she says, “over the decade
that language of the correlates became the language of school improvement and school
reform” (p.376).

Taylor comments that the six correlates of effective schools attributed to Ronald
Edmonds were published in a 1979 Educational Leadership journal article entitled
Eflective Schools for the Urban Poor. Taylor notes that, “since that time, seven newer,
more broadly based correlates are now specified”:

(1) Clearly stated and focused school mission;

(2) Safe and orderly climate for learning;

(3) High expectations for students, teachers, and administrators;

(4) Opporttmity to learn and student time-on-task;

(5) Instructional leadership by all administrators and staff members;

(6) Frequent monitoring of student progress;

(7) Positive home and school relations (2002, p.377).

11

Emerging from school effectiveness research findings, conclusions, and
recommendations, these seven correlates appear to have evolved into what could be
called a, “research-based” or “school improvement process” approach to improving poor
performing schools - particularly those schools with significant numbers of
disadvantaged students.

Taylor estimates that since the early 1980’s over 700 school districts have
attempted to carry out school reform using the effective schools process and, she notes,
from 1988 until 2002, “more than 300 school districts in the United States have
implemented the effective schools process” (Taylor, 2002). Her research suggests that
school principals may achieve better results if all seven of the correlates, versus only a
few, are included in a school’s strategic plan for change and student academic
improvement.

In a paper prepared for the January 4, 2006 International Congress for School
Effectiveness and Improvement, Pam Sammons of the University of Nottingham, School
of Education in the UK, indicated that over the past decade, more attention is being paid
to school effectiveness research and the school improvement process, as a possible means
of addressing issues of social justice, inclusion, and the academic achievement gap
between students in different ethnic groups and socioeconomic classifications. Sammons
(2006) argues that, “attempts to define equality and equity in education draw on notions
of social justice and social inclusion" and, as a result, four primary issues should be
addressed: “equality of excess, equality of circumstance, equality of participation, and
equality of outcome” (p.4). Referring to educational systems in difi‘erent countries she
notes that, “in most systems students from disadvantaged backgrounds (especially

minority, ethnic backgrounds, those experiencing social disadvantage such as low

12

income, parents lacking qualifications, unemployed, in low SES work, poor housing etc)
are more likely to experience educational failure or under-achievement” (p.4).

Sammons argues that the similarity of United States and United Kingdom school
reform issues are reflected in nine correlates or characteristics of effective schools that
emerged from research conducted in both countries. Effective schools, she notes:

. Establish processes of effective leadership

Have effective teaching

. Develop and maintain a pervasive focus on learning

Produce a positive school culture

Create high and appropriate expectations for all

Emphasize responsibilities and rights

Monitor progress at all levels

. Develop staff skills at the school site and

. Involve parents in productive and appropriate ways (Sammons, 2006, p.19).

owsewaww~

In City Schools: Leading the Way, Forsyth (1993) notes that research funded by
the Danforth Foundation and the University Council of Educational Administration
(UCEA) was conducted by the Urban Initiative Project (U IP) in 1993 in an attempt to
understand the “areas of greatest challenge” an urban school administrators might face
leading an effective school. Drawing from this research Forsyth argues that a principal
should be prepared to address, at a minimum, ten significant challenges developing an
effective urban school. The ten leadership challenges are: Understanding the urban school
context and conditions of practice; motivating urban children to learn; managing
instructional diversity; building open climates; collecting and using information for
problem-solving and decision-making; acquiring and using urban resources; governing
urban schools; effecting change; establishing mission, vision, and goals; and principal
accountability for all school activities and outcomes.

Many researchers have concluded that principal preparation and professional

l3

development programs are exposing aspiring and experienced principals to effective
schools research in an attempt to develop the knowledge and skills leadership program
participants may need to implement, manage and lead change within their schools (Davis,
Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson, 2005; Hess & Kelly, 2005; Joseph Murphy,
2002; National Commission for the Principalship, 1990; National Policy Board for
Educational Administration, 1989; U.S. Department of Education, 2004; University of
Wisconsin Madison, 1999). My concern is the school effectiveness research I reviewed
appears to be more focused on school improvement strategies, process implementation,
organizational effectiveness, and leadership style of the school stafl‘ than the critical
social, economic, political, physiological, psychological and academic needs of the
Afiican American child that may be attending the urban school.
School Leadership Standards

In 1994, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA), a
consortium of multiple national school administration organizations including the
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), and the American
Association of School Administrators (AASA), commissioned the development of
national standards for school leaders. Working under the auspices of the Council of
Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the taskforce formed the Interstate School Leaders
Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). Joseph Murphy, professor of education at Ohio
University, served as chair of the task force and was responsible for coordinating task-
force activities during the two-year project (J. Murphy, 2003). On November 2, 1996 the
Council of Chief State School Officers approved and adopted the task force
recommendation that educational leaders develop and demonstrate knowledge,

disposition, skills and competencies in the following six areas of school leadership:

14

0 Standard 1: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision
of learning that is shared and supported by the school community.

0 Standard 2: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program
conducive to student learning and staff professional growth.

0 Standard 3: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by ensuring management of the organization, operations, and resources for a safe,
efficient, and effective learning environment.

0 Standard 4: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by collaborating with families and community members.

0 Stande 5: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.

0 Standard 6: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all
students by understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social, economic,
legal, and cultural context.

Since their adoption and announcement in 1996 ISLLC standards are often used as
the structural foundation for designing and developing school leadership preparation
programs and State or district level certification criteria of school principals (Cornell,
2005; Coutts, 1997; E-Lead, 2004; Hale & Moorman, 2003; Lashway, 1998, 2001;

Joesph Murphy, 2002; U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
Why Urban Principal Preparation Programs are Needed?

Today, based on a national trend of school district resegregation (Evans, 2004;
Frankenberg, 2003; Lee, 2004; G. Orfield, Frankenberg, & Lee, 2003) more and more
K—12 principals find themselves in urban school districts where the majority of the
student population are children of color. Urban principal training programs are needed to
prepare new and experienced principals to address the issues, challenges, and
opportunities they may have as leaders of a K-12 urban school with a majority Afi'ican
American students population from low income families (Anderson, 1991; Cuban, 2001;

Ladson-Billings, 2004; Lee, 2004). Using free and reduced lunch as a surrogate for low

15

income, the Center on Education Policy (CEO) explained that, “Children qualify for free
lunches under the National School Lunch Act if their family income does not exceed
130% of the federal poverty level and for reduced-price lunches if their family income is
above 130% but below 185% of the poverty level” (p.11). The Center on Education
Policy (Center on Education Policy, 2006) reports that in many states, and in large urban
school districts with 25,000 or more students, minority children from low-income
families may, “make up the majority of public school enrollments.”

Many researchers have reported that principals in urban schools encounter a
population of students, particularly, African American children who have lower academic
test scores than students in other ethnic groups; higher drop-out rates; lower graduation
rates; and are too often taught by less experienced teachers. In addition, urban students
ofien need a firll range of non-instructional support services including free or reduced
lunch; extended day care before and after school, pre-kindergarten programs; a school
nurse; psychologists; social workers; or student counselors (Brown, 2005; Carlin, 1992;
Center on Education Policy, 2005; Cotton, 1991; Cuban, 2001; Delpit, 1995;
Frankenberg, 2003; Haberman, 2000; Lytle, 1992; McAdoo, 1997; G. Orfield, Losen, D.,
Wald, J., & Swanson, C., 2004; B. S. Portin, 2000; Tate, 1997).

In addition to issues related to race and poverty, urban principals will be pressured
to achieve tactical objectives of increasing student academic achievement and improving
graduation rates. External issues will include district superintendents attempting to
optimize dwindling economic resources, school board members attempting to improve a
school system situated in a declining urban setting, and the omnipresent mandate of No

Child Left Behind.

D.H. Eikenberry (1930), an education professor at The Ohio State University,
argued in The Professional Training of Secondary-School Principals that high school
principal preparation and training is needed to ensure that principals focus on student
growth and development versus academic subject matter. Eikenberry contended that:

We are witnessing in America a spectacle never witnessed before in the history of the world - an
attempt to provide universal secondary education. The experiment has progressed so far that it is
no mere trite remark to say that the high schools of the country hold in their keeping the destinies
of our social, political, commercial, mechanical, religious, and cultural leaders of tomorrow.

The century-old idea of secondary education as preparation for college and as discipline has
been discarded, and in its place has been substituted a philosophy which emphasizes the necessity
of leading each individual to formulate for himself a social program which will function
constructively in a modern, dynamic world. In the modern secondary school the principal becomes
a social engineer, directing the activities of his school in the direction of pupil growth rather than
in the direction of formal mastery of traditional subject matter. This responsibility of the
principalship makes it imperative that much attention and thought be devoted to the professional
training of the high school principal. (Eikenberry, 1930).

Murphy and Schwartz (2000) are representative of a growing body of researchers
who believe principal preparation programs are required to “adequately” train
replacements for a significant number of school principals who may be retiring or
otherwise leaving the education profession over the next several years. In Leadership for
Student Learning: Reinventing the Principalship, Murphy and Schwartz state:

In the next 10 years, 2.2 million new teachers will be needed, more students will be added to the
nation’s school systems and additional administrative positions will be created as the systems
grow. In a 1998 survey of 403 school district superintendents, half reported a shortage of qualified
candidates for principal vacancies. The study cites a wave of principal retirements as the major
cause for the shortage...37 percent were over age 50 by the 1993—~94 school year. For example, a
1999 University of Minnesota study estimated that, by 2010, about 75 percent of Minnesota
principals will be lost through retirement or attrition, even as school enrollments are expected to
grow by 10 to 20 percent. Yet the problem in Minnesota and elsewhere is not a shortage of
credentialed job candidates. For every administrator leading a school in Minnesota, there are three
additional licensed administrators who do not hold school leadership positions. Still, 86 percent of
Minnesota superintendents reported in 1998 that filling principal positions was “difficult" or “very
difficult.” Too few credentialed people are prepared adequme for the job. And too few qualified
educators want to be principals. Why? (p.5).

Multiple researchers (Dantley, 1990; Gooden, 2002; K. A. Leithwood & Riehl,
2003; J. Murphy & Schwarz, 2000) posit that principals of urban schools have not been

adequately trained or prepared to deal with the multiplicity and complexity of issues

17

related to race, politics, economics and social justice they will face as urban school
leaders. In fact, these researchers suggest that ...Two areas of preparation that needs
particular attention are: (A) providing leadership appropriate for an urban school and (B)
standards-based principal accountability.

Appropriate and applicable leadership in urban schools. Leithwood & Rich]
(2003) note in What Do We Already Know About Successfirl School Leadership(K. A.
Leithwood & Riehl, 2003) that, “a recent review of literature was able to locate a total of
121 articles addressing forms of primary principal leadership in just four prominent
education administration journals within the past decade alone. These articles described
20 distinct forms of leadership. . .that the reviewers classified into six generic leadership
approaches... instructional, transformational, moral, participative, managerial, and
contingent forms of leadership" (p.13).

Leithwood argues that preparation program curricula and field-based experiences
should help aspiring principals understand, “research about different forms and effects of
leadership” and the practice of always “remaining sensitive to the context” and diverse
needs of urban school faculty, students and parents (K. A. Leithwood & Riehl,
2003)(Leithwood, 2003). Leithwood says:(K. A. Leithwood & Riehl, 2003) ,

The challenges for leaders in diverse school context call for two distinct approaches to leadership.
The first approach includes practices aimed at implementing policies and other initiatives that
would serve well, those populations of children about which we have been concerned. The second
approach to leadership aims to ensuring, at a minimum, that those policies and other

initiatives. . .are implemented in just and equitable ways. This usually means building on the
forms of social capital that students do possess rather than being restricted by the social capital
they do not possess. Such an approach to leadership is referred to variously as emancipatory
leadership, leadership for social justice, and critical leadership (p.36).

Noting that, “these two approaches to leadership ofien seem to live in different worlds”

Leithwood concludes that, “diverse schools [I interpret as urban schools] demand both

sets of leadership practices, if they are to serve their pupils well"(p.36).

Mark Gooden (2002) provides additional support for the notion of ‘appropriate
and applicable’ urban school leadership in the journal article Stewardship and critical
leadership - Sufi'icient for leadership in urban schools? Building on Tate’s (1997)
concept of “raced people” [people who have faced discrimination because of race and/or
class -— and been historically oppressed psychologically, physically, educationally, or
economically] Gooden argues that because raced people, “have been omitted from the
conversation in the construction of models for leadership”(Gooden, 2002), p.135) we
should reconsider the appropriateness and applicability of commonly accepted theories of
leadership for the urban school environment. And, he suggests, the “rigid application” of
commonly accepted leadership models have, “the tendency to control rather than educate
raced people” (p.135).

Urban principals may be required to perform in the role of “servant leader” and,
according to Gooden, "must surely have a calling to serve in such an environmen "
(p.133). Building on research by Michael Dantley (1990), Gooden suggests that urban
principals must become adept at, "questioning the way things are and setting new
precedents where necessary for the sake of advancing organizational knowledge" (p.140).
"Unfortunately,” Gooden notes, “many urban school teachers and administrators have not
subscribed to this notion of stewardship, and they are unaware or unconvinced of using
critical leadership as a guide to their pedagogy or leadership” (p.140). Continuing, he
warns us that, “research studies using traditional, empirical, and positivist frameworks
often offer school leaders recipe-like recommendations for producing effective
educational institutions . . . .Unfortunately, these frameworks and models fail to address

many of the unique challenges facing urban schools” (p.133).

19

Murphy and Schwartz; Leithwood and Riehl; Dantley; and Gooden all present
compelling arguments for exposing leadership program participants to a school
leadership theory and practice that may be more appropriate and applicable for urban
school leadership. Equally important, preparation program participants should have
internship experience, mentoring, and in-service exposure to a variety of urban school
leadership styles and approaches. .

Standards-based principal accountability. No Child Lefi Behind (NCLB)
mandates each state to hold school administrators accountable for annual academic
improvement of all students within their school. The Center on Education Policy (2005)
makes it clear that academic improvement continues to be a major challenge for urban
principals. We see in Table 2.0 that in school year 2004-05 there were 5,765 Title 1
schools [13% of 42,723 Title 1 schools in the United States] that were identified for
improvement. It is important to note in column two of the table that, “urban districts have
27% [11,288] of the Title 1 schools in the nation, but 42% [2,408] of the Title 1 schools
identified for improvement." Conversely, while only 28% [489] of the urban schools
“exited improvement status” 69% [1230] of suburban schools were able to improve. This
data supports the disturbing notion that, “urban districts are being identified for
improvement at a disproportionate rate” (Center on Education Policy, 2005).

Data in Table 2.0 supports the argument made multiple researchers (Brown, 2005;
Chrispeels, 2002; Cuban, 2001; Druian & Butler, 1987; Edmonds, 1979; Forsyth, 1993;
Gantner, Daresh, Dunlap, & Newsom, 1999; P. Hallinger & Murphy, 1986; Lam, 1999;
Reynold J. S. Macpherson, 1998; Sammons 2006) that urban school principals must be
prepared to provide appropriate and applicable leadership that is necessary and sufiicient

to achieve annual school improvement objectives and sustained student academic

20

achievement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 2.0: Percentage and number of Title 1 schools identified for
improvement and improvement status by district type and size, 2004-05.
2 .2 a m
8 8 8 a
"‘ u: _ S 9 ~ '5 8
2 8 2 8 5 2 3, m
__.._ _. .2: ._ E .2 ._ a
53 —:—.: 5; '5 .—. 2 E 2%
e l“ a: E H E ‘- 8 3 “ g
.o g .o a fi 5. .8 .2: g 73' E
s “a r: .. .5 .. s 2: ~ ~5 g
r: u r: 5 8 0 ‘9. c: a E o-
3 at) U :2 E an '0 '0 e g 33
... m .‘S 8 m 0 o 9 U, 3:
s — = °° a 8 e 52 ‘5 r 3 s a:
E _§ § E g a e s 5 é a e *5
u“: a :51: n a .E a: 2 if: 8 .§ a a
_All districts 42,723 100% 5,765 100% 1,774 100%
District
_Urban 11,288 27" ) I ,408 42‘ o 489 28%
_Suburban 17,666 4 ‘ r J.,: ()7 40% 1,230 69%
Rural 13,769 32% ,051 l 800 55 3%
District size:
Very large 6,426 5‘ r ,628 2.8‘ r 251 4%
fie 7,483 6‘ I ,104 9‘ r (18 35")
Medium 0,544 2.5‘ , ,459 2.5‘ 2 (26 215‘ J
Small 8,259 43% ,5 74 227‘ I 279 6‘ )
Source: Center on Education Policy, December 2004, districts survey, Item 4 (Table 3b) and
Item 7 (Table 6a) twww.ceflcorglnclb/NCLBPolicflriest005/CEPPBlwebpgf)

 

 

 

Structure of Principal Preparation Programs

There is a wide disparity in the reported number of university-based or alternative
preparation programs for aspiring principals in the United States (Anderson, 1991; Davis
et al., 2005; Hale & Moorman, 2003; Hess & Kelly, 2005; Levine, 2005; Michelle D.
Young & Creighton, 2002). For example, Arthur Levine (2005), the president of
Teachers College, Columbia University, used the Carnegie Foundation topology of
university-based programs - baccalaureate, Masters, and doctorate degree — to classify,
survey, and evaluate educational leadership preparation programs offered by, “the

nation's 1206 schools, colleges, and departments of education" (p.9). In contrast,

21

Michelle Young (2002), Executive Director of the University Council for Educational
Administration (UCEA), indicated there were, “approximately 500 colleges and
universities, and yet to be counted, alternative programs that provide pre-service
education leadership preparation" (p. 8).

Masters preparation programs

The current structure of university-based Masters level school administration
programs appear to be the result of a gradual, incremental buildup of ideas, concepts, and
theories borrowed from professions and disciplines outside of the school administration
profession. Murphy (2003) shares that prior to World War II, school administrators
borrowed ideas for improving organizational efficiency from the business sector.
Following World War 11, there was, he said, “a clamoring for scientifically based
underpinnings for the [school administration] profession" (p.5). One result, Murphy
posits is that, “knowledge blocks from the behavioral and social sciences were laid into
the foundation of school administration" (p.5). To illustrate his point Murphy provides, in
Figure 2.0, what he believes was the “typical Masters of School Administration degree
program in the mid-1990’s” reflecting a twin-tier foundation of management and
behavioral science courses(J. Murphy, 2003).

Structure of Doctorate level urban school leadership programs. During February
2006, I called Cleveland State University (CSU) to get information about the CSU Urban
Education PhD program. The program administrator explained how and why the CSU
Urban Education program was started and suggested I review the “Urban-13” web site
http://www7 om ~'--’~.. .. ' ’ ’ ' ' 1 htm (Urban-13, 2006) for additional information
about the genesis of the program. The CSU administrator did explain that Urban-l3,

formed in the early 1970s, originally consisted of 13 universities that were located in

22

major urban cities and also offered doctorate degrees. The intent of the program was for

 

Figure 2.0: A typical Masters of School Administration program in mid 1990’s

 

 

 

 

 

Management Behavioral sciences
School business administration Research methods statistics (psychology)
School personnel administration » School community relations and/or
politics of education (political science)
School facilities Organizational theory (sociology)
Supervision of employees School finance and/or economies of

education (economics)

 

People personnel administration Qualitative methods (anthropology)

 

History and/or philosophy of education
(history, philosophy)

 

 

Source: Murphy, J. (2003). Reculturing Educational Leadership: The ISLLC Standards Ten
Years Out (Information Analyses General (070)). U.S.; Virginia: National Policy Board for
Educational Administration, Fairfax, VA.

http://www er'ir ed ' ‘ ‘ " y/servlet/ER1CServlet?accno=ED481619

 

 

 

members of Urban-13 to share data about programs, students, staff, and fiscal matters. As
of February 2006, the Urban-l3 membership included the 21 doctorate degree granting
universities shown in Figure 2.1.

Review of six different universities listed on the Urban 13 website confirmed that
a doctorate level degree specifically focused on “urban education” is not offered at all 21
universities. For example, the University of Alabama Birmingham offers a Ph.D. in
educational leadership, however, their website reveals that the program is not designated
or identified as being specific to “urban education.” Due to the attempted brevity of this
paper, I will only discuss the structure of one Urban-13 urban education preparation

program — the Ph.D. program offered by Cleveland State University.

23

Source: Urban-13 website http://www? as“ edu/ " ..

 

Cleveland State University (2003) began offering the Urban Education Ph.D.
program in 1987 to provide program participant’s the knowledge and skills required to
provide leadership and effect change in “urban K-12 schools, colleges and adult learning
settings” (p.1). The program is structured to help participants (A) enhance their
knowledge of the urban learner; (B) understand the social context of urban education; and
(C) develop an urban perspective. Participants develop their research skills and
knowledge in one of four specialized roles in urban education: teaching, counseling,
administration, or policy studies. As shown in Figure 2.2, the CSU program’s conceptual
framework - reproduced from
hgp://www.csuohio.edu/coehs/college/model/DoctoralProgmramework.pc_lf - defines
twelve skill-based urban school leadership competencies each program participant is
expected to develop.

Participants completing the program are expected to, “have a broad knowledge of

the environmental impact of the urban school and community on learning opportunities”

24

 

Figure 2.2: Cleveland State University, Urban Education Ph.D. Conceptual Framework

 

Course number and Title:

 

for these outcomes.

The table below lists the program outcomes for the Ph.D. Program in Urban Education conceptual
framework. Your instructor has indicated with a code of E, D, RA, or N how this course prepares you

 

Program outcomes code: E= Explore, D= Develop, RA= Refine/Apply, N= Not a Focus

Cod
e

 

Knowledge of scientific inquiry: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will possess
knowledge and understanding of quantitative and qualitative research methodology and ability

to conduct research [gowledge Base: Research Skills)

 

Technology: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will understand and utilize current
technology in order to enhance research designed to promote change across all aspects of the

urban educational environment (Knowledge Bases: Research Skills, The Urban Perspective)

 

Knowledge of the research ethical standards: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will
understand and implement the ethical principles regarding the conduct of research in an urban
setting (Knowledge Bases: Research Skills, Social Context of Urban Education, The Urban
Learner)

 

Understanding of the Urban Environment: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will
possess knowledge of urban theory, and public policy that drives urban change (Knowledge

Bases: The Urban PersEctive, The Urban Learner)

 

Assessment of policy process: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will acquire an
understanding of public policy formation process, and identify areas of resistance to policy

reform (gowledge Base: The Urban PerspectiveL

 

Diversity: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will gain knowledge of the origins and
natm’e of multiculturalism and its contributions to the nature of urban life ( Knowledge Base:

Social Context of Urban Education)

 

Integration of humanities, social sciences, and education issues: The CSU Urban Ph.D. graduate
will be able to draw from a rich educational background to implement change in the urban

setting (flowledge Base: Social Context of Urban Education)

 

Contextualism: The CSU Urban Ph.D. graduate will understand how environmental context,
race, and gender impact an individual's educational opportunities and identity construct

(Qowledge Bases: Social Context of Urban Education, The Urban Learner)

 

Knowledge of human development over the life span: The CSU Urban Ph.D. graduate will

articulate an understanding of inter-individual and intra-individual differences and change in

human behavior, adjustment, learning, and development across the life span (Knowledge Bases:
Social Context of Urban Education, The Urban Learner)

 

Leadership Skills: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will assume a leadership role in
the urban community and workplace based on knowledge of leadership concepts and theories
(Knowledge Bases: Social Context of Urban Education, Organizational Change and

Develop_rr_rent)

 

Systems Perspective: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will view problem-solving and

change from the perspective of the individual, organization, and larger social system

(Knowledge Bases: The Urban Perspective, Social Context of Urban Education, Organizational
Change and Development)

 

An agent of change: The CSU Urban Education Ph.D. graduate will possess knowledge of
organizational processes and change strategies (Knowledge Base: Organizational Change and

Development)

 

SOURCE: Cleveland State University

httD://wv. csnnhin ‘ ’ ’ ’ l/DoctoralProgramI‘ J N"

 

 

 

 

25

 

and “drawing upon his or her knowledge base as a teacher, counselor, or use this
administrator. . .knowledge to create new systems of intervention that “are
institutionalized through processes of organizational development” (p.1). The CSU
program appears to be focused on enhancing participant’s knowledge and understanding
of the urban student learner and how children might experience education in an urban
learning environment.

Alternative principal preparation programs. In 2004, Rod Paige, the United
States Secretary of Education, (U .S. Department of Education, 2004) acknowledged that
“entrepreneurial school districts, states, higher education institutions, and others have
developed promising programs that draw new talent into leadership roles and provide job
embedded preparation and support” (p.5) — all in an attempt to address the critical need
for high quality urban school leaders. Paige noted that partnerships consisting of for-
profit, nonprofit, philanthropic organizations, universities, and school districts are being
formed in a concerted effort to provide alternative leadership preparation and training
programs for aspiring urban school principals.

The term alternative preparation program refers to school leadership programs
that are not run by a university or college — instead they tend to be partnerships that are
facilitated and run by private-sector profit or not-for-profit organizations. The only
estimate of alternative preparation programs was in the methodology section of the U.S.
Department of Education (2004) report Innovative Pathways to School Leadership. While
discussing the sample and target population for their research project, the authors
explained that they had identified, “60 potential sites" for alternative preparation
programs for aspiring principals by using a variety of search terms that included,

“alternative leadership preparation; alternative principal certification; alternative

26

T—

administrative certification; expedited certification; and accelerated certification” (p.8).

In Review of Research School Leadership Study: Developing Success/id
Principals (Davis et al., 2005), Christine DeVita, President of the Wallace Foundation, is
quoted on the importance of school leadership preparation and the Wallace foundation’s
commitment to establishing collaborative partnerships to get the job done. She said,
“Better training alone won't solve America's mounting school leadership challenges. Well
trained leaders, placed in near-impossible job conditions aren't likely to succeed in
improving learning. But if better training isn't the whole answer, it is surely a big part of
it” (p. l).

A key finding of Davis’s research is that effective school principal preparation
programs should be, “research-based, have curriculum coherence, provide experience in
authentic context, use cohort groupings and mentors, and are structured to enable
collaborative activity between the program and area schools” (2005, p.3). The U.S.
Department of Education (2004) Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to
School Leadership research report provided detailed data and information regarding
program objectives, participants, structure, components, and accomplishments of five
alternative programs that meet the effective preparation program criteria as suggested by
Davis. New Leader for New Schools (2005) is one of the alternative preparation program
highlighted in the Innovations report.

Key details of the New Leader for New Schools (NLNS) urban school principal
preparation program are summarized in Figure 2.3. As shown in the second column of the
figure, the NLNS consists of a public and private sector partnership between the Kirkland
and Ellis foundation; Broad foundation; New Schools Venture Fund; Boeing; New Profit

Inc.; and urban school districts and local universities in five major cities and states: New

27

.a

 

Figure 2.3: New Leaders for New Schools - Urban principal preparation program (10f 2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leadership, Washington, DC: Office of Innovation and Improvement.

Program name Program Participant selection Number of Percent of
and focus partners and admission applicants and participants
criteria program placed
participants following
PT‘ZE‘E‘
NEW LEADERS Public and private Bachelor’s degree; Applicants: 2001 to 2004:
FOR sector partnership five years (2004) 1,100 60% principals
NEW SCHOOLS of Kirkland and professional and
New York, N.Y., Ellis; Broad experience; Program 35% assistant
Chicago, Ill., foundation; New two years teaching participants: principals .
Washington, Schools Venture experience; (2005) 90
DC, Fund; Boeing; and demonstrated (2004) 56 95% placement
Memphis, Tenn., New Profit, Inc. leadership (2003) 52 rate of program
and San with urban school (2002) 31 participants —
Francisco Bay districts and local Vision of leader: (2001) 13 230 since 2001
Area, Calif. universities in New Coaches and inspires Total = 242
York City, every teacher to Recruiting Participant is
Started: 2000 Chicago, reach and teach objective: committed to
Washington DC, every child Nontraditional spend minimum
Focus: Recruiting Memphis and the candidates from of three years in
and developing San Francisco Bay Applicant screening: outside of their urban
the next area Fourteen complex education district alter
generation of questions used as an program
outstanding applicant “weeding completion
leaders of the tool” 2004: Gender
nation’s urban 60% female
public schools Two phase
interviews: 2004: Ethnicity
First, a one hour 60% African
interview with two American
program staff plus a 30% White
written case study 7% Hispanic
analysis and 3% Asian Am.
response
Second, a full day
interview
U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Innovations in Education: innovative Pathways to School

 

28

 

 

Figure 2.3: New Leaders for New Schools - Urban principal preparation program (cont’d) (20f 2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leadership, Washington, DC: Office of Innovation and Improvement.

Standards-based Program Program Program cohort Program school-
program design participants based practicum
curriculum induction

Standards based on Certification: Concept of Support: Full-year urban
12 essential Participation of local participant’s Five years of school residency
competencies that University provides intellectual program support with a mentor
reflect research on credentialing accountability principal
successful urban required for provides self- On-site coaching

school certification reward for from a veteran

“turnaround” learning and urban principal

principals Principal continued effort Coach support

certification based Cohort coaches provided for

All program on program Six-week summer required to attend both mentor and
participants attend completion institute at six-week summer mentee at least
four five-day Wharton school session and four once each week
transformational Data analysis to of management in foundation

and instructional track, graduate Philadelphia seminars

leadership seminars placements; facilitates throughout the

during the first 12 candidates, participants year

months of the professional growth networking and Internship
program and achievement of bonding. Coaches help integrates

students in program each cohort classroom

Program coaches participants schools member develop theory with day-
conduct assessment Two years of individual to-day urban

of participant On-going evaluation coaching and leadership school
proficiency in each of program and mentoring in each development leadership

of the 12 essential participants used for participants first plans and challenges
competency continuous new principalship portfolios

standards improvement position
U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Innovations in Education: innovative Pathways to School

 

York City; Chicago; Washington DC; Memphis, Tennessee; and San Francisco Bay area

in California. The New Leaders program started in 2000 with a clear objective to,

“recruit and develop the next generation of outstanding leaders of the nation's urban

public schools” (2005). It is important to note that non-traditional candidates fiom

outside the education profession are actively recruited for participation in the program.

Program curriculum and content. Hess & Kelly (2005) reported a similar

experience when they, “set out to examine what candidates are taught in the core courses

29

 

 

that constitute principal preparation and established principal preparation programs” (p.4)
Afier an extensive search Hess reported, "Unfortunately, there exists no systematic
information addressing this question" (p.4). In an effort to better understand the content
of university educational leadership programs, Hess and Kelly surveyed 56 educational
leadership programs and collected at least four ‘core’ course syllabi from 31 programs - a
total of 210 syllabi. Data analysis included a statistical estimation of the relative amount
of attention seven major strands of school leadership was receiving in university-based
principal preparation courses. Hess reported that the strand labeled, “managing for results
received 16%; managing personnel 15%, technical knowledge 30%; external leadership
8%; norms and values 12%; leadership and school culture 6%;managing classroom
instruction 11%; other 3%" (p. 17). Hess concluded that "the evidence indicates that
[school leadership] preparation has not kept pace with changes in the larger world of
schooling, leaving graduates of principal preparation programs, ill-equipped for the
challenges and opportunities posed by an era of accountability” (p. 35). And, he
continued, "Meaningful reform of principal preparation programs must retool the content
so that it matches the challenges confronting principals in 2 1 st-century schooling" (p.38).

Building on research by Bradley Portin (2000), Lashway (2003a) suggests that
preparation programs should teach aspiring principals how to, "diagnose and act on a
school's needs" and the importance of deciding how they can provide, distribute, or share
leadership across, "seven domains of leadership: instructional; cultural; managerial; HR;
strategic; external development; and micro-political” (p.7).

The Southern Regional Education Board (2005) has taken the initiative to design
and make available to universities and school organizations, 14 Leadership Cmriculum

Modules that could be used in the curriculum of aspiring principal preparation programs.

30

The modules, listed on the second page of the report, include:

Using data to lead change

Standards-based cuniculum development
Assessment and instruction

Standards-driven student work

Creating a scth culture of high expectations
Results-based professional development
Literacy leadership

Numeracy leadership

leading change

Creating a personalized learning environment
Organizing the learning environment
Building and leading effective teams
Communicating effectively in a high-performing school and
Coaching for school improvement

SREB indicates the modules are being used in preparation programs at “Western
Kentucky University, University of Rhode Island, East Tennessee State University and
other universities. . .to redesign their leadership preparation programs” (p.2). In addition,
“many states, including Alabama, Florida and Louisiana are using the modules statewide,
while a number of school districts such as Charleston, South Carolina and Ringgold and
Macon, Georgia, are turning around their low performing schools by using strategies
recommended in the modules” (p.2).

Program Evaluation and research
Three approaches to principal preparation programs evaluation and research appear
in the research literature: (1) research focused on understanding how external forces
efl'ect principal prepMon programs; (2) research investigating program structure and
components; and (3) research attempting to evaluate the effect program graduates have
on school improvement and student academic achievement. Figure 2.4 outlines the three

appromhes to program evaluation and research.

31

Educational reform movements.

External forces research focuses on understanding and evaluating the effect

 

Figure 2.4: Three categories of principal preparation program evaluation and research

 

Category one: Program external forces

0 Educational reform movements
0 State licensure and certification
0 Educational policy

0 Program competition

0

Stakeholder pressures

 

Category two: Program structure and components

 

 

 

 

 

structure m commnents
Partnership arrangements Faculty selection, training and support
Program vision Participant recruitment
- Program theory-of-action Summer residency
School context — urban, Participant selection and admission
suburban or rural Participant evaluation
Curriculum design and Participant reflection and assessment
content: e-a. pmblem based learning Curriculum content and delivery
P70813111 certification e-leaming, practicum, internship, etc.
Financial resources and Program standards
5111390" Participant competency requirements
Single or multiple year Mentors
WWW training Mentorship agreements
Professional development for aspiring, new
and experienced principals
Cohort learning groups
Program self-assessment and monitoring
Participant performance evaluation,
assessment and feedback
New principal induction period of 2-3 years
New principal on-going support
Participant's salary
Category three: Program graduates effect on student academic achievement
Principal leadership effects
0 School improvement and student academic achievement.

 

 

“outside” forces - educational reform movements; educational policy; state certification

requirements; program competition; or pressure fiom key stakeholders to modify or

32

 

improve the program - may have on a principal preparation program ( see, for example,
Center on Education Policy, 2005; Education Commission of the States, (2005); Maxey,
(1999); Murphy, 1991; National Center for Education Information, (2003); US
Department of Education, 2004; and Young, Mountford and Crow, (2005)).

In the early 1980’s, educational reform movements focused on improving
educational systems and leadership preparation programs received a significant boost
after the release of the A Nation at Risk report in 1983. Murphy (1991) observed that
following the report’s release, “efforts to improve education has been occurring at an
unbroken pace for nearly a decade" (p.49). In 1988, Murphy conducted research to
evaluate the impact of school reform movements on university-based school
administration and leadership preparation programs. For example, survey responses
Murphy received from, “74 chairpersons of Department of Educational Leadership”
provided good insights into the amount of change that had or had not occurred in
university-based preparation programs. Programmatic improvements reported by survey
respondents included “stifl‘ening entrance requirements, especially test scores; increased
attention to recruiting women and minorities; reduced reliance on student self-selection
into the program; establishing closer working relationships with school districts and
practitioners who became partners in the identification and selection of students; greater
weight on applicant's classroom teaching experience; and more stress on participants
demonstrated leadership in instructional areas"(p.52). Only modest improvement was
reported by respondents in the recruitment and selection of program participants.

Murphy observed that the program modifications and improvements reported
were consistent with recommended program changes outlined in, “two reports at the

forefront of reform in preparation programs - the 1987 National Commission on

33

Excellence in Educational Administration's (N CEEA) report Leaders for America '3
schools and the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) report
released in 1989" (p.53).

Department chair survey responses also indicated that new preparation courses
being added, “tended to be idiosyncratic”— one program might emphasize policy analysis
or computers, while another might prioritize school planning. For example, universities
reported adding courses or content on instructional leadership, managing school change,
and implementing school improvement. Moderate change was also reported in program
clinical components. Some departments established “new field based requirements" while
others, Murphy noted, “added field-based requirements to specific certification or degree
areas (e.g., the EdS) where they [field-based requirements] previously had not been
required” (p.54).

Murphy argues that school reform movements “had only a modest overall effect
on preparation programs” and on “the way they prepared school administrators” (p.51).
And, he conjectured, key reasons for the lack of significant reform were, (1) “a time lag
between environmental pressure and internal responses” (2) “pressure for improving
preparation programs was coming from outside versus inside the Academy” (3) “these
[preparation] programs have historically been fairly well buffered from external
interference” and (4) insufficient motivation and incentive for universities to change
because of, “a wide-spread perception among professors that there were few problems in
their field” (p.52). It is important to note that respondents to Murphy’s survey said that
recruitment and selection of minority candidates was a high priority for program
improvement. Murphy concluded that external pressures for reform had had only modest

impact on “the curriculum, and the quality of clinical experiences programs offered" and

34

equally important, “it is hard to imagine how we will develop the needed number of
minority school administrators absent more vigorous attention to equity issues in
recruiting and selecting students for our preparation programs" (p.53).

State licensure and certification State certification requirements and school
district criteria for the principalship can also exert significant external influence on
preparation program curriculum, content and program Mcipants exit skill requirements.
For example, two intemet sites that provide certification prerequisites and licensure
requirements for school principal or superintendent positions in each of the 50 states: (1)

hm;://mb2.ecs.org[§p_orts/R§pgrt.§px?id=878&m_ap:_0 the Education Commission of
the States (ECS) web site and (2) the National Center for Education Information (N CEI)

ht_tp://ncei.comf2003 Princiws Sum'ntendents/indexhtm. While both sites provide
similar information, the NCEI site provides additional information on candidate supply
and demand information. The following information is an example of principal licensure,
certification and preparation information available on the NCEI website:

OHIO: SUPPLY/DEMAND CONSIDERATIONS - Ohio is experiencing shortages of principals.
Stateoflicialssaythatthere isanoversupplyofpeoplewhoearnamaster’sdegree ineducational
administration, but who never intend to use the credential to become a school principd. State
officials say that this overage is a contributing factor to the shortage of administrators in the state.
Ohio should have a sufficient administrator pool, but they don’t want to serve. Teachers get the
administrator degree to qualify for higher teacher pay, and some of them would actually take a cut
in pay if they opted to become school administrators. In addition, they often don’t want the time
commitment required of a principal, and some school districts tie administrators’ pay to their
performanceonproficiencytests. Inaddifiomthestatehasalsoidentifiedanequityand
distributionissueamongschooladministratorsbygenderandrace.

REGULAR PATH PRINCIPAL - Provisioml Principal License Prerequisites: A candidate forthe
Entry Year Program for Principals must:

OI-Iave2years ofsuccessfirl teachingexperiencermderaProfessional Teacher Licenseatthe level
forwhichthePrincipalLicenseissought;

0 Have a master's degree;

0 Complete an approved college or university principal prepm'ation program;
OBerecommendedbymedeanmheadofwachaemmfimuawflegemmivasityappovedm
Wpfimipalsnnd
OchessfirflycompletemexamhrafimpresmbedbydreStateBomdofEdueafion.

Research by Yormg 2002; Levine 2005; and Kottkamp & Orr, 2005 are prime examples

35

of research attempting to evaluate and recommend improvements for the curriculum,
content and outcome objectives of principal training and preparation programs provided
by universities or school districts.

Program structure and components.

In Who is Framing the National Understanding of Educational Leadership
Preparation and Practice? Michelle Young (2002), Executive Director of UCEA,
expressed strong support for a two-pronged approach to examining the structure and
components of principal preparation programs: (1) conducting best practice inventory of
existing preparation programs and (2) modifying and improving the structure of principal
preparation programs. Referring to preparation program research studies conducted by

researchers like Murphy and Louis, (1999), Young comments that:

A thorough review ofthe literature reveals that reform is needed in six major areas: (I)
recruitment and selection; (2) program content; (3) delivery methods; (4) program standards;
(5) faculty professional development; and (6) institutional support. Additionally, because we
know little about the effectiveness of the majority of university educational leadership

prepamfimprogramswehavembasisfmaresponsemaifieswhougmmaleadaship
training should be taken outofuniversities (p.l l).

Program partnership arrangements. While university leadership programs may
or may not be structured to operate in a partnership arrangement, each of the alternative
principal preparation programs previously mentioned in this paper, for example, the New
Leaders for New Schools program, involve some form of collaboration or formal
structured partnership between one or more school districts, universities, state
organizations, nonprofit, or for-profit organizations (U .S. Department of Education,
2004). In Fixing Urban School Systems (Grantrnakers for Education, 2003)
philanthropic, nonprofit and for-profit organimtions are encouraged to thoughtquy

evaluate and consider the potential risks and rewards of partnering with urban school

36

districts to provide leadership preparation training for aspiring urban school principals.
The report advises, for example:

While the work of helping urban systems improve is routinely messy and unpredictable, it is still
worthwhile. But grant-makers must become more explicit up-front about the kind of partnership
they want with school boards and administrators, the goals they want to pursue, the changes they
expect to see, how their investments will help, and the results they expect to get (p.l).

The report cautions that organizations establishing partnership programs with
urban school districts will likely face a unique set of challenges because, “urban schools
are part governmental agency and part community project" (Grantmakers for Education,
2003). Potential partners are warned that political challenges will likely include, “vested
interest groups, school board election politics, and the demands of parents and
community members.” The report notes that Stanford University professor James Marsh
once referred to urban school systems as “organized anarchies" where people come and
go “in unpredictable patterns” and, he continued, “goals are ofien unclear and stated in
high-minded vague generalities” and school capacity and technologies required for
change “is weak or unpervasive at best” (p.3). The report advises partners to establish a
“plausible strategy” for school improvement, constantly monitor for expected results, and
not depend on a “superman” school administrator or district superintendent, for the
success or continuation of the school improvement project and partnership (p.4).

Program components. Research conducted by Arthur Levine (2005), president of
Teachers College, Columbia University was focused on examining the components and
overall framework of, he said, “the programs themselves and their capacity to educate
principals and superintendents in the skills and lmowledge necessary to lead today’s
schools and school systems.” Entitled Educating School Leaders, Levine’s research

included developing and analyzing case studies of 25 college and university departments

37

of education, and reviewing responses to, “a national survey of deans, chairs, and
directors of education schools; education school faculty members; education school
alumni and school principals” (p.7). Levine’s survey collected data regarding nine
structural components of university and college of education leadership programs:

Program’s purpose, goals, and definitions of success;

Curricular coherence and ability to teach school leadership, knowledge and skills;
Curricular balance of theory and practice;

Faculty composition of scholars and practitioners;

Admissions criteria;

Graduation standards and degrees awarded;

ls education research high-quality, driven by practice, and useful to practitioners and
policymakers?

Are finances adequate to support the program and?

Is there continuing program self-assessment and performance improvement?

SP‘PPPNT‘

>090

Levine concluded that, "collectively, the field of educational administration is not
successful.” Commenting on the survey results, Levine noted that, “there were programs
that were successful in meeting one or more of the criteria" (p. 48), however, Levine is
adamant that university-based leadership preparation programs are not preparing school

leaders for the complex school environments and difficult challenges they will face —
today and in the future. He said:

In a rapidly changing environment, principals and superintendents no longer serve primarily as
supervisors. They are being called on to lead the redesign of their schools and school systems; lead
their schools in rethinking goals, priorities, finances, staffing, curriculum, pedagogies, learning
resources, assessment methods, technology, and use of time and space; recruit and retain top staff
members; educate newcomers and veterans; ensure professional development for teachers and
administrators; prepare parents and students for new realitiesmschool improvement; create a sense
of community; and build morale in a time of transformation. Few of today’s 250,000 school
leaders are prepared to carry out this agenda. Neither they nor the programs that prepared them
shouldbe faultedforthis.Putsimply,theywereappointedtoandeducatedforjobsthatdonot
exist any longer (p. 12).

Program self-assessment and monitoring. In 2003, a research taskforce on
educational leadership preparation was, "developed to make widely available the
conceptual and research base on leadership education” (U CEA, AERA, & NCPEA,

2005). The joint-taskforce was sponsored by the University Council for Educational

38

Administration (U CEA), the American Educational Research Association (AERA) -
Division A, AERA Teaching in Educational Administration Sig., and the National
Council of Professors of Educational Administration (N CPEA). Kottkamp and Orr
(2005) make the point that, "Leadership preparation programs, despite their prevalence
(over 500 nationwide) and importance to school improvement, have rarely been evaluated
in a systematic and comvae manner, nor have their long-range impact's been
measured" (p. l ).

The two co-chairs of the taskforce, Robert Kottkamp, Hofstra University and
Margaret Terry Orr fiom Teachers College (Kottkamp & Orr, 2005), say the task force
has three primary objectives: First, conduct comparative evaluations of leadership
preparation programs’ impact on students served, the schools their graduates lead and the
schools’ educational outcomes. Second, develop research designs, methods and
instruments that can be replicated and refined through study in multiple institutions and
settings to facilitate on-going knowledge development of leadership preparation -
nationally and internationally. And third, engage the leadership preparation field more
broadly in the individual and comparative study of their effectiveness and impact.
According to Kottkamp, members of the task force have identified ten discrete “domains
of research” and “agreed on four evaluation studies” (Kottkamp & Orr, 2005, p.2-3). The
UCEA web site hgpzlluceaorgz provided helpful detail on research activity within each
research domain.

Program graduates
Athirdcategoryofresearohattemptstounderstandandcvaluatethe leadership
effect of preparation program graduates and the academic achievement of students that

attend their schools (Gates, Kallio, & Young, 2001; P. Hallinger & Leithwood, 1994;

39

Heck, 1992; K. Leithwood & Jantzi, 1998; Mitchell, 1990; Nunley, 2003; Parra &
Daresh, 1997; Reynolds, 2001; U.S. Department of Education, 2004; Waters et al., 2003).
For example, the U.S. Department of Education (2004) research report indicates that each
of the five alternative urban principal preparation programs they investigated are
committed to collecting and analyzing three to five years of student test data in urban
schools where program graduates become principals. The data and analysis will help
program designers and developers (1) identify opportunities for program improvement
and (2) assess the leadership effect of principal preparation program grmluates on student
achievement.

In Distributed Leadership and Student Engagement in School, Leithwood and
Jantzi (1998) argue that, “evidence suggests teacher and principal leadership effects are
modest, largely indirect, and account for comparable amounts of variation in student
engagement" (p. 3). Leithwood notes that Ogawa and Hart reported in 1985 that,
“principal leadership explained 2 - 8% of the variation in student performance” (p.26).
Leithwood concluded that, “teacher leadership effects far outweigh principal leadership
effects before taking into account the moderating effects of family educational culture”
(p.26). And, he continues, evidence from this study is similar to Heller and Firestone's
1995 conclusion that “principal leadership does not stand out as a critical part of the
change process” (p.27).

In their educational research report entitled Balanced Leadership, Waters, Marzano
and McNulty (2003) claim to have identified 21 principal leadership responsibilities and
actions that can directly effect school improvement and student achievement. Their meta-
analysis of 70 studies included, “an exhaustive review of leadership literature - including

institutional theory, systems theory, organizational learning theory, transition theory,

40

change theory, and diffusion theory - to help school leaders understand how to effectively
carry out the 21 key leadership responsibilities identified” (p.3). A key research finding
is, “a substantial relationship between leadership and student achievement. . .an average
effect size (expressed as a correlation) between leadership and student achievement is
.25" (p.3).

The 21 principal leadership responsibilities and activities identified in Balanced
Leadership are: culture; order; discipline; resources; curriculum, instruction and
assessment; focus; knowledge of curriculum, instruction and assessment; visibility;
contingent rewards; communication; outreach; teacher input; affirmation; relationship;
change agent; optimizer; ideals and beliefs; monitors and evaluates; flexibility; situational
awareness; and intellectual stimulation" (p.4). Waters asserts that each of these
leadership actions and responsibilities may have a positive or negative impact on student
achievement (p.5). After reviewing the report it was not clear to me how, or to what
extent, urban schools, urban school principals, or urban school students were represented
in the 70 studies included in the meta-armlysis.

There appears to be little agreement or consensus among researchers on the
relationship, impact, or effect principal leadership has on urban student academic
achievement. Clearly, this presents both an opportunity and challenge for persons
attempting to design and offer an urban school leadership preparation program. A major
challenge is that key program stakeholders will likely expect the program to be “research-
based” when, in fact, the research knowledge base relating to principal leadership effect
on student achievement and school improvement contains a wide range of research-based
findings and conclusions.

Salient Features of Urban Principal Preparation Programs

41

In the research literature, training and preparation programs for urban principals are
portrayed as having three common features and characteristics. First, urban school
leadership preparation programs make positive versus deficit or negative assumptions about
urban children’s capacity and ability to learn. Second, m'ban preparation programs help
participants understand the urban setting and prepare them for the difficult political, social,
economic and instructional leadership issues and challenges they will face. And third, urban
programs are focused on developing principals for urban K-12 school leadership - versus
suburban or rural. An excellent example are the five alternative preparation programs
discussed in Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership (U .S.
Department of Education, 2004). Each program was specifically designed to recruit, train and
prepare participants to serve as urban school principals.

Positive assumptions about urban children. The Cleveland State University
(CSU) urban Ph.D. program discussed earlier in this paper is a good example of a
university-based urban school leadership program that places the concept of urban
children as “urban learners” at the core of their program activities. One of the CSU
program administrators emphasized that the number one program priority is to help PhD
program participants, “deepen their knowledge and understanding of the urban learner”
(Cleveland State University, 2003).

Jean Baker (2004), a professor in the Michigan State University, College of
Education, believes urban children will be better served when their teachers and principal
have a positive versus negative perception of the urban students attending their school.

The Urban Learner Framework (ULF) is fiamed by four conceptual themes that, Baker
argues, can help school leaders develop, “a new vision of the urban learner as culturally

diverse, capable, motivated, and resilient.” She explained:

42

This view represents a major paradigm shift in research and theories of intelligence, learning, and
instruction that could lead to a new order of results for urban learners. This new view challenges
former sweeping generalizations of urban learners as deprived, underachieving, unmotivated, and
at risk. It suggests that urban educators build on the strengths of the urban learner by embracing
change that utilizes research on cultural diversity and learning, unrecognized ability and
underdeveloped potential, enhancing ability development through motivation and effort, and
resilience. The ULF is grounded in the belief that focused educational change that gives special
attention to urban leaner issues can heighten opportunities for students to achieve academic

success and life-long productivity.

0 Theme 1: Cultural Diversity and Leaming - seeing, understanding, valuing, and using the
knowledge students acquire from their daily home and community experiences in a way that
builds on their strengths and weaves this essential information into instructional activities in
the formal curriculum.

0 Theme 2: Unrecognized abilities and underdeveloped potential - recognizing the multiple
abilities that students possess and using diverse approaches to connect to students' musical,
bodily-kinesthetic, logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, interpersonaL and intrapersonal
intelligence

0 Theme 3: Enhancing ability development through motivation and effort - creating optimal
learning experiences by connecting to issues, events, and activities that peak student' interests;
using student errors as opportunities to learn; and promoting the use of problem-solving
activities and project-focused tasks.

0 Theme 4: Resilience - having a classroom environment based on high expectations for all
students that provides caring, challenging, and meaningful experiences; serves as a healthy
response to risk situations which may occur outside of school; and bolsters the students' own
coping abilities (Baker, 2004).

Urban school issues and challenges. In Accountability in City Schools
Macpherson (1998) argues that administrators ofschools located in urban areas face a
complex and diverse set of political, social, and economic challenges they must be
prepared to address. To emphasize his point Macpherson, borrowed the following quote
from Safe Schools: Policies and Practices by Rossman and Morley (1996):

Citizens often recognize that schools are microcosms of society, reflecting the lager communities
in which they are located... Nevertheless, the public expects schools will be somehow more
exemplary than other social institutions. Thus schools are expected to not only ensure students
academic achievement, but also impart socially appropriate values, attitudes, and behavior. In
addition, Americans, and members of many other societies as well, expect that schools will
function as safe havens -— protecting youth and inculcating them against the adverse conditions of

the larger environment, such as poverty and crime (Macpherson, 1998, pp.395-396).

Urban school principals must be prepared to provide leadership necessary and

suflicient to address a myriad of internal and external issues that affect their school.

43

Internal issues may be related to school culture, building operations, teacher quality and
experience levels, inadequate student health-care, growing special-education population,
low graduation rates, and sustained improvement in student achievement. External
challenges will likely include attempting to minimize or offset the hazardous effects of
toxic neighborhoods and an urban community with high rates of crime, domestic
violence, generational poverty, poor housing conditions, high unemployment, and
inadequate health care.

Developing principals for urban K-1 2 school leadership. Fifteen distinguishing
features of five alternative urban principal preparation programs discussed in Innovations
in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership (U .S. Department of Education,
2004) are summarized in Figure 2.5. Common features across the five programs are:
structmed and formalized partnerships; multi-year program duration; vision of the urban
principalship; program design and development based on a clear vision; performance
standards and assessments for school leaders; candidate selection and screening criteria;
cohort learning groups; authentic hands-on experience and exposure to principal job
responsibilities and urban school leadership; frequent participant reflection; and
monitoring and assessment of participant’s performance and success - both before and
after completing the program (p.29).

The importance of urban principal training and preparation programs was voiced by
(Carlin, 1992) who, like many other educatioml researchers, believes a critical
requirement for urban school reform and sustained academic improvement are school

principals who have been well trained and prepared to provide building level educational

 

Figure 2.5: Common features of five urban school leadership preparation programs

 

1. Urban school focus: Program focused on

preparing “quality” principals for urban school
leadership.

2. Summer workshops /seminars: Required
and critical component of the new principal

3. Problem based learning approach: Program
includes a mix of case study, scenario, or action
research.

4. Principal certification or preparation:
Program completion meets State's criteria for
school administrator certification or
recertification.

5. Curriculum design and content: Curriculum
conceptual framework focuses on the urban
learner, urban school settings, and
organizational change.

6. Partnerships and financing: Initial base of
support including partnerships with key
stakeholders and funders to finance planning,
development, and early implementation “start-
up” costs.

7. Multiyear program: Program developers
make a commitment to developing,
establishing, and implementing the program a
minimum of three to five years.

8. Research-based program: Research-based
vision of what and how an effective principal
leads instructional improvement and student
achievement gains.

9. Program vision: Focused theory of action
about program development and instructional
design based on a clear program vision.

10. School leadership performance standards and
outcome assessments: Aligned with the vision and
theory of action.

ll. Candidate selection criteria and screening
process: Reflects the vision and capability of the
program.

12. Participant cohort learning groups:
Structuring participant groups into continuing
cohorts that frequently meet to discuss what they
are experiencing and learning about the principal’s
job.

13. Authentic learning: Experiences that
incorporate on-the-job and practical realities of the
principal’s work.

14. Reflection and assessment: Frequent

structured opportunities for participmts to do
personal reflection and performance assessment.

15. Monitoring and assessment: Structured
program monitoring and assessment feedback of
participants’ performance in the program, and
success on the job after the program.

 

 

Source: U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to
School Leadership, (p. 29).

 

 

 

leadership (Elmore, 2000; Farkas, Johnson, & Duffett, 2003; P. Hallinger, 1992; Kimball
& Sirotrrik, 2000; J. Murphy & Schwarz, 2000; Osterman & et al., 1993; B. Portin, 2004;
Reves, 2004; Sergiovanni, 2000; Thomson, 1993; Tyack & Cuban, 1995; Wanzare & Da

Costa, 2001; Waters et al., 2003; Wolcott, 1973; Michelle D. Young et al., 2005; Yukl,

45

1982). In The Principal ’s Role in Urban School Reform Carlin (1992) emphasizes the
importance of urban school principals being prepared to provide building level
leadership:

There is one area of reform, however, that ahnost all reformers agree on as needing immediate
attention. That area is leadership, especially at the school building level....Reformed education
requires principals with vision who have the opportunity to communicate and infirse it. ...The role
of the principal receives special attention because it offers the single most immediate route to
school reform. If that role can change, if it can be strengthened and its incumbent held
accountable, what marvels may be worked in the improvement of each school building (p.46).

46

CHAPTER 3

METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Research Approach

Marshall and Rossman (1999) believe the selection of a particular research
approach can help the researcher select an appropriate method for data collection and
analysis depending on the assumptions and objectives of the research (p. 105). My
research objective is to understand, from the perspective of nine urban school principals,
“What it means to be principal of an urban school with a majority Afiican American
student population." Based on this objective, I decided that a phenomenological research
approach was appropriate for this study.

Four philosophical underpinnings posited by Creswell (I998) helped me frame,
structrn'e and implement this research project. First, I focused on listening and learning
from the “lived experiences” of my study participants. Second, I did not challenge or
pass judgment on participants’ statements regarding how they perceived or experienced
their training and preparation for rn'ban school principalship. Third, I understood that my
participants’ perception of their preparation for school leadership would be based on their
conscious awareness of the preparation process itself. And foru'th, rmderstanding that
each participant’s consciousness of the reality of their school leadership training,
experiences and preparation was perceived based on the meaning each participant
attributed to their set of preparation experiences.

Using these forn' precepts as a methodological frame, I was able to develop and
narrate, in Chapter 5 of this paper, the meaning this group of nine urban school principals
ascribed to their preparation for urban school leadership.

47

Participant selection
Patton (2002) advises that, “When a person, group, organization, or country is the

unit of analysis qualitative methods involve observation and description focused directly
on the unit" (p.228). Continuing, Patton argues that, “the key issue in selecting the unit of
analysis is to decide what it is you want to be able to say something about at the end of
the study” (p. 229). Following Patton's advice, for this research project the urban school
principal is my unit of analysis. I

After receiving university approval to conduct my research, I met with a district
executive in an urban school district in Michigan who agreed to invite nine school
principals and the district’s director of leadership training to participate in my research.
The nine school principals that agreed to participate in this research project all report to
the same director. A copy of the voluntary consent form and confidentiality agreement
each participant signed is shown as Figure 3.0 in the appendix.

Each participant was assigned a pseudonym to help ensure their confidentiality.
For example, the alias name for the district director of training is Francis. Her 30 year
work history in this urban district includes 11 years as an elementary school special
education teacher; 3 years as an elementary school assistant principal; 13 years as a K-8
elementary school principal and 3 years in her current role as district director of training.
Francis is responsible for providing leadership training programs for teachers who may
want to become assistant principals and assistant principals who aspire to become school
principals.

Table 3.0 provides a summary of the alias names, grade levels and private and
public sector work history of the nine urban school principals. As shown, three principals

are male and six are female. All are African-American and school grade level

48

responsibility is mixed: one principal is K—5 elementary; three are K-8 elementary; two
are 6—8 middle school; and three are grades 9-12 high school. This mix of participant
grade level responsibility helped illuminate grade level differences in school culture,
building operations, administrative procedures, instructional leadership challenges, and
school or student issues created or exacerbated by the urban school setting.

In column five of Table 3.0 we see that the work experience of the nine principals
ranges fiom 14 to 40 years of total service in urban education. Classroom teaching or

V school staff experience of the nine principals ranged fiom 10 to 18 years; district staff

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3.0: Participant's career history in private sector and urban education as of
June 2006
Urban education
.8 “a
3 5‘: 3
3 3 r . E
"‘ o
E i E E E
Participan School g ’5’ E 5 ‘5 g g. g
talias gradelevel a: ,, a .5 73% a 3, 33
mme g f; a E g E, E 3 ‘8 .0 5 .E
r a >- r3 r: '5 o 3 <? E >- a.
Male
Robert K-8 elementary 1966 40 I l 20 2 7 33
Daniel 6-8 middle school 1972 34 18 13‘ 2 1 33
George 9-12 higr school 1 1976 29 16 1" 9 26
Female
Ruby K-5 elementary 1980 26 13 5 4 4 22
Mary K-8 elementary 1970 36 16 4 16 20
Paula K-8 elemental-L 1973 33 13 4 3 13 20
Kathy 6—8 middle school 1986 20 14 2 4 16
Henrietta 9—12 high school 15 1990 14 10 2 1 l 13
Marietta 9-12 high school 1968 38 15 15 8 30
Average: 30 14 4.6 6 24
Note: All data supplied by participants
" Served 10 years as assistant superintendentand3 years as district superintendent
in a smaller urban school district.
“ Dean of students

 

 

 

from 2 to 20 years; and 2 to 15 years of experience serving as curriculum leader or

49

assistant principal. Column ten shows that the nine principals have been in their job an
average of 6 years and, as shown in column eleven, had worked in urban education an
average of 24 years before being selected for the principalship.

Table 3.1 shows student populations ranging from 350 students in one of the four
elementary schools to 1000 students in one of the three high schools. In seven of the nine
schools over 90% of the students are African-Americans, while the two remaining
schools have a 50% or 55% African-American student population. The percentage of all
students in each school receiving flee or reduced lunch ranged hour 63% to 94%.
Additional descriptive data and school related information is included in Chapter 4 in the
form of a briefcase study of each of the nine principals.

The rich diversity of my participant’s urban education work experiences, grade
level responsibilities and school building challenges helped me collect a large quantity of
qualitative data to analyze and digest.

Data Collection

Data collection activities included conducting one focus group, eleven participant
interviews, and reviewing multiple documents provided by participants. Marshall and
Rossman (1999) suggest that focus groups provide pmticipants the opportunity to, "listen
to others opinions and understanding in order to form their own ”(p.l 14). This notion
fully supported the phenomenological intent and objective of this study - to understand
the individual and collective perceptions, essential structure and meaning of the lived
experiences of the individual participant and the group. During May of 2006, I conducted

a 90—minute focus group with six of the nine school principals. During the focus group

50

 

Table 3.1: Participant’s estimates of student population and school staff

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Student population School staff
-o
.. ta 5
o I—i
.5 .G a g .—
0 0 o 0
E _ 5. § § ’5 s E 5.
§ : § '5 5 a E .. i. E
a o '2 g E g 3 g 8 {3’ 1: .5
a a 8 : 5 § g3 § ft 8‘ g
a O ‘4- .O 3 %
°~ '— V’ 0 E _ 5 O 33 a m '—
r §§£<rsé§rri ti
9.. (>3 {- a" ta" 1— L £2. 3 w “a g (n 8
Elementary school
Ruby K-5 482 94% 50% 44 18 22:1 0 4 21 1
(41%) (9%) (49%) (2%)
Robert K—8 720 87% 95% (Information not available)
Mary K-8 587 90% 90% 984 21 28:1 16 4 50 3
(22%) (17%) (4_%) (53%) (3%)
Paula K-8 350 84% 99% 54 20 18:1 7 4 21 2
(37°@ (13%) (7%) (39%) @%)
Middle school ,
Daniel 6-8 652 81% 100% 104 34 19:1 26 6 32 6
(33%) (2 5%) (6%) (3 1%) (6%)
Kathy 6-8 480 80% 98% 71 19 25:1 13 2 34 3
(27%) (18%) (3%) (48%) (4%)
High school
George 9-12 1000 75% 99% 136 60 17:1 10 9 47 10
64%) (7%) (7%) (3 5%) (7%)
Henrietta 9-12 700 Not 98% 79 33 21:1 5 6 30 5
avail (42%) (6%) (8%) (38%) (6%)
Marietta 9-12 850 63% 55% 107 55 16:1 10 5 30 7
(51%) (9%) (5%) (28%) (7%)

 

 

Notes: Estimates provided by participants

 

participants responded to the following six focus group questions.

0 Q1:Whatdoesitmeantobetheinstructionalleaderofanm'banschool?

0 Q2: How, when, and where were you trained for school principalship?

0 Q3: What school procedures, functions, oractivities require your direct

involvement or leadership as an urban school principal?

51

 

0 Q4: Are there issues and challenges that you believe are unique to urban public
school principals? Please describe.

0 Q5: What does it mean for a principal to be “adequately” prepared for urban school leadership?

0 Q6: How would you characterize your training, experience, and preparation for
urban school leadership?

Before participants responded to question number three, I showed each participant
a copy of Table 3.2 and asked the participant(s) to identify the top three instructional and
top three administrative activities that require their direct involvement and leadership in
their respective schools. During May and June of 2006, I met with each of the nine
school principals at their respective school building and conducted a 60-minute one-on-
one interview using the open-ended structured interview guide (Patton, 2002)shown as
Appendix C in the Appendix. The six focus group questions were included as questions
during interviews with the three principals who could not attend the focus group session.

During June of 2006, I also conducted two separate 90 minute interviews with
Francis, the district director of training. A copy of the district director interview guide is
included as Appendix B in the appendix. I interviewed Francis to understand (1) the
districts approach to principal selection, training and preparation and (2) how Francis
perceived the issues, challenges, roles and responsibilities of school principals working in
this urban school district. The focus group and interviews with all participants were
audio-taped and transcribed for my review and analysis.

During each interview participants gave me copies of documents and artifacts
relevant to their school leadership training, experience and preparation. Reviewing these
documents (1) provided important insights into the districts approach to principal

preparation, (2) served to triangulate focus group and interview data and (3) helped me

52

 

Table 3.2: What school procedures, functions, or activities require your involvement or leadership as

an urban school principal?

 

Instructional leadership

Administrative leadership

 

1. Translation of test and
assessment data into effective
instructional strategies (4)

1. Student discipline (5)

22. Attending school sports
events

 

2. Assessment of stakeholder
wants, needs, and demands.

2. Parent concerns (5)

23. School assemblies

 

3. Research based curriculum

3. Student registration

24. Student registration

 

 

 

 

development and instructional

delivery (3)

4. School choice communication 4. Building maintenance and 25. Lunchroom monitoring (1)
and student transportation appearance

5. Staff standards, certification 5. Paperwork and reports (3) 26. Building security and safety
and evaluation (1L (1)

6. Staff professional development 6. District meeting 27. Legaiissues

7. Stafi morale (4) 7. Retuming telephone calls 28. Communicating with family

social services agencies (1)

 

8. School improvement plan(s)
development and implementation

(3)

8. Fire drills

29. Student records management

 

9. Funding stream allocation and

9. Teacher hiring(1)

30. Crisis planning, training, and

 

reporting management
10. Stakeholder communications 10. Substitute teachers 31. School vision, strategic
strategy, plan, content direction, and goal setti&(4)

 

11.Studentsandstaffsafety(6)

1 1. Budget development and
control (2)

32. School improvement teams
(1)

 

12. Parent and community
involvement (2)

12. Staff professional
development (1)

33. Administrative technology
and support

 

13. NCA accreditation

13. School committees

34. Leadership team meeting

 

14. Student recognition

14. Student attendance (1)

35. Staff meetiggs

 

15. Special education

15. Staff assignments and
scheduling

36. Food and food services

 

16. Textbook reviews

16. Meeting with parents

37. Student transportation

 

17. Student graduation

17. Parkingconcerns

38. Cash management and
security

 

18. Bilingual education

18. Staff communication

39. Union interactions

 

19. Classroom technology

19. Student dress code

40. Communication with local
television, newspaper and radio

 

reporters
20. Library resources 20. Attend school band 41. Other administrative
concerts leadership components?

 

21. Student counseling and
support services (1)

21. Attending community

events

 

22. Principal personal professional

development (1)

 

23.1ndividual student academic
needs (1)

 

 

 

 

Note: (x) = Number in parentheses is the number of x of Wicipanm selecting this item.

 

better understand the school leadership training and prepm'ation experiences of each

53

 

participant.
Analytical fiamework
F our categories of research helped me fi'ame, analyze and better understand the

qualitative data I collected regarding the training and preparation of the nine urban school
principals participating in this research study. The four research categories are:

0 Urban principal role, responsibility and approach to leadership

0 Urban children attending school in toxic urban settings

0 Structure, curriculum, and content of urban principal preparation programs

0 Urban school effectiveness

The first category of research focused on understanding or recommending an
appropriate leadership role, responsibility or approach for an urban school principal.
Researchers in this category discussed a myriad of findings and espoused theories related
to instructional leadership, leading change, critical leadership, servant leadership, critical
race leadership, moral leadership or the effects of school principal leadership on student
achievement (Bogotch, Miron, & Joseph Murphy J r., 1998; Dantley, 1990; Gooden,
2002; Kimball & Sirotnik, 2000; Tate, 1997; Waters et al., 2003). For example, critical
race theory, espoused by William Tate (1997) provides an ideological construct for
considering what might constitute appropriate leadership training, experience and
preparation for an aspiring urban school leader. Tate offers the concept of “raced people”
- people who have faced discrimination because of race and/or class and been historically
oppressed psychologically, physically, educationally, or economically. Building on Tate’s
notion, (Gooden, 2002) argues that because raced people, “have been omitted from the

conversation in the construction of models for leadership” we should reconsider the

54

appropriateness and applicability of commonly accepted theories of leadership for the
urban school environment. Employing raced people as an analytical lens during data
analysis helped me better understand my participant’s experiences with issues of race or
racism during their training and preparation for urban school principalship.

The second category of research focused on the notion of urban children living in
toxic neighborhoods situated in urban settings that may have a negative affect on the
child's health, psychology, since of self worth, value for education, safety, or ability to
focus on learning (Baker, 2004; Cotton, 1991; Delpit, 1995; Kozol, 1991, 1996; G.
Orfield, Losen, D., Wald, J ., & Swanson, C., 2004; Payne, 2005; Rossman & Morley,
1996; Schlechty, 2002).

A third category of research helped me analyze and interpret the themes that
emerged regarding the organization, structure, process flow, components, curriculum,
content or outcomes of participants leadership training and preparation programs (Bruss,
1986; Cleveland State University, 2003; Levine, 2005; J. Murphy, 1998; Pam & Daresh,
1997; U.S. Department of Education, 2004; Weick, 1976; Michelle D Young, Crow, Orr,
Ogawa, & Creighton, 2005; Michelle D. Yormg et al., 2005). The research theory of
loosely coupled systems posited by Weick (1976) is an example of research that provided
a lens that helped me examine the organizational process and procedural connection
between the skill and knowledge-based outcomes of principal training and the leadership
skills criteria established by the five person selection committee that decides which
aspiring principal is selected to be school principal.

The fourth category of research used to illuminate and scrutinize my data centered
on the notion of urban school effectiveness, accountability, school reform, leading

change, NCLB, principal leadership effects, and building strong school, family and

55

community partnerships (Boysen, 1992; Chrispeels, 2002; Edmonds, 1979; Epstein,
2001; Forsyth, 1993; Fullan, 2001; Greiner, Bennigson, & Poulfelt, 2005; Kozol, 1991;
Reynold J. S. Macpherson, 1998; Payne, 2005; Taylor, 2002). Citing research by Richard
Elmore, F ullan (2001) argues that, “changing the way school principals are recruited,
supported, and developed” is necessary to prepare school principals for their role and
responsibility of change leadership (p.146).

Four separate research lens equipped me with an eclectic mix of theories,
arguments and perspectives that helped me analyze and begin to understand the data I
collected during this project. Creswell (1998) cautions that researchers engaged in
phenomenological research must not allow past experiences and current perceptions to
infiltrate and contaminate data collection, analysis or research conclusions. Advancing the
notion of “epoche” he urges the researcher to “bracket” preconceived ideas about the
phenomena and focus instead on listening to the voices of study participants — with the
intent of understanding how they have constructed meaning fiom their exposure and
experiences with the research topic under investigation (p.54). Following Creswell’s
suggestion, I listened closely to each of my ten participants and resisted the temptation to
prejudge, discount, or devalue participant’s statements that did not fit with my
understanding, preconceptions or prejudices regarding urban principal preparation.
Instead, I focused, as Creswell advised, on examining or “gazing” at the data from my
participant’s perspective, while consciously “bracketing” my analysis from my prior
experiences, biases, and preconceptions of leadership preparation.

Data Analysis
A pleasant but unexpected result of verbatim transcription of the audiotape

recordings of the 90 minute focus group session and eleven one hour interviews was an

56

enormous quantity of qualitative data. Developing individual case studies for each of the
nine urban school principals proved to be an effective way to segment and begin to make
sense of this large quantity of data. More importantly, the structured protocol I used to
frame focus group and interview questions helped me conduct a cross case analysis and
create the nine participant case studies presented in Chapter 4 and, in the process, uncover
multiple, “patterns and theme that cut across individual experiences” (Patton, 2002, p.57).
The themes and findings that emerged from the nine case studies are summarized and

discussed in Chapter 5.

57

CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS

Nine urban school principal case studies

The objective of this research is to rmderstand, ”What it means for a principal to be
prepared to be a principal in an urban school with a majority African-American student
population." from the perspective of nine urban school principals in Michigan. In this
chapter, findings generated from the data that was collected from one focus group and
from open-ended structured interviews with nine principals are presented in the form of
one case study for each principal - four elementary school principals, two middle school
principals, and three high school principals. Dming each interview session, participants
shared their perspectives on (1) their role and responsibility as principals; (2) their
training, experience and preparation for urban school leadership; (3) the effect of the
urban setting on urban school leadership; and (4) the implications and recommendations
for urban school leadership training and preparation.

The audiotape of each participant’s interview was transcribed and then coded to
identify emerging themes. Significant themes were then recorded in one of the following
six narrative categories:

1. Participant profile: Principal’s university training; work history in urban
education; school facilities; student population; teachers and school support staff.

2. Leadership training: Participant’s perception of their school leadership training,
professional development, mentoring, and on-the—job experience

3. Leadership priorities: Each participant discusses their perceptions of key
leadership priorities for their urban school.

58

4. Unique urban school issues: Participant's perception and brief discussion of issues
and challenges they believe are unique to their urban school.

5. Leadership preparation: Participant’s perception of leadership skills, knowledge,
capacity, and insight developed as a result of university training, district training,
professional development, mentoring or on-the-job experience.

6. Leadership programs: Participant’s perceptions of university and district
sponsored leadership programs intended to train and prepare aspiring principals,
assistant principals, new, or experienced principals for urban school leadership.

Each of the nine case studies presented in this chapter are organized and flamed by

these six narrative categories. Two significant benefits of framing each case study with
the same six narrative categories are: (l) collectively, the six categories frmctioned as an
efficient and effective rubric for performing a cross-case analysis to identify common
interview themes and (2) provided a narrative framework to present my findings and

recommendations.

First case study Ruby, Principal K-S elementary school
RUBY: To me providing adequate urban school leadership is doing what is expected of you, and sometimes
I don‘t feel that way. It's difficult when you're a single building administrator trying to complete all those
tasks, making certain everything is done on time and meeting everyone's needs, the students, the
community, the teachers, and also making certain there’s effective instruction. When you're in school,

when I was at the university, they didn't coverthat. To me it was like theory, research...and not what's
gonnahappen whenyougetinthere. Maybemeyjustdidn'tknow?

Participant profile

Ruby, a K-S elementary school principal, has worked in this urban school district in
Michigan for 26 years - her entire career in education. An African-American, Ruby joined
the district in 1980 after graduating from a historically black college in the South with a

Bachelors and a Masters degree in Early Childhood Education and, she said, "a ZA

59

endorsement to teach preschool or Head Start." During the first 13 years of her education
cmeer, Ruby worked as a regular education teacher in three different elementary schools
within the district. In 1993 she moved to district staff and served as a reading specialist
for five years before being promoted to assistant principal of an elementary school. Four
years later, in 2002, Ruby was selected by a six person school selection committee
[composed of parents, teachers, union representative, and district executive] to be
principal of her current K-5 elementary school.

Ruby's three-story, brown brick, elementary school building is located on the
north-west corner of a noisy street intersection in what appears to be a low income
neighborhood. An eight foot tall chain-link fence provides see-through protection for the
student sand-lot playground area and gravel surfaced visitors’ and school staff parking lot
- both located in the rear of the building. A total of 44 personnel work in Ruby’s school -
22 (50%) teachers; 21 (49%) staff support specialists; and 1 school administrator, Ruby -
or, as she refers to herself, "a single building administrator.” Closer examination of her
teaching staff reveals there are 18 regular education teachers; one art teacher; one
computer teacher; one physical education teacher; and one literacy coach.

Discussing her student population, Ruby disclosed that of the 482 students
attending her school, ”approximately 50% are African American; 34% Hispanic; 10%
Caucasian; and the balance, a diverse mix of Vietnamese, Arabic, and other." Ruby is
proud of the fact that her school has consistently met or exceeded school improvement
objectives established by her district, the state of Michigan and No Child Left Behind. An
August 2006 Michigan Department of Education school improvement report published on
the Internet (http://wwwmichigan.gov/documents/schools met AYP_169521 7.PDF)

confirmed that while Ruby’s K-S elementary school did make adequate yearly progress

60

(AYP) in 2006, 54% of all of the schools in Ruby's district did not make their 2006
adequate yearly progress objectives.

After 26 years in urban education, Ruby confided that she is Seriously considering
taking early retirement from the district. Her intent, she said, is to use her ZA
endorsement and urban school leadership experience to, "open a preschool, or Head Start,
or something like that.” Ruby made it clear that although she is, "committed to urban
education," she is, "not interested in becoming a superintendent or central office
executive,” because, she said, "she doesn't want that kind of stress."

Leadership training

In addition to formal university training, Ruby has attended many district
sponsored professional development and leadership training sessions since joining the
district. When I asked how she would characterize her leadership training, Ruby
responded, "it was essential, important, beneficial and inspirational." Essential theoretical
knowledge was provided by the university. Professional development conducted by the
district was important and beneficial to the development of her instructional and
administrative leadership skills. And she said, it was inspirational to hear the leadership
strategies, approaches and success stories of other urban school principals from outside of
her school district, “who have seen significant growth in their school test scores and
student discipline.” For instance, Ruby recalled attending two separate leadership
training sessions and being inspired by ”Lorraine Monroe and Marva Collins" - both of
whom are nationally known ‘heroic’ African-American urban school principals. ”When
they leave," Ruby said, ”I always feel motivated. It uplifis you. You go back to your
school and say, yes, I can do this.”

Another reason Ruby said she characterized her school leadership training as

61

essential is, in Michigan, all principals are required to renew their school administrator
certification every five years. The primary requirement for recertification is the
completion, Ruby explained, "of the equivalent of six university credit hours of school
administrator training within the previous five-year period." Because her administrator
certification "expires in June of 2006" Ruby was in the process of documenting all of the
training she had attended over the past five years. After assembling her documentation,
Ruby will send her documentation to the district director of leadership training who will
stamp her documentation with, "an official seal” before forwarding the documentation to
the Michigan Department of Education for their review and approval. Ruby emphasized
the point that in Michigan all principals are responsible and held accountable for selecting
and attending training sessions that their school district and the Michigan Department of
Education believe will improve their school leadership skills and capacity. Comer
training, offered by Yale University, is a good example.

Ruby has attended Comer training at Yale twice, she said. Once while she was a
teacher, and again in 1998, while she was assistant principal in an elementary school that
had adopted the Corner model. Ruby explained why she believes her Comer training was

both beneficial and inspirational. She said:

I loved Comer because it involved all stakeholders...your parents, teachers, and the community.
It's basically focused on meeting the needs of all children so you can educate children plus meet
their emotional and physiological needs. All those needs have to be met and they're saying if those
needs are not met, how can you really educate a child. So they give you the strategies to do tint.
They also involve the parents in all the meetings that you have. Once a month you bring in the
community,andmaybeastudent,anddiscusswhat'sgoingoninthebuildingandcomeupwith
strategies on how to address the needs in your building.

Sometimes I leave the training very motivated because these are the principals that have the
same challenges 1 have and they have seen significant growth in their schools... test swres and
with discipline... It lifts you up.

Ruby believes her ongoing training has helped her understand and implement

strategies to support her teachers, address student issues, and deal with school wide

62

challenges. For instance, her district has, she says, "a continuous series of classes on how
to deal with a difficult child." In addition, in each class she received classroom
management handbooks that she has used to develop a resource library in her school.
Ruby explained that now, "when teachers come to me and say I cannot deal with this
child. What can I do?" both she and her teachers "have access to those resources," Ruby
said. Training that has helped her deal with school wide issues include the Harvard
Urban Leaders Data Wise program. Harvard data training, she said, ”. . .deals with data
and research. How do you look at the data in your school? and, . . . once you look at your
scores, and the research, what can you do to improve in your building?" Ruby is planning
to attend more training focused on, "classroom observations." She wants training that
will (1) help her better understand "what to look for" when she is conducting a classroom
observation and (2) help her determine, ”are the teachers doing that?"
Leadership priorities

Ruby argues that providing instructional leadership is her highest priority. When I
pressed her to define instructional leader she said it means: (1) being involved in the
instructional activities in her school (2) being knowledgeable about her student and
school data, (3) being in the classrooms, knowing how instruction is being delivered and
how to fine-tune instruction and (4) being able to model lessons for her teachers. In
addition to the data-analysis in-service training the district provides for teachers and data
specialists in her school, Ruby believes it is important that she receive additional training.
From her perspective, as the instructional leader of her school, it is critical that she
participate in training to improve her data analysis, strategy development, and project
planning and implementation skills. Ruby explained why her being trained in these areas

is so important:

63

Well, we [building principals] have to look at the data individually [by student], we also have to
share itwithourgroup [22 teachersltocomeupwithaplan duringthefirstweekofschool. That's
when we look at the item analysis and then submit an action plan to the district. Say my reading
scores were low in informational text. What strategy are you going to use? What resources?
Maybe provide professional development. . .show a video. Begin on what date and when will this
end? Maybe only 50% of my students were able to attain 100%, by June of next year we will have
maybe 80% of our students’ proficient in that area.

What they [the district] really want is differentiated instruction. That means you're supposed
to look at where your children are...ifthey're low in addition... write up a plan and have strategies
for teaching that skill to those students. That's supposed to be done during workshop time...time
when teachers really address those student needs. I think the teachers are struggling with it because
they still say they don‘t have enough time to do it or they don't understand how to do it...because,
while you're working with those two children, what are your other 28 children doing? So we are
trying to provide them support in that area, more professional development...visiting other schools
and just going in and modeling forthose teachers.

Ruby admits that additional professional development, planned workshops and
modeling support still does not ”resolve their [teachers] issue of not having enough time
to do it.” As the instructional leader, Ruby's approach is to, "really go in and support
them and encourage them that they can do it and just give them strategies... have them
visit other teachers and see how they're doing it."

In addition to instructional leadership, Ruby admits there are seven other high priority

activities that require a significant amount of her time and direct involvement:

staff professional development

addressing parent concerns

paperwork that's due to the district

attending community activities her children are performing in
visiting her students in the hospital

dealing with discipline concerns, and

providing additional resources for her staff, parents, and students.

>195”?pr

Ruby admits she finds it difficult to accomplish all of her high priority objectives
and still meet the expectations of multiple stakeholders. As she says:

Tomeprovidingadequateurbanschoolleadershipisdoingwhatisexpectedofymtandsometimesl
don't feel thatway. It's difficult when you‘re asingle building administratortryingtocomplete allthose
tasks,makingcatainevaythmgisdmemfimeandmeefingevayom'sneeds,thesmdents,the
community, thewachers, andalso mkingcertainthere’s effective instruction. Whenyou're in school,

64

when 1 was at the university, they didn't cover that. To me it was like theory, research. . .and not what's
gonna happen when you get in there. Maybe they just didn't know?

Unique urban school issues

Ruby, an African-American, confided that she attended a Catholic elementary
school and high school that was, she said, "all female and predominately white."
However, because she has worked her entire educational career in this urban school
district, Ruby made it clear she would not speculate about school leadership issues
outside of her urban district. Two aspects of her urban elementary school, Ruby believes,
are unique include (1) dealing with parents who disagree with disciplinary actions and (2)
the difliculty she has increasing the amount of involvement parents have with their child's

education. She said:

Omjobinpubliceducationistocducateallchildren,nomatterwhatisgoingonwiththem,that’s
part of our responsibility as educators. So I think part of it could be the discipline or maybe the
parental involvement that may be unique. Parents work so some parents cannot volunteer so we
have to look at, when they send their children to school every day as part of parental involvement,
because they’re sending their child to school. . .they're walking them to school, but that is part of
being an involved parent. 1 had a conversation with a parent this morning the time that they sit
out in the car and observe their children, they could get out of the car and assist with the children
standing in line, or with them walking in the building or standing in the hallway. That's about 45
minutes they are spending just observing.

I also see discipline as a challenge, or maybe just dealing with the parents. Sometimes on
issues they will challenge you...with some, if you suspend, or you have a problem, they're going to
challenge youuntil itbecomesanargument. '

Class size is another challenge facing Ruby and her teachers. With 482 students
and 18 regular education teachers, Ruby estimates that her class size is, ”maybe 25 to 30
children in the classroom," verses of the district guidelines, she says, “of no more than 25
students per class” for her K—S elementary school. Without additional budget funds to
hire two additional regular education teachers, the issue of class size will remain a
challenge - for her students, her teachers and herself.

Ruby noted that identifying and implementing instructional strategies that can

65

maximize teaching and learning for her diverse student population [50% African-
American and 34% Hispanic] is a significant challenge. From her perspective, scant

research is available to assist her in this effort. Ruby said:

None of those books really get into the ethnic group. It‘s just generalized so much...l never hear the
teacherssaytlragandlhopetheydontthinkthatbutlnoticethere [are] alotofstudiesoutthereabout
how to deal with our black males. I think for all children, they need someone that is nurturing and
instruction must be very engaging, but they do make reference to Afiican-American students are
accustomed to a lot of music so maybe you have to integrate that.(fix wording) 1 know my Hispanic
people love to thaw. That's just been an observation, but they are excellent artists.

Leadership preparation

Ruby believes that urban school assistant principals and building principals must
be comfortable articulating educational theory and demonstrating their skills, knowledge
and understanding regarding (1) academic instruction (2) school administration and
operations; (3) the urban school neighborhood and local community; and (4) multiple
needs of their urban students, their parents and school staff. From Ruby‘s perspective,
preparing for urban school leadership is an ongoing process of continuous learning,

personal reflection and incremental improvement. She said:

Goodcommunication skills, beingagoodteambuilder,andcommittedtothcchildren, staffandthe
commrmity. Being knowledgeable about subject areas taught in your school. Understanding the
diversity of the children in your school . . . and understanding your community. I think knowing
what resources are out there, because many parents come to you needing resources - either for
insurance, medical, or social work services. Some may require housing. You need to be
knowledgeable about and understand your neighborhood the children are living in. The dynamics
and... what's going on in those neighborhoods. What are the barriers for them [students] to get here
[to school]. Any abandoned homes? Is there drug trafficking on that street where the children
cannot play outside because of that? Are there vicious dogs? I think that's important. Knowing
what libraries, agencies and churches are in the community. Churches are now partnering up with
the schools to provide tutoring services or .. . fruit baskets and food baskets for those families. Also
just being a personable person...being approachable... a good listener. The parents and the
community cannot feel thatyouarecoldorthatyou will not listentothem. Ijustthinkaboutwhatit
takestomake itthroughtheday. Attheendofthedaylalwaysreflectonwhatcouldlhavedoneto
improvemyday? Rightnowl‘mthinkingaboutSeptember. Whucanldotobeabetterlcadel’?

Ruby is convinced that good mentors are important, however, mentors have not

played a significant role in her leadership training or career advancement. Ruby noted

that when she was a new principal, members of the local Executive Service Corps (ESC)
[private sector executives or professionals] were assigned to mentor her cohort group just
after they completed the district's 12 month new principal training program. From her
perspective, the ESC executives assigned to her group have not been particularly helpful.
Instead, Ruby has identified experienced principals within the district who have
graciously agreed to function as her informal mentoring network support group. She
said:

WehadpeoplefiomcorporateAmericawhowouldmeetwithusonceamonflr...wemetinalittle
clustersowe were abletonetwork withotherprincipals. Someofthemhadbeenprincipals for
maybe six or seven years so we were able to get some strategies from them. I'm not still inthat
but it'sagood program. lthinkwe still needtobementored... we have our district directorsto
callonoralotofushavedevelopedrelationshipswithotherprincipalswhowecancallonfor
assistance. Youmeetalotofthembyanendingflremeefingsandywreaflaewhocouldhelpyou
incertainareas.

Two retired principals Ruby worked for earlier in her career still call, she said, to offer

her their support and assistance:

Havelhadanymentors? Yes. Iwouldcalltheprincipalstlmtlworkedundermentors. They
always call andsaywhatdoyouneedfrom me? Howcan l helpyou? Eventothisday,twoof
them have retired, but like, you want me to come up to the school and assist you with anything?
They have letters that they use all the time... I can come put those on your computer. So those
administrators have continued to be supportive. And I think it's because they know what it's like to
beinabuildingalone. Evendroughtheyhadanassismntprincipalorsmfi‘coordinator,theyreally
know the challenges and understand what is required.

Leadership programs

After reviewing a list of instructional and administrative activities that may
require their leadership and direct involvement [see Table 3.2] I asked participants two
questions: (1) What school activities, procedures or frmctions require your direct
involvement or leadership? and (2) What percentage of your time would you say you
spend on instructional or administrative activities? After reviewing the list Ruby (1)

confirmed that the activities are representative of activities that require her leadership and

67

involvement as a K-5 urban elementary school principal and (2) stated that her university
training, district professional development, mentoring, and on-the-job experiences have
done, she believes, a very good job of preparing her to provide leadership in each

instructional or administrative activities. She said:

Everything that you have listed on this chart right here, I do, because all of it is important. And I
think the ones that we [urban principals participating in the study] highlighted, like the school
vision, strategic direction, or staff development depends on what district you work in and what
reports would be required. To me all of these are really important. Translation of test.. .this is what
we do...and even this one.. . newspaper and radio; they [the district] provide us with the in-service
onthattoteach ushowtodealwiththemedia. Soeverythingonyoursheetofpapenasfaras
instructional and administrative is what all of us are dealing with.

And I don't know how they would do that [teach these activities] at the college level, gaduate
leveL I don't know. Maybe school districts can address that like we’re doing here in this district.
Like crisis planning, they [the district] have an office that does that, they come out and in-servicc us.
The legal department, they send the lawyers out to provide professional development during
schooltimeorafierschool. Someofthetrainingactivitiesarecoordinatedthroughthedistrict
leademhiptahfingpmgrammdsomeofthemmaybemandatedbythewpermtendent

In contrast to her positive remarks regarding her training and preparation, Ruby is
quite concerned with the lack of resources and inadequate amount of time she has to do
her job. For example, Ruby complained that schools in her district with less than 600
students are not authorized to have an assistant principal. Because only 482 students
attend her school, she is the only administrator in her building. Ruby explained how being
a single building administrator affects the amormt of time she devotes to an activity:

Yes,lprobablywastrainedforit,butit'sthetimeandresornces.Whenyouhaveanassistant
principal maybetheprirrcipal could tellthe assistant principal, youcan hmdle all parentconcerns
andall of my student discipline, while 1 get in here and observe these teachers. So, I mean, we've
hadthetrainingas anassistant principal and goingthroughthe leadership academy, not necessarily
through our graduate work, and the district is really working on providing us with professional
developmentinalloftheseareas. lt'sjrrstthatonceyougetintotheschooLhowdoyoummage
yorutime?Oncetheparentscomein,ldospendalotoftimewiththemandtheirstudentconcems.

Another concern Ruby raised was the triangular relationship between the leadership
training program, the amount of time she devoted to instructional or administrative
leadership, and her job performance evaluation. Without disclosing the rating or content

of her last job performance evaluation, Ruby posited that, "if you're not adequately

68

trained your evaluation is going to reflect that, “because”, as she explained, "we are
evaluated on test scores, parent complaints, safety, certain reports that are due, how many
fire drills. . . do you improve student achievement in your building. So everything is there
and documented. . . to show if you have decreased or increased in those areas." Her
concern with the current performance evaluation process is that the evaluation does not
take into account the amount of time she may be forced to devote to specific activities.
For example, Ruby estimated that she spends, "approximately 20% of her time on
instructional activities and 80% of her time focusing on administrative Operational
activities." In spite of the fact that her performance evaluation, "has probably got four or
five pages balanced probably 50% [instructional activities] and 50% [administrative
activities]."

As we concluded the interview Ruby volunteered that she believes the results of my

research could and should be used to help aspiring principals, assistant principals and new

principals understand, and perhaps appreciate, what it means to be principal ofan urban
public-school or, as Ruby said, "What does a principal do all day?" She said:

ltwouldbeniceandinformational ifyoucouldsharethiswithuniversitiesthataretrainingteachers
to be principals or assistant principals. What is it that [urban] principals are really doing? When
you're a teacher sitting in a classroom... you might say oh, if 1 were the principal, I would do it like
this, and she or he is not doing that correctly. But they may not understand what is preventing you
from getting to it that day. ..you‘re not always just sitting in your office on the telephone or balancing
your checkbook. When you're in your office and not physically in the hallway, you're actually
irrvolvedwith something. Itcouldbepaperwork, itcouldbeaparentconcerns, itcouldbedowntown
cdlmgyouabomwmmmg...maflfimes,lminkafladmmmmmgagedmmsmwfionflm
administrative tasks.

I‘vebeentryingtoinviteteacherstodothismerprincipaljob] foraday. ltoldthern 1 would
subintheirclassroom sothattheycould seeforthemselves, Whatdoesaprincipaldoallday? Even
though a principal may be smiling and pleasant, they may be upset about something or it's something
theyhavetopreparefortlnteveningorthaday. 'I‘heyalsohavealife. Soit'salsolearninghowto
liveabalancedlife sothatyourworkdoesnotconsruncyourlife.

Second case study Mary, Principal K-8 elementary school

MARY:WhenlstmtedatmyprevimsschooLlspentmemajmityofmydaymadminisuafive

69

things... maybe 90% administrative and 10% instructional. By the time 1 left, it was more like 50%
and 50%. Right now, [in her newly merged school] I’m maybe 80% administrative and 20%
instructional. Next year it will definitely change to more instructional and less administrative.

I believe in a building culture. A part of the culture of this building is the youngsters had an
enormous amormt of infractions - acting out, fights, that type of thing That's where my time was
needed this year. If things go the way I’m planning, I'll do more instructional, tmtil eventually, they
should be about equal. That's where I'm trying to go.

Participant profile

Mary, an Afiican-American female, began working in the district in 1970, after
graduating from a local university with a bachelor's degree in teaching and a master's
degree in urban education. For nine years, from 1970 until 1979, she worked as an
elementary school teacher in two different schools. Early in her career Mary was
convinced she wanted to remain in the classroom her entire career. "I did not want to be a
principal" she said. However, afier serving on a district task force charged with helping
to select students, school staff, and curriculum content for a new elementary school, Mary
changed her mind and decided to pursue the principalship.

Mary worked in the newly created elementary school for seven years — working
_ half time as a staff and curriculum coordinator and half time as a classroom teacher. In
1986 she was promoted to assistant principal in the same school. Two years later, Mary
was reassigned from her elementary school to a middle school as the assistant principal.
She served there for two years before being promoted, in 1990, to principal of a preK-S
elementary school. Five years later, in 1995, Mary was appointed to her current position
as principal of a K-8 elementary and middle school.

Mary is proud of the fact that, in 2006, the 587 students in her school - 90% of whom

are Afiican-American -— made adequate yearly progress towards achieving the goals and
objectives mandated by the state of Michigan and NCLB. To support the academic,

psychological, physiological, and sociological needs of her students Mary has a total

70

school staff of 94 personnel - 41 teachers, 50 support specialist, and 3 school
administrators. Twenty-one of her teachers have regular education responsibility, sixteen
are special education teachers or aides, and four have other teaching responsibilities.
Mary’s fifty support staff members include psychologist, social worker, language
impaired, guidance counselor, food-service, building engineer and custodians.

The three school administrators include one curriculum leader, one assistant principal and
herself as principal. Discussing why she has more support staff and administrators than

teachers on her school staff, Mary explained:

The sociological needs ofthe children, I am not going to say they outweigh the academic needs, but
they are extremely important. I know it's something that people don't like to hear because they say
that urban administrators are using it as an excuse. I absolutely believe all children can learn. I
thrive on that. But I also know that the negative sociological factors that impact families have a
direct bearing on how a school functions.

Leadership training

Mary estimates that 40% of her urban school leadership training was university-
based and 60% a combination of on-the-job training and professional development
provided by her school district. From her perspective, "The rmiversity level does a
wonderful job with the theoretical background of education and that type of thing, but
there are some ‘nuts and bolts things’ that when you walk in the door, people hand you. ..
and expect you [to be] prepared to handle.” Mary is convinced that she received some of
her best training in 1990 when she attended, “a two-week urban school leadership
training session conducted by the North-Central Regional Education Laboratory
(NCREL) . . . right outside of Chicago. It's a national Institute” she said, and, "they bring
urban leaders in from all over the country to work with those of us who are working in

W settings."

71

Urban school leadership training, she believes, should include both theory and task-
level leadership training specifically designed to help prepare aspiring principals,
assistant principals and cm'rent principals to perform their instructional, operational and
administrative leadership roles and responsibilities. Specific examples of task-level
training are creating a school master schedule; developing and managing a school budget;
writing an effective building security plan; and effective and efficient techniques for oral,
written and electronic communications with school stakeholders.

Leadership priorities

In 2005, the school district decided to close the high achieving preK-S elementary
school where Mary had been principal for five years and merge her school with an
existing K-8 school located approximately 22 blocks away. Mary was appointed principal
of the two merged schools. Following the merger, Mary estimates her student population
was 800 students. The primary reasons for closing Mary's previous school was declining
student enrollment caused by (1) the expansion of commercial buildings and industrial
facilities into the residential single-family neighborhood and (2) the exterior appearance
of the building. Mary explained: ”The inside of the building was in better shape. . . but it
looked worse on the outside. . . it looked like an eyesore, so they closed it for that reason."

One year after the school merger, Mary's enrollment had dropped from 800 to
approximately 587 students. Mary confided that the district superintendent had indicated
that, ”it was a little mistake the way they closed some of the achieving schools because
they had assumed parents would come to the merged schools and they didn't." Mary
believes there were six primary reasons for the drastic decline in student enrollment.
First, she said, the district did not provide adequate school bus transportation. Second,

stiff competition from charter schools with more convenient locations. Third, Mary's

72

current school had a long-standing reputation as a low-performing versus high-achieving
school. Fourth, parents in her previous school did not like "losing their neighborhood
school." Fifth, families in the current neighborhood have fewer kids, or no school age
kids, and, because of the poor Michigan economy, many neighborhood parents are
leaving Michigan and "going South to get a job." And sixth, Mary noted, "This building
is in worse shape than the building I left. That didn't help either."

Mary’s priorities for her second year [2007] as principal of her merged school
included dealing with student discipline; working closely with staff and parents;
conducting multiple student assessments and testing; hands-on management and
leadership of her school; timely completion of important paperwork and reporting; and
establishing a consistent set of school routines and rituals that reflect a high achieving
school climate and culture. Her ultimate priority is to spend more of her time on
instructional versus administrative leadership activities. As she said:

When I started at my previous school, I spent the majority ofmy day administrative...maybe 90%
administrative and 10% instructional. By the time I left, it was more like 50% and 50%. Right now,
[in her newly merged school] I’m maybe 80% administrative and 20% imtructional. Next year it
will definitely change, to more instructional and less administrative.

I believe in a building culture. A part of the cultln’e of this building is the youngsters had an
enormousamountofinfi'actions,actingout, fights,thattypeofthing, That'swheremytimewas
needed this year. If things go the way I am planning, I'll do more instructional, until eventually, they
shouldbeabomequal.'l‘hat'swherel'mtryingtogo.

Unique urban school issues

Mary noted that her personal concern and professional responsibility for student
safety requires her to constantly assess and monitor the urban setting and industrial area
surrormding her elementary school. For example she has, "devoted an enormous amount
of time to going through the neighborhood counting abandoned houses with gapping
holes or foundations that weren't filled in." In addition to potential issues of student

safety caused by abandoned houses near her school, Mary explained how these

73

abandoned homes created another issue - large rats. When the abandoned houses are
eventually torn down, she said, they typically are left as a large pile of debris creating an
ideal breeding ground for rats. "When they razed the abandoned houses it released them
on the community." Thankfully, Mary notes, "the rats never entered the school",
however, Mary was forced to close her school playground for three weeks because, she
said, "I couldn't run the risk of sending children outside during the day." Commenting on
unique aspects of urban school leadership, Mary said "that's urban administration. ..that
became my responsibility just as much as whether the children started their reading 10
minutes after they got in class. . . that becomes as much a part of my job as academics."
Leadership preparation

According to Mary, aspiring and practicing principals can be trained, but not
necessarily prepared, for urban school leadership. She believes universities and urban
school districts can do a good job of teaching instructional and administrative leadership
skills and techniques. However, that person is not adequately prepared for urban school
leadership unless they have three critical attributes - caring, understanding and personal
and professional commitment to urban children, their families, and the urban community.
Urban school leadership, she says, "is something you absolutely have to want to do. ..
want to be in an urban setting...you're gonna see things, some of them will break your
heart and sometimes you get such joy. Adequate preparation is, understanding, before
you get in it, what it's all about."

Mary has never had a formal mentor for the principalship. Instead, multiple

members of her family have served as role models. For example, she said, "My mother
was a teacher and three or four of my aunts were teachers.” Her advice to aspiring

principals is, "you have to walk, talk and act like a principal at all times. . .you can't

74

supervise what you don't do yourself and you can get people to do what you want from
a position of power, but if you want people to really buy into what you're doing, you have
to model what you want. If you do that they'll do what you asked them to do." Referring
to principals of urban, rural, and suburban schools, Mary expressed the opinion that, "All
principalships are hard. . .they’re extremely hard, and I don't think mine is any harder. . .it's
just different."
Leadership programs
The district principal selection process has changed significantly since Mary was

appointed principal in 1990. In the late 19805, Mary notes, "you had to be an assistant
principal for five years; work as an assistant principal in two different schools; take a
written test; pass an oral interview; and go through an assessment and testing center." A
significant change occurred in the mid-1990’s when candidates for assistant principal or
principal were no longer required to take administrative tests and "there was no more
assessment center." Another major change occurred in 2006 when the district announced
that aspiring principals, assistant principals and newly appointed principals would all be
required to complete a lZ-month school leadership program offered by the district
Leadership Academy.

Mary believes convincing teachers in the district to leave the classroom and pursue
a career in school administration will continue to be a difficult challenge. Many teachers,
she said, are hesitant to leave the security of the classroom to pursue the principalship
because (A) principals in the district do not belong to a union; (B) principfls are
employed by the district as at-will employees; (C) each school year all principals must
have their employment contracts renewed - or not renewed —by the district

superintendent; and (D) over the past ten years the significant decline in district student

75

enrollment has resulted in many school principals losing their jobs. In addition, high
unemployment is a major concern in all areas of Michigan - especially in this urban
geography. From Mary’s perspective, many teachers believe tenm'e, union membership,
and staying in the classroom may provide a higher level of job security than a school
administrator position. As a result, recruiting highly qualified candidates for urban school

leadership programs and principalship positions is becoming more and more difficult.

Third case study Robert, Principal K-8 elementary school

ROBERT: Every school has a personality and every principal has a personality. Usually that school
personality can take on the principal’s personality and, in interviewing people, you can tell if that person is
goingtofitinornot. Whensomeone isjust sentandyou havetotakethem... andtheyhave noconceptof
workingwithateamthentheystickoutlikeasorethmnb. Thatproducesaproblem.

Participant profile

On May 8, 2006, I conducted a one-hour interview with Robert, the principal of a
K— 8 elementary school located on the far-East side of this rn'ban school district. One
month later, Robert retired from the district after 40 years of service. Discussing his
formal university training, Robert, an Afiican-American, revealed that he has a BS in
Music with a minor in English and Social Studies; a MS in Guidance and Counseling; an
Education Specialists degree; and an EdD in Administration and Supervision - all from
universities in Michigan. While working on his bachelor’s degree in music, Robert
worked part time in this urban district for four years as a substitute piano accompanist.
Graduating in 1966, he joined the district as a full-time classroom vocal music teacher.
After teaching music for four years, Robert spent the next 27 years working in student
guidance counseling - serving seven years as a school guidance counselor and twenty

years at the district level as a guidance counseling supervisor and department head.

76

Robert, “completed his EdD in Administration and Supervision in 1995 and in
1997 moved into school administration” as the assistant principal of a K- 8 elementary
school. In 1999, he was appointed principal of a K-8 performing arts school. In 2003,
four years later, Robert agreed to serve as principal of an additional performing arts
school in the district and, fi'om 2003 until 2005, served as principal of both schools. In
2005 the two schools were merged into one K-8 performing arts school and Robert was
formally appointed principal of the newly merged school. Robert estimates that 95% of
the 720 students in his current K-8 elementary school are African-American and
approximately 87% qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Leadership training

Robert characterized his training and preparation for urban school leadership as
"adequate to good." University training, he noted, was only adequate because "the
university does not necessarily prepare one for on-the-job practices. The research and
theory is there but there are a whole lot of things that go on that you never hear about in a
college classroom." The training he received from the school district was "good" he said
because district training was always focused on school Operational procedures or
instructional programs he was responsible for implementing in his school. In addition to
professional development sessions on effective communications and time management,
district training also discussed best practices for dealing with the social, psychological,
emotional or special needs of urban students and their parents, guardians or families.
Robert believes his training could have been improved if he had had the

opportunity for "mentoring or job shadowing." He confessed that while he was an
assistant principal he "didn't know all that my principal did." He explained:

lhadsomeresponsibflifiesmddraewasmodraassishntprincipalwhohadsome

77

responsibilities. .. we carried out those responsibilities and kept the school going, however, I was
not at all aware, until I became a principal, of all the meetings that the principal is asked to attend. ..
and they tell you what you must do and then you come back and delegate that to be done and check
tomake surethatithappens. Iknewaboutdelegatingandcheckingtomake surethatithappensbut
was not at all aware of the public relations aspects of the job.

Leadership priorities

Because Robert's current K-8 school was the result of two elementary schools
being merged one year ago in 2005, the multiple year student test score data required for
calculating a multiple year average is not available to determine the appropriate AYP
phase for the school. As a result, Robert's school is classified as being in AYP phase 99
advisory status - meaning his school did not make AYP. For Robert, providing
instructional leadership that can help his students achieve passing scores on the Michigan
Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) test is one of his highest priorities. Robert
expressed frustration that he has not been able to devote more time to his instructional
leadership responsibilities. The real issue he says is 90% of his time is spent dealing with
operational issues and administrative activities: for example, attending meetings,
responding to parents, or responding to school district request. Finding adequate time to
focus on instructional leadership activities, he says, "is a major challenge." To illustrate
his point, Robert held up a partially completed report and explained that the district had
already decided which textbooks he should order so, he said, "right now I am involved
with book inventory and ordering of supplies for next school year." He continued,
“Instead of dealing with and resolving higher priority instructional issues related to
curriculum, staff management, staff development and teacher coaching.

If he could spend more time with his curriculum leader and classroom teachers,
Robert believes he could improve the linkage between district curriculum standards, his

vision for the school, teacher classroom instruction practices, and student achievement.

78

Robert explained that staff management - finding substitute teachers to provide "class
coverage in terms of teacher absences" — [ms been a daily challenge for him. For example,
on the day of this interview, Robert confided that six teachers did not show up for work.
"Each school in the district," Robert explained, "has two building subs [substitute
teachers] but when your teacher absences go beyond that, then you start having to rotate
the schedule, to manipulate and use people's preparation period."

From Robert's perspective, staff development and teacher coaching are high
priority instructional leadership activities that would require Robert spending a significant
amount of time helping teachers "fine tune" their classroom management and
instructional delivery skills. The issue for Robert is that he doesn't feel he has enough
time to devote to this important activity. Robert understands that as the school
instructional leader he is, "responsible for every teacher and every activity that takes
place in each teacher's classroom" and believes, "his primary role is monitoring and
assisting in instructional delivery if there's a need for that."

Unique urban school issues

Responding to my question regarding issues and challenges unique to urban
public schools, Robert insisted on discussing a major similarity between public schools —
suburban, rural, and urban, before discussing what he considers to be unique. A major
similarity, he said, is "kids are kids." Children from similar social and economic
backgrounds, he explained, will exhibit similar behaviors in school. "The context might
be different where they come from - urban, suburban or rural - but students fiom a high
economic level, whether they are urban or suburban, are the same and they do the same
things... and urban or submban children from a low economic bracket will do the same

things."

79

Robert believes a unique issue in this urban district is the tops-down versus
bottoms-up approach, process and procedure for teacher selection and hiring. He
believes, "that it would help him to improve his school" if he had the opportunity and
authority to "interview and select his teaching staff, as opposed to accepting whoever
human resources sends." Improving student achievement, he notes, requires teamwork -
the individual contribution and collective effort of every member of his school staff. His
role as principal, he believes, is to provide team leadership. The classroom teacher’s role
is to teach and the support staff’s role is obligated to provide assistance and professional
support for students, staff and school administrators. The key, Robert emphasizes, is
everyone working together as a team, therefore, he argues that he should be allowed to
pick the players on his team:

Every school has a personality and every principal has a personality. Usually that school
personality can takes on the principal’s personality and in interviewing people you can tell if that
person is goingto fit in ornot. When someone isjust sentandyou have to take them... and they
havenoconceptofworkingwithateam,thenthey stickoutlikeasorethumb. Thatproducesa
problem.

Robert confided that another unique, and perhaps more pernicious challenge is
dealing with the classroom teachers in his school who have a negative or deficit versus
positive view of African-American students who come from low-income urban families.

Elaborating on his concern he said:

Ihavestaffwhodidnotgrowupinanurbancommrmityandlspendalotoftimewithstaff
development to help drem understand the urban child. No. I spend time helping them learn to
understand the underprivileged child. An underprivileged child doesn't necessarily have to be
urban, but when you come from a middle-class or upper-class neighborhood and values, and then
youareworkingwithchilchenwhoarelowsocioeconomic,itcanthrowyou. Solspendalotof
timehelpingthemrmderstandwhatisgoingon,andthateverythingyousee,lmmit'snotall
bad. It'sjust the way it is.

Leadership preparation
Throughout his 40 year career in this urban district, Robert says he never had a

80

formal mentor to help prepare him for school leadership. Whenever he was considering a
career move, he said "I did have somebody I could call .. . my first department head when
I was teaching. . .that person is now retired but he is still available to me." Robert believes
his university exposure to educational theory; district professional development;
experience as a high school music teacher, guidance counselor and district staff; and
serving as a middle school assistant principal, combined was adequate training and
preparation for his current role and responsibility as a K—8 urban elementary school
principal.
Leadership programs
Immediately following his promotion to elementary school principal in 1999,

Robert was required to attend principal leadership training offered by the district.
Although he did not remember specific content of his leadership training, he did offer two
suggestions to improve the current district leadership training program. His first
suggestion was to add grade level job shadowing. Robert believes a person headed
towards a middle school principalship should shadow a middle school versus elementary
or high school principal. From his perspective, "It's different in all three places, so it
would be important to shadow at the level one has an interest." Second, he suggested
single-building administrator leadership training should be developed for those principals
who may not have an assistant principal, or cm'riculum leader position, authorized for
their school. In this district, schools with less than 600 students are not authorized to
have an assistant principal or curriculum leader. Many elementary schools and middle
schools within the district, he noted, fall into this category.

According to Robert, the Harvard Urban Leaders program he attended in 2003 was

the "best and most practical learning experience I've had after becoming a principal

81

because all the speakers had practical experience related to their topic." In addition, he
said, "there were people there from all over the world and it was very interesting to sit in

small group sessions to discuss similarities and differences from a worldwide

perspective."

Fourth case study Paula, Principal K—8 elementary school

PAULA: Mentoring advice for aspiring and new urban school principals: "shadow a seasoned and
experienced principal; learn to delegate; do your job to the best of your ability; don't sweat the small stuff;
and, ifyou don'tknow Jesus Christ youbetterestablish arelationshipwith him because, you aregoingto
need that kind of relationship to sun-vive.

Participant Profile

Paula, the principal of a K—8 elementary/middle school began this interview at 3:25
pm. by saying, "I've got something to do this evening, so I'm only gonna give you one
hour. After an hour, I’m through. I just can't give you any more time." It became clear to
me during the interview that setting clear expectations, plain talk, and delivering on her
promise, have been key to Paula's successful track record as a principal. Not smprisingly,
we ended the interview at 4:25 pm.

The demographics of the students in Paula’s K-8 elementary/middle school are
quite different from the K-8 private school, located on the corner - only one block away.
"The school on the corner is approximately 70% white and is a private school," and,
Paula explained, "parents pay maybe 8, 10 or $12,000" to send their children there.” In
her school, Paula has, approximately 350 students, 99% of whom are African-American
and 84% qualify for fiee or reduced lunch. Paula noted that she does have, "one white
child. . . a little girl. . .she just came from Florida this school year." While several schools

in the district with similar racial and economic student demographics are considered

82

failing schools, Paula's school has developed a reputation as a high performing school.
Paula is proud of the fact that for the past 13 years in which she has been principal, the
students and staff in her school have met or exceed the school improvement objectives
established by her district, the Michigan Department of Education and, since 2001, the
adequate yearly progress (AYP) objectives mandated by No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

A total of 54 persons work in Paula's school in a variety of teaching, staff support
and school administrator positions. For example, twenty of the thirty-one teachers have
regular education responsibility; seven are special-education teachers; one is an arts
teacher; one is a computers teacher; one is a physical education teacher, and one is the
literary coach teacher. Staff support roles in her school include psychologist; social
worker; speech and language teachers; food service and noon hour aides; secretary;
engineer and custodian. One curriculum leader and Paula as school principal are the only
administrators in her school.

Paula, an African-American female, has worked in this urban school district for
33 years. Hired in 1973, she worked as a special education teacher for 13 years before
moving to district staff as a special-education consultant. After four years on district staff
she was promoted, in 1990, to assistant principal in an elementary school. In 1993 she
was promoted to her current position of K- 8 elementary/middle school principal. "I’ve
been at this school for 13 years as principal and I think I learned to do the job, on the job,
as well as at workshops and conferences... that I have attended over the years," she said.
Paula believes her university training provided important theoretical information but,
made only a minor contribution to her urban school leadership skills, capability and
practice.

Leadership training

83

Paula’s formal university training includes a BS in Education, a MA in teaching
and an EdD in Education that she earned in 1996. All of her degrees are from universities
in Michigan. When I asked how much of her university training was directly related to
her role and responsibility as an urban school principal? she replied, "I'd say maybe 25%
university and the rest [she learned] on the job, in terms of in-service, and reading, and
whatever." Two examples of useful university training, Paula said, were, "School law...
and student discipline." Student discipline was useful, she said, "Because I used to teach
emotionally impaired students." Commenting on what she did not learn at the university,
Paula said "I didn't learn anything about food service; newspapers and radio reporters;
student registration or student information systems; ordering materials; doing a budget; or
returning phone calls. I learned all that on the job."

Prior to 1991, teachers and school administrators in this district were eligible to
receive step-level salary increases for completing various levels of educational attainment
- for example, a Masters degree plus 30 credit hours; Education Specialist degree; or a
Doctorate in education. Paula revealed that, "Teachers still do [receive step-level salary
increases for additional education] . . . and when we [principals] had a union, we did as
well. . . but now we don't have a union. . . and we don't get that any more.” Her
professional development training after becoming a principal has included, she said,
“attending classes at Harvard, Yale, a local Independent School District (ISD) and three
different universities in Michigan.” She is convinced that the eclectic combination of her
formal university training, district professional development and 33 years of on the job
training and experience have helped her develop the leadership skills and capacity she
needs to continue to "get the job done" in her school. As she puts it, "I think I have the

traininglneedtobeagoodleader...lthinklhavewhatlneedalready. Thereisnothing

84

else that I need to learn. I know what I need to do. Maybe just doing it?"
Leadership priorities

"Instructional leadership? I think it means," Paula said, "that I am supposed to be
able to provide leadership to the instructional staff in terms of instruction that impacts
students." Paula makes a sharp distinction between her responsibility to help her teachers
improve their instructional delivery skills and her teacher's reSponsibility to create and
manage a classroom setting that supports and encourages student learning. "I tell my
teachers that classroom management is their concern. I'm not the classroom manager,
they are. Don't send children to me for me to manage. That's their job" she said. Paula
then described the training and resources all of the teachers in her school have received to
help them develop and implement student discipline and classroom management
strategies:

We've had in-services where they are provided with [classroom management] strategies. We have a

social worker who has in-service at our staff meetings and I gave everybody a book with pre-referral

strategies... these are some strategies that you can use. to deal with this child. Don't bring them to
me. Ifthis child is a problem in your class and you choose not to read it [the pre-referral book],
that's yourprerogativebutl‘m providingyou someresom'cesbecauselcan‘t... I‘m notspendingall
of my time on discipline.

Based on 13 years of classroom teaching experience Paula understands that
classroom management encompasses strategies to deal with student academic
performance and discipline techniques for inappropriate student behavior. As she says,
"the challenges teachers face in the classroom are not just behavior, some of these are
academic kind of issues." As the instructional leader of her school Paula attempts to limit
her involvement in classroom management to (1) advising new or inexperienced teachers;
(2) mentoring experienced teachers; and (3) only getting involved in discipline issues that

require her approval, signature, authorization, or in some cases, she says, her

85

understanding of kids:

I have kids come in here... teachers say they were fighting and they need to go home. Usually I sit
them out there on that bench and Imake them sit close to each other. And I tell them, you guys
got to work it out or else I'll have to call your parents and you'll have to be suspended fiom school.
1 have not had one child since I started doing that who has not worked it out. They sit there, they
start talking and laughing and they work it out, and they don‘t have any more problems, and
that's the honest truth.

"The point is, I'm not spending all of my time with you [the teacher] because Johnny
throws paper on the floor. I'm not. That's not what I'm here for. If I'm an instructional
leader, you need to learn how to deal with Johnny when he throws paper on the floor,"
she said. Despite ongoing attempts to get her teachers to deal with student discipline
issues in their classroom Paula still listed student discipline as one of her top five school
leadership priorities.

Four other leadership priorities Paula said require a significant amount of her time
and attention are (1) staff meetings to ensure timely two-way communication; (2)
classroom observations and new teacher evaluations; (3) dealing with parent concerns;
and (4) "making certain that the management support staffis focused on what they are
supposed to do. . . staff intervention kinds of activities."
.Urban school issues

Paula believes a unique challenge for her school is what she perceives to be a lack

of focus or sense of urgency by the district to acknowledge and "fix" long-standing issues
in her school. Her frustration stems from her belief that, "At the district level people
know what's wrong with these schools.. . but to fix it just requires more than they are
willing or able to commit to doing." Using this Ph.D. research examining urban school
leadership preparation as an example, Paula commented that, "Folks in [this district] tend

not to pay attention to research... and since I am familiar with doctoral procedures [Paula

86

has an EdD in education] . . . I know nothing much will happen with it. It will be filed,
and unless somebody is doing a similar study... they might look at it... otherwise,
nobody’s gonna look at it."

Four issues Paula believes her urban district should address are (1) repairing,
renovating or replacing old school buildings; (2) the lack of adequate school resource; (3)
classroom overcrowding; and (4) collecting and disseminating accurate student data.
First regarding renovating old school buildings, Paula said, "Take this building for
example... this building was built in 1910 [86 years ago]. . . you don't see buildings this
old in suburban school districts." Despite the neat and tidy exterior appearance of her
three-story brown brick building, and the high-gloss wood-wax finish I noticed on
classroom floors and hallways, Paula is frustrated by the fact that her school "has never
had extensive remodeling."

The lack of adequate school resources — specifically, not having an adequate supply

of substitute teachers - was the second issue Paula raised:

They [the district] claim to be concerned about achievement and they want good results on test
scoresbutyou know,theydon‘tprovideyouwithgoodteachers,andtheydon'tprovideyouwith
substitutes. My friend... he's a teacher in [a suburban district]...they always have a sub when
somebody is absent. You know, how are you gonna have a school when you don't even provide
subs,thesubstituteteacher,whenthemacherisabsent. That'scrazy!

Her third issue is classroom overcrowding, a long-standing and pernicious issuethat
affects every student, teacher and staff member in her school - and, she believes, many

other schools in her district:

ThishasbeenontheOprah[Winfi-ey]show. Didyouwatchhershowoneducationthatshehada
few weeks ago? [Oprah is building a school for girls in Africa and paying forthe entire project out
ofher own money] Oh, it was profound... but the point is, it almost seems as though the powers
thatbe, they don'tcareabouteducatingkids...in theurbanschools, theyjust throw stufftogether.
How do you put 35 kids in a classroom and expect high achievement? The recommended class-size
is 25 for grades K-3; 30 for grades 4 and 5, and 35 for grades 6 through 12. That's crazy... you’re
justaholdingstation...butthat'swhattheydo. Inmy7"'and8'"grade,lgot37inoneclassand39
orsomethinginanotherclass...andtherecommendednumberis35.Mygrades6,7and8are

87

above 35. It's horrible. That's what I'm saying... nobody cares about these kids.

The fourth unique issue that Paula perceives, she and her peers are facing the
difficult task of collecting and reporting accurate student count data Because public
schools in Michigan are funded on a per pupil basis Paula and her peers, she says, operate
under a mandate and tremendous pressure from district executives to submit accmate
student count data that accounts for every student enrolled in each school. Principals who
submit inaccurate student count data may be in jeopardy of not having their employment

contract renewed for the following school year. Paula explained the issue this way:

It has nothing to do with district enrollment dropping... that's a different matter. What we are
talking about is missing kids. Let me tell you ...this is [the] problem. You’ve got a 10 day
window for counting. .. and all the different rules. Say Johnny Jones has left the school district but
IleaveJohnnyJonesonmy formweusetocormtkids. Whentlreydoanarrdittheysayokaymh,
Johnny Jones is enrolled over here in [another school district] and you're saying he's still in this
district? That's the kind of thing they're talking about in many cases.

In the high schools, it's really crazy because maybe 3, 4 kids, they don‘t go to every class.
Some kids skipped this class so the teacher doesn‘t count them.. . and maybe somebody else has
counted them. . .or, maybe the teacher is counting them present when they're not there. Or, when
they do the audit. .. you find that you can‘t count this kid because he doesn't have six
classes. ..maybe they enrolled for six but then dropped classes, but that information didn't get bmk
to the membership. It's crazy. It's a teacher’s responsibility but the buck stops with the principal...
so ultimately, it's the principal's responsibility.

The problem is the district provides the training to the administrators they don't provide
the trainingtotheteachers... andunless you [theprincipal] takethetimetotraintheteachershow
to do it, it's... messed up. What I do... I take the time to look at it. It's almost like you have to...to
know everything If somebody's been absent three days, we need to know where that person is.
With mysmall school [350%] it'saloteasiertodothat,butsomebodyinahighschoolwith
1700kids, it'shard, hardertodothat... butthey [all principals inthedistrict] stillhavethe same
accountability.

Leadership preparation

"Whether a principal is adequately prepared for urban school leadership really
depends on who you ask,” Paula argues. It may depend on what that person's
expectations are for a principal; or the principal's reputation and track record; or the

issuesthatneedtobeaddressedinthatschool. Basedonhertrackrecordofconsistently

exceeding AYP and school improvement objectives, Paula believes the district executive

88

she reports to has full confidence in her leadership skills and capability. To make her
point, Paula revealed that the district executive to whom reports, has never been to her

school:

I haven't seen [the district executive] in over a year. .. as a matter of fact... never been in my
school. And that's a good thing... because there are some places that they [the district executive]
are overthere all the time... I mean all the time... and, I‘m okay with that. I'm okay. I do what
I'm supposedto do. I know what I'm supposed to do. I get thejob done.

Paula believes that being adequately prepared for urban school leadership means
the principal is (I) able to communicate effectively with students, staff, parents and
stakeholders; (2) is willing and able to make decisions; (3) can find answers and
resources required to resolve situations; (4) gets the job done; and (5) practices service
leadership. To explain how she perceives and ‘makes sense’ of the notion of service

leadership Paula offered the following:

At Harvard, I had asession on service leadership. the whole conceptresonated with me... because
I think to be an effective principal, especially an urban principal, you have to want to serve...
becausetheydon'tpayyouenoughtodowhatldo. Theydon't... theycan'tpaymeenoughtodo
what I do. I mean, ifyou are a servant leader, to me, it means... it's not about you...okay... it's
goingaboveandbeyondwhatitisthatisexpectedofyou. That'sserviceleadership,aslrmderstand
it.

Leadership programs

Urban school principals must have good teambuilding and school leadership skills,

but, Paula says, ”I'd even go a little bit further. . . I'd say they need compassion and

passion." From her perspective, some aspiring principals or peer principals in her district
may not have the level of compassion and passion she believes is required for the job:

Justlookingatthepeoplewhoarebecomingprincipals [inthisdistrict]... theydon'tseemtobe
doingagoodjob. llistenedtosome ofthem, notall ofthem... and, you know, it's all about, I‘mthe
principal. And they have so many problems. I don‘t know. Maybe I've been a principal so long
now [13 years] that I realize I can't do it all by myself. I thinkthey [the district] are providingthe
training [leadership training] but, I'm not sure if the people they are selecting are... maybe I
shouldn't say that because I don't know everybody who's selected... but so many schools are ‘offthe
hook’ [havingalotofpmblernsandissueletalktonewprincipalsandforwhateverrcasmsthey
seemtobestrugglingalot.

89

Based on her knowledge of other schools in her district, Paula argued that the
consequences of new or experienced principals not being adequately prepared for urban
school leadership include, "they have badly run schools. . . failing schools. .. schools
where they are always putting out fires...schools where they are always having parental
complaints." In addition, principals lacking compassion and passion for urban students,
she says, may not provide the leadership tlmt teachers in an urban school need to help and
support them as they struggle in their classroom to improve the acadenfic performance of
their urban students. To make her point about principds being adequately prepared and
having compassion for urban students, Paula told the story of how a peer principal
expelled a ninth grade student from school - for what may have been a minor infraction —
with the potential impact of delaying that student' 3 graduation from high school. Paula
said:

lsee so many principals that are out to get the kids. They kick them out ofschool for this, kick
them out for that. It's hom’ble. I think urban schools do a disservice to children. I was [shopping]
yesterday... getting in my car... had a whole lot ofstuff... and this kid came over and said do you
need some help? I started talking to him... what school do you attend?... what grade?...he said the
ninth grade... and I said do you like your school principal?... and he goes, no, I can't stand that...
she's mean...kicked me out of school...because he opened the door to let some kids in the building?
That could be serious, but why would you kick a kid out of school for the rest of the school year?
We are kicking kids out of school left and right... especially in the high schools... that's why only
50% of them are graduating. .. because we're kicking them out left and right. They‘re tardy, you've
gottogohome forthreedays. Heskippedaclass,you‘re goinghomeforaweek. Youopenthe
door, you go home for six weeks? That's crazy!

Although she did not have what she termed a "bona fide mentor" Paula noted that
her former principal did serve as an informal mentor when she was a new principal. ”Just
someone that I could talk to" she said, "when I needed some help or information.”
Although she is not currently mentoring an aspiring principal, Paula has several pieces of

advice for an aspiring or new urban school principal. First, ”shadow a seasoned and

90

 

experienced principal." Second, "learn how to delegate." Third, "do your job to the best
of your ability." Fourth, "don't sweat the small stuff, because it's all small stuff." And
fifth, "if you don't know Jesus Christ you better establish a relationship with him because
you are going to need that kind the relationship to survive."

Paula believes she should be evaluated and receive feedback on her school
leadership performance, however, while showing me a copy of the most current school
principal evaluation form, she commented that, "I haven‘t been evaluated in the last
couple years. . . but we are in the process of doing an evaluation this year. It’s supposed to
be annual... but because the district has undergone so much change, it hasn't happened."
Categories on the principal performance evaluation form included AYP; school
effectiveness; student instructional time in content area; data-driven decision making;
delegation; fire drills; safety drills; and code of conduct violations. Paula explained that
prior to her performance evaluation meeting with her district executive, she "is supposed
to do a portfolio of sorts. .. that address these issues." Paula said she is not concerned with
what happens before, during, or even after her performance evaluation, because from her
perspective, neither the input nor the outcome of her evaluation will be used for any
constructive purpose:

I haven't been evaluated in the last couple years... but we are in the process of doing an evaluation
for this year. I'm not sure how it's going to be done...it's sort ofa ...new process. We're supposed to
do a portfolio of sortsmaddress these issues... this is worth 20 points... this is IO... this is 15...
that'sZO. Idon'tthinkit'sgoingtohaveaneffectonanythingthisyearbecausewe’redoingitatthe
endoftheschoolyear. Idon'tknowwhatimpactitwilllnveinthefirture. I'mnotsurewhatithas
impactedinthepastbecausenooneeverdiscusseditoncewedidit.

Fifih case study Daniel, Principal 6-8 middle school

DANIEL: Being a small district [referring to his previous school district], we didn‘t have a training center
or management academy for building principals. We didn't have folk who were paid to do training. We
relied on consultants, or the Intermediate School District (ISD), to in-service us or provide staff
development. MyMasta'sldegree]wasinadmmisaafiomsoIhadcomsewmk,hnmtamsofacunlly

91

having on-the-job experience, that was only through the internship program - which they [previous district]
only had for a short period of time. I went to several workshops dealing with running a building, but
nothing near what this district provides.

Participant Profile

Daniel, an African-American principal of a 6-8 middle school in this urban school
district in Michigan, has been working in urban education for 34 years. Early in our
interview he freely admitted that public school administration was not his first choice as a
career. Daniel, explained that he had attended a historically black college to study
advertising but was forced to drop out of school due to a lack of money. He returned to
Michigan and, afier first attending a local community college, graduated from a four year
university in 1972 with a BA degree in teaching. Later that year, he began his 34 year
career in education by accepting a teaching job in what he called, "a small K-l4 urban
school district." The district was small because, he said, "It only had one high school,
three middle schools, five elementary schools and one community college career
academy." In 1978 Daniel earned a Masters degree in Educational Administration and, he
added, "I finished the course work for my EdD last year [2005] but I haven't been
awarded my doctorate yet. .. because I still need to complete my paper... probably by
spring of 2007."

Summarizing his 34 year work history in urban education, Daniel joined the small
urban school district in 1972 and worked nine years as a middle school regular education
teacher before moving to another middle school in the district as the football and
basketball coach. Nine years later Daniel was promoted to assistant principal of the same
middle school. After only one year as assistant principal, Daniel was promoted to district
assistant superintendent. His promotion, he believes, was based on 19 years of

experience working in the district, his reputation for getting things done, and his graduate

92

level university training in educational administration. His responsibilities as assistant
superintendent included labor relations, human resources, transportation, facilities and
maintenance. Ten years later Daniel was appointed superintendent of the district and
served in that capacity for three years, until he retired in 2003 afier 32 years of service in,
as he said, "that small urban district."

Daniel "only stayed retired for several months" because he received a call from a
middle school principal in this urban school district who "offered him a job as a
curriculum coordinator in her middle school." Daniel accepted the job, he says, "because
I realized I missed that interaction with students at the building level." Eight months later,
Daniel was promoted to assistant principal of a K- 8 elementary/middle school. One year
later, in 2005, a six person school principal selection committee selected Daniel to be
principal of his current 6 - 8 middle school.

According to Daniel, 652 students attend his middle school. Approximately 81%
of his students qualify for free and reduced lunch and, he said, "100% are African-
American." Of the 104 personnel that work in his school, 40 (38%) are regular education
teachers; 26 (25%) are special education teachers or aides; 30 personnel (31%) provide
staff support services; and 6 (6%) of the 104 school personnel are school administrators.
The six administrators, Daniel noted, include one curriculum coordinator; three

curriculum leaders; one assistant principal and himself, as school principal.
Leadership training

Daniel has had no special education training but is expected to provide
instructional leadership for the special education teachers and staff that works in his

school. Daniel did not reveal the number of special education students in his middle

93

school, but did explain that 26% of his staff are special education teachers or aides needed
to accommodate the " growing number" of students in his middle school who have been
diagnosed as requiring special-education. Daniel believes he and his teaching staff would
benefit from special-education in-service training that could improve their skills and
capacity to assess, diagnose and understand which of his 652 students need, or do not
need, special-education services and support. Daniel explained why he and other urban
principals should receive special-education training as an integral part of their university
training, district professional development training and leadership preparation program:

This whole special ed piece... training would help. Students who have been misdiamosed or who
are borderline, how do we recognize those students? We had a workshop yesterday... focusing on
students exhibiting the same types of behaviors as kids in special-ed but the pments refused to sign
the documents. How do we in-service teachers who have been teaching [for] 25, 30 years, but who
don‘t understand what inclusion means. . .don‘t know how you reach that population of youngsters...
how to do a lesson plan that would allow them to...get the students started md pull a couple ofkids
out to give them some additional one on one? If I were more knowledgeable about how that's done I
could provide that to my staff... when there was a need.

We maynotbeabletotap into special-education firndingbecausethestudcntshavenotbeen
diagnosed... but there are other resources out there. We could possibly reduce class sizes in a
couple of areas to provide more one-on-one instruction... but when you've got 32 kids md one
teacher, there's no way.. .not a whole lot of time you can devote to one or two individuals who need
more time than you're able to give them. Or, their parents don't want the stigma. Or, in some
instances, parentshaveagreedtohavethemplaced, buttheytestedalittlebitabovetheareathat
wouldallowthemtoreceivetheservices.Alotofthesekidshavenotbeendiamosedmndthey're
sitting there, and they're failing.

Daniel admitted that his previous "small urban school district" did not have a
leadership development program for their aspiring principals or school leaders. Each
principal, he explained, was basically responsible for getting the leadership training they
thought they needed. Daniel confessed that in his previous district, "we relied on
consultants or the Independent School District (ISD) to come out and in-service us and to
provide some staff development. But no, we didn't have our own management Academy
for building principals."

Daniel believes the labor relations and law classes in his educational leadership

94

graduate program were appropriate and helpful for his previous responsibilities as the
director of human resources, assistant superintendent and district superintendent, but, he
said, "that training was not applicable to the job responsibility of a building principal” -
his current responsibility in this district. Daniel appreciated the opportunity to attend the
district aspiring principal leadership training program in 2004, when he was assistant
principal and school leadership training after he was promoted to building principal in
2005. Daniel complemented the district for implementing the school leadership training
program as an integral part of an ongoing process of professional development for school

leaders.
Leadership priorities

After only one year as building principal, Daniel believes he is making slow
progress towards achieving the AYP goals and objectives mandated by his district, the
state of Michigan and No Child Left Behind. Daniel's middle school did not make AYP
in 2006 and is currently coded as being in AYP restructuring - Phase 5. Daniel is
confident that he can make the needed improvements, however, he did confide that, "the
pace, this year being the first year, has been somewhat slow." Daniel clearly understands
his role and responsibility as principal of an urban middle school that is being
restructured. "I'm the educational leader in the building charged with making sure,"
Daniel said, "that the school makes adequate yearly progress (AYP). . . that's my primary
responsibility." Discussing his leadership approach to making AYP, Daniel said, "I have
to make sure that my students and staff have the materials and resources they need in
order to be successful... in order for them to improve their test scores." Daniel has

concluded that a major inhibitor to achieving his school improvement objective is the

95

 

existing culture and climate of his school. From his perspective leading change is his

number one priority;

We have to change the culture in the building...to get students to rmderstand what proper behavior
was... change in terms oftheir decorum... how they carry themselves. Dealing with our parents

. . .making sure our parents understood that this was a partnership... the school has a responsibility
but it's not oru' responsibility alone. Some of the things we're doing to change the culture ...we’re
holding students accountable and monitoring student progress very closely. We've offered after-
school tutorials. . . formed a partnership with a local university where we have onlirre tutoring
now, something we started this year. It's been slow... but I have seen some improvements. You see
the number of referrals on a particular kid... through interactions and interventions, you see the
number ofreferrals being reduced... he’s staying in class more... out in the hall less. His grades
may have been all D's and F’s, but now he's getting some C’s...he's making some progress

Daniel understands that implementing cultural change and achieving his school
improvement goals will require the support and buy-in of his entire school staff. One of
his first actions as a new principal was, he said, to interact with his staff to develop a
shared vision for the school and get their insights, ideas and suggestions for where and

how the school could be improved. He said:

Iaskedfortheirhelp.Whenlfirstcameonboardlhadatalkwiththemaboutwhattheysawthe
school doing different from lastyear. Wheredidtheywantto seetheschool go? Werethey
satisfied with the condition the school was in, not only the physical plant but the schools reputation?
Iftlre answer was no, then... let'stalkaboutwhat we needtodo, collectively... because I can'tdo it
bymyself. They saidthey wanted change but... you haveto be willingtoput inthe required time
andenergy.

Weputsomethingsinplace...likehallmonitoring,stafi‘assistance,interactingwithkidson
passes from classes. For example, ifyou did give them a pass, monitor how Iongthey were gone
from your classroom... and don'twriteany passes during fifth and sixth hour, becauseafier hrrrch....
Many of the staff has stepped up. We're not where we should be but we‘re making progress. I‘m
gettingby-in...andsomearebringingotherstafl‘personsalong. Westillhavethosewhoare
resisting,sayingit'salotofwork...andljustwanttoteach. I'mtellingmystaffwehavetodo
moretlnnjustteachcontent.

Unique urban school issues

Commenting on major similarities between the two urban school districts in which
he has worked, Daniel said (1) both are urban districts, (2) both have a majority African-
American population and, (3) the vast majority of the student population qualify for free
or reduced lunch. Key differences between the two urban districts, he says, are: (l)

organizational culture; (2) size; and (3) the amount of one-on-one and interpersonal

96

interaction in the smaller district between district staff and building personnel.

Elaborating on the differences between the two urban districts, Daniel said:

Differences? There was a difference in district culture... it was smaller... and you didn't have as
much red tape. You had more interpersonal interaction with those who were in decision-making
positions in terms of getting things done or if you needed them quickly. In terms of students,
kids are kids. And the parents, at one time, were very, very involved and you had more home
visits. On the administrative side, it was more hands-on. For example, there was more
collaboration with the union... we could sit down and talk aboutthings we needed to see happen...
it wasn't a matter of whether it was negotiations time or not...we could make certain things
happen.

This district [current district], being the size it is, there are more layers in terms of the
bureaucracy. . . and more departments. If you look at what I did from the assistant superintendent
position, it was quite a bit. .. you were charged with a very large responsibility and you had to
acquire the skills needed in order to be effective at what you did. That's why, although my
doctorate is in education leadership... the school law, labor relations, dispute resolution, contract
negotiations, those types ofthirrgs... I can‘t use those courses as a building principal, but they
preparedmetodowhatlhadtodothen.

Daniel divided his discussion of unique urban school issues into two categories:
(A) school building issues he is attempting to address and (B) issues he believes can only
be resolved by district level administrators. One example of a building level issue is the
lack of adequate resources. To illustrate this point, Daniel noted that his school building
is, "over 100 years old" does not have adequate custodial resources and it is very difficult
to get building repairs done in a timely fashion:

You know, there are days when we may have just one custodian in me building, for this entire

building, and that's not adequate. I mean, I‘ve got, we‘ve counted tlrerrr, approximately 58 holes in

the walls in terms of classrooms. These were there over the summer, when I got hue they were

there,andwe still havenotbeenabletogetthemplastered. I‘vebeentoldthattheyhave

priorifizedihandfvebeentoldthatdreyarecomingbut....

Another rmique building level issue is the negative image students and parents have
of Daniel’s school because of the schools history of low MEAP scores [Michigan
standardized test] and not making AYP, he said, "for four years in a row." Daniel argued
that the districts approach of, "changing the school name. .. five years ago... in an attempt
to give it [his school] a different image. . . and change the culture [from a low to high

achieving school" was superficial change that has not worked. A much better approach,

97

Daniel said, would be for the district to provide him with the resources he needs to,
"make sure all the children succeed," - a lofty goal espoused by the district.

Three district level issues that Daniel would like to see addressed are (1) district
bureaucracy; (2) early reading interventions programs; and (3) alternative schools for
middle school students. The first issue, district bureaucracy ofien manifests itself in the
form of “lots of red tape" that inhibits or precludes him from getting a timely response to
his request for approval, critical resources or support for his school. From his perspective
the root cause of the "red tape" issue are the multiple layers of district staff scattered
across multiple departments within the district. The smaller size of his previous district
(I) made it easier for a school administrator to get information or support from the
district, and (2) required district staff and administrators like him to operate more
efficiently and effectively.

The second issue the district must address, Daniel said, is early reading
interventions at the elementary school grade level before they get to middle or high
school. "If we don't get these kids reading and literate by the third or fourth grade,
game’s over," Daniel said. The district should critically analyze the current K-12
curriculum and find a way to, "allocate more of the time to reading and mathematics."

Daniel pressed his argument by saying:

Having this well-rourrded educational offering [curriculum] for our kids really is not serving them
well when they can‘t read, social studies and langrrages arts are all for naught... okay. You talk
about reading and writing across the content areas in every class...teach reading in every class...
flrat's not happening. And we're fooling ourselves if we think it is. It's just not happening. When
youhavekids inmiddleschoolwhoare l6andintheseventhgrade,you’vegotaproblemmatwe
have failed to address.

Daniel believes the district should establish alternative schools for middle school

students. Some middle school students, Daniel argues, find it diflicult to transition to high

98

school, demonstrate appropriate behavior inside and outside of the classroom, and still

maintain acceptable levels of academic achievement. He said:

We have a challenge as it relates to alternative educational placement for middle school kids. We
have alternative high schools in urban areas but the problems that we see kids experiencing [is]
they don‘t just start in the ninth grade. There are students who need, like we're starting to
implement now, the single gender classes in middle school... all-male classes, all female classes...
maybe one or two classes to start, to see how it works. But we need to lnve better interventions
for kids early on...because sometimes, when we have these programs in ninth grade, it's too Ime.
It's too late.

Leadership preparation
Daniel believes the best way for a principal to develop urban school leadership

skills, knowledge, and capacity is through a mix of, "schooling, work experiences, and
having some measure of success in your job performance. . . being successful where and
at whatever you were assigned. That way," Daniel continued, "you demonstrate that
you've learned how to pick yourself up and get back into the game. . .and that's key."
Mentors, Daniel confessed, have not helped prepare him for his current role and
responsibility as an urban middle school principal. Instead, he was adamant that his best
training and preparation was his 34 years of experience as an urban school teacher, sports
coach, curriculum leader, assistant principal, assistant superintendent and district
superintendent.

Daniel was eager to pass on the following advice to aspiring, assistant or new urban
school principals. He said:

Iwouldtelltlratpersonthatwhenyou viewaprincipalshiprmderstandthatit'snotalwayswhatyou
think it is. It does require a very, very high level of commitment... and time. It requires a lot of
work... and ongoing preparation. It’s a tremendous responsibility. If you're doing the job that
you‘ve been hired to do, you're responsible for the education of every student who is in your
building, okay. And I firmly believe that if a student leaves you and they are unable to read, write,
or compute, you've failed them. You have failed those kids... those children, okay, ll, l2, 13, and
in my case, 15,16,17 years old. It's a trust that you have with them. Parents... parental support,
even if you don't get it, you still have to teach that child.
Andunderstand,thingshappeninurbanschools. Mykids,theybringittoschoolwiththem
everyday... arrdyou'vegottoprepareyourselfforthat. 'I‘herearethingsthataregoingonintheir
lives... youhavetoreachouttothem. Youhavetodomorethanjustteachkids. Youhavetogrow

99

them. And you have to be willing to give that because they need it...if you’re gonna reach them and
make a difference in their lives. So think about it real hard. If this is what you wanna do, fine, you
know, we need good principals all over the map. But understand, it does require a lot of effort and a

lot of work.

Leadership programs

Since joining this district Daniel has participated in a substantial amount of
leadership training offered by the district's leadership academy and a variety of district
staff such as the law department or school improvement specialists. He likes the fact, he
said, that "there is ongoing professional development," to help him stay current on
educational research; school improvement techniques; best practice school procedures;

and academic strategies that can benefit urban middle school students. He said:

Thelearningneverstops. Youhavetogooutandfindoutwhatthenewstatemandatesare,and
how they're gonna impact what we do. Report requirements... the law as it relates to federal funds
and what you can spend these funds on. Laws as it relates to special-education, Title I, you know,
you have to stay abreast. Your responsrbility as a building principal is to make sure that you‘re
following the guidelines. For example, when they changed the pupil accounting system, you
know, they called the principals in and made am we were aware ofhow it was done. I applaud
this district for providing ongoing training.

Adding a structured internship to the district's existing principal leadership training
program, Daniel believes, would make the program even better. In addition to university
training and district in-service, Daniel posits that a school administrator internship and the
opportunity to shadow and work directly with experienced urban school principals would
be extremely valuable. Similar to mandatory in-service for teachers, an in-service for
aspiring and assistant principals could provide hands-on work experience, beneficial
exposure, and a principal‘s perspective to school leadership issues, challenges and school

leadership strategies for improving student academic achievement. Daniel said:

Even though you have the coursework... and the presenters have background knowledge, that's
very helpful... but you really need to be there, you know, and have in-oflice training. Just like
student teaching, all the coursework won't prepare you for the actual day-to—day rigors of teaching,
nor will aspiring administrator seminars prepare you for being in a building... you just have to be
there. I think if that changes [if an internship is added to the program] you'll see administrators
better prepared.

100

Sixth case study Kathy, Principal 6-8 middle school

KATHY: I found myself in a very unusual position...l was really grateful and flattered that I was selected
tobeprincipal ofthisnewlycreated middleschoolbecause,thiswasoneofthefirstcharterschoolsin
Michigan and one of the first de-chartered schools in the nation. It went from charter to public. There’s a
law that if a charter school fiduciary decides not to finance the charter school they become a de facto public
school. I was honored to be selected as principal because that was a real tricky road because you're dealing
with an entire student body whose parents chose to leave the public school district in the first place. And
now all of a sudden, they're back. I felt it was really an honor that the district saw skills in me, that they
chose me to do this then, because remember, at the time, I was an assistant principal in charge of just over
150 kidstheday before, andnow,thenextday, I'mover800childrenandthis staffthatwasZ/3 charter, l/6
public school district, and 1/6 ofthe staffcarne in new.

Participant profile

Kathy's 6-8 middle school is located on a busy boulevard in what appears to be a
low-income neighborhood near the center of this urban city. Neatly trimmed grass
surrounds the playground, and the attractive fi'ont entrance of the school gave the
appearance of order - until I noticed that the name of the school was missing from the
front facade of the building. When I asked Kathy why her school had no name, she
smiled and explained:

I'vebeeninthisbuilding forfouryearsandithasn'tbwnthesameschoolfortwoyears inarow,
you know... with all the things that are happening in the district... like multiple school closings...
the elementary school proximal to us is closing and moving into our building... so we’re going to
be a K-8 building in the fall...so, we'll have another transformation.

Kathy's explanation provided a partial answer to why her school had no name on
the front of the building and also explained why Kathy was of interviewing within the
district , as she said, "for all kinds of things," including a principal job in another school.
Kathy confided that, "The plan is for the elementary school principal to come over," and
take over as principal of the newly created K—8 elementary/middle school. When I asked

Kathy, "Where will you go?" She smiled and replied, "I don‘t know yet. News at ll."

101

The district executive to whom Kathy reports had described Kathy as an effective
urban school leader who has strong leadership skills; understands school operations;
willing and able to make needed changes; and has demonstrated she has the leadership
skills required to improve student achievement. The executive's testimony regarding
Kathy's reputation as a school leader may explain why Kathy was originally selected to
be the principal of her current middle school - a school that was previously a charter

school. Kathy shared the following background of her school:

I found myselfirr a very rmusual position...l was really gratefirl and flattered that I was selected to
be principal of this newly created middle school because, this was one of the first charter schools in
Michigan and one of the first de-chartered schools in the nation. It went from charter to public.
There’s a law that if a charter school fiduciary decides not to finance the charter school they become
a de facto public school. I was honored to be selected as principal because that was a real tricky
road because you're dealing with an entire stutknt body whose parents chose to leave the public
school district in the first place. And now all of a sudden, they're back. I felt it was really an honor
that the district saw skills in me, that they chose me to do this then, because remember, at the time, I
was an assistant principal in charge of just over ISO kids the day before, and now, the next day, I‘m
over800childrenandthisstaffthatwa32/3 charter, l/6 publicschooldistrictmd l/6ofthestaff
came m new.

When she was a young girl, Kathy's career ambition was to become a doctor,
however, she confessed, a combination of circumstance, her in-laws, and an unexpected
foray into teaching, influenced her to pursue a career in urban education:

'l‘hewaylgotintoeducationiskindofserendipitousbecauselalwayswantedtobeasurgeon. Butl
got married and I had children. My father-in—law had always said, ‘You lmow what Kathy? You would
make a great teacher.’ And I said, ‘no, I wouldn‘t...that's not for me.’ Then there was a downsizingat
the job that I had, and somebody said well, why don't you substitute teach? And I said, maybe I'll do
thatintheinterim...andthatwasallshewrote,youknow,Ireallylovedteaching. Thatwas20years
ago and I‘ve been in education every since. 80, my father-in-law was right.

Kathy joined the district in 1986 after earning a BS in Psychology and a BA in
Biology and Chemistry. During her 20 year career in the district, Kathy worked as a K-8
classroom science teacher for 14 years; two years as a K-8 assistant principal; and four
years in her current position as a 6-8 middle school principal. The racial and economic

demographics of her student population, Kathy noted, has remained pretty much the same

102

-approximately 98% African American and 80% free and reduced lunch. The most
significant change in her student population over the past four years has been the
significant decline in student enrollment. When Kathy took over as principal, her
enrollment, "was over 800 children." Her current student enrollment is "now about 480
students." In addition, the composition of the school staff when she became principal
was, "2/3 charter, 1/6 public school district and 1/6 of the staff came in new " she said.
Her first challenge was to get this diverse group of teachers working together as a team.

She explained her approach:

Itwasarealjugglingact.... Firstlcalledthestafi‘together...andwehadalotofmeetings. And
I said, you know, your buddies are all looking for us to fail... and the charter schools are going to
say, oh, they failed because they went to a public school district. Public schools will say, oh, they
failedbecausetheyusedtobeacharterschool. We'regoingtocallthemallout. We'regoingto
make them all eattheir words.

Leadership training

In addition to a BS in psychology, a BA in biology and chemistry, and a Masters
degree in teaching, Kathy only needs one class to complete her Education Specialist
degree requirements. Because her district requires candidates for principal to have
completed graduate-level classes in school administration, Kathy "used the education
specialist degree as a means to get the principal's job." Kathy commented that she is
planning to "take the additional 50 or 60 credit hours required to get a Ph.D. in
Education" because she would "like to be a district superintendent, one day."

Although she believes her university training, district professional development
and on—the-job training have prepared her for district executive level responsibility, Kathy
confided that two years ago she "interviewed for an assistant principal position in the

district and didn't get it." But, she said, " that turned out to be a good thing, you know,

103

God is good. I just ask the Lord to order my steps, and just lead me to where he knows I
need to be. It's worked out pretty good so far." Kathy has faith that she will achieve her
career objectives but is a strong believer that it is her responsibility to design and
implement a training curriculum that will prepare her to assume higher levels of urban
school leadership.

Some components of Kathy's leadership training curriculum are mandated by her
school district, while other training is suggested, but not mandated, by the Michigan
Department of Education. For example, all school principals in Michigan must apply for
recertification every five years by documenting that they have completed the equivalent
of six credit hours of school leadership training within the last five-year period. The
school district must indicate that they approve the content of the six credit hours before
the principal’s recertification documentation is submitted to the state for their review and
approval. "Principals can decide," Kathy says, "what to take [school administration
courses or leadership training sessions] based on what you think you need to know or
improve on." From Kathy's perspective, the bottom-line is that she is responsible and
accountable for her school leadership training.

Kathy was very critical of her formal university training for two reasons: First, she
estimates that only 15% of her university training was focused on preparing her to work
in an urban school setting, and second, she was disappointed that her rmiversity training
gave her, "a pedagogy to refer to but did not give a real-life explanation of the urban
classroom." Kathy then shared several reasons why she believes that her district' 3
leadership training program for assistant principals and school principals was,
"exemplaryz"

Nmnberone,wehadinputintermsofwhatweneeded. Numbertwo,theclassleaderdidareally

104

goodjob putting the program together because, as a recent urban principal herself, she knew what
the needs were coming into that setting so she provided a lot of insight. And third, there's a
new principals connection where they [newly appointed principals] stay together as a cohort for a
year. I think it's an excellent program. It went from the ‘who you know’ philosophy of becoming
an administrator [in this district] to actually having the training. So, you know, I thought it was

excellent.

From Kathy’s perspective, "District training is designed to meet the needs of principals in
the" [urban] district... with its focus on testing, evaluation, legal, special-education, NCLB
and parent involvemen ."

When asked how school leadership training could be improved, Kathy offered two
suggestions: First, "universities should have curriculum and class content based on where
you are headed... either urban, suburban, rural schools or special-education." And
second, because her budget training had been "too theoretical," Kathy was adamant that,
"Leadership training should include the nuts and bolts of how to do school finance and

budgeting. . . and should focus on what [finance and budget numbers] goes where."

Leadership priorities

“My top leadership priorities would probably change if you asked me tomorrow"
Kathy said, "but, today, May 6, 2006, my answer is instructional leadership, teacher
quality, school culture and declining student enrollment." Kathy noted that instructional
leadership is a concept and priority that she prefers to discuss in the context of what she
actually does versus what she might do theoretically. For her, instructional leadership
means "leading by example, focusing on student academic excellence, minimizing
distractions and disruption of classroom instruction, and providing her teachers and staff

with the resources they need to teach." She said:

To be an instructional leader everything you do is moving towards the educational and
instructional excellence of children. Making sure the teachers have all the materials in place they

need. Monitoring, managing and administering the course of the school day... by setting up a
schedule that is amenable to learning and minimizing the impact on the classroom. For example,

105

not too many announcements over the PA, like Bobby, come get your coat, cuz, all these things,
little things but they impact instruction. .. because, if you make a blanket PA announcement,
everybody's class is stopping... instead, call Bobby's classroom.

Kathy believes instructional leadership applies to all aspects of her school
leadership responsibility — not just instruction. "1 don't think of instructional leadership as
a relationship between the principal and teachers... I think it encompasses everyone." A
total of 7l teachers, staff support personnel specialist and school administrators work in
Kathy's building - 24 employees are regular teachers; 10 are special-education teachers;
34 are staff support specialists; and 3 are school administrators, including 1 curriculum
leader, 1 curriculum coordinator, and Kathy as principal. The following comments
illustrate how Kathy attempts to provide instructional leadership to all members of her
staff — not just teachers:

Everybody's includedandeverybody is empowered. Whenwedothings... wedothings together.
Thelrmchmomaidesaminvitedtlrecustodiarrsareinvited. Asamatteroffactwehadameeting
andthecustodianledthemeetingbecausehehadsomeideasthathewantedtopresent. Agood
idea doesn't have to come from me, it comes from whoever it comes fi'om. They're very involved.
They teach lessons. Oneof my securitypersonsisthe cheerleading coach. oneof thenoonhour
aides istlredance coach... and might comeandsay I‘venoticedthisaboutthis groupofkids...
there’s adance lesson... canlteach it? [Kathy's answer...) Yeah!

Teacher quality is her second priority. Kathy says one approach to improving
teacher quality is "to make sure that you’re evaluating and assessing what instruction is
going on and how that instruction is being received and perceived by the kids." She
attempts to assess teacher quality every day by conducting informal teacher walk-
throughs. "When I'm walking down the halls I'm looking in every class. . . peeking my
head in. Just because a class is noisy doesn't mean there's not instruction going on.. .and
a silent class doesn't mean learning is going on either you know. When they’re doing
science experiments it's not going to be a silent class" Kathy suggested.

In addition to daily walk-throughs, Kathy also conducts formal teacher

106

evaluations. The major difference between the two assessments, she explained, is their
depth and duration. "The walk-throughs that I do every day are not an evaluation. An
evaluation is a formal tool that contractually takes one hour. It takes an entire class
period because you have to see the beginning of a lesson, the course of the lesson, and the
closure of the lesson. But, a walk-through, you can do by sticking your head in the door."

Her third priority, developing a common culture for her middle school, is an
ongoing challenge. When the two schools were merged four years ago Kathy said she had
"about 40 teachers." All 40 of the teachers, Kathy noted, "needed some tweaking. . . in
terms of what they needed at the time. . . and about three or four," Kathy confessed, "I
tweaked right out the door. . . some charter and some were public." Today she has 24
teachers in her school; however, four years into her principalship, Kathy is still
attempting to merge her ex-charter school teachers and public school teachers into a high-
performing team of urban school educators. Public school teachers, Kathy noted, are
accustomed to working in a school culture flamed by a union contract. "Charter school
teachers weren't," she said, "but when they came into the district they had the opportunity
to join the union as active members or simply pay union dues." Many of her teachers
actively participate in the teachers union because as long as they pay union dues, "bottom
line, you might as well get the benefits of being in a Union."

It is important for aspiring urban school principals to understand "that every single
building has a different culture and everybody [principals] has a different style of
leadership." The "grand mystery," she says, "is matching the leader to the culture of the
institution that they find themselves in." In addition, she argues, an urban school
principal must have mastery of a wide variety of leadership tools and techniques for

managing and leading change within the school teaching staff. "You know, a teacher will

107

be in a building for 20 years while a principal’s lifetime [as principal of the school] is
usually three years. So, you know, they'll [teachers] just wait. . .. they can acknowledge
whatever platitudes you send them, but they're gonna do what they wanna do." Aspiring
principals, Kathy suggested, must know how to analyze a school culture, tmderstand
where people in the school have been, where they are now and where they’re coming
fiom. The key, she says, is to know, "how best to move them to where you feel they need
to go and also make sure that they buy into it, as well." Because, she says, "If they don't
buy into it, then they're not going to do it"

Kathy’s fourth priority is the precipitous drop in student enrollment in her school
over the past four years - fiom 800 to 480 students. Kathy believes the sharp decline in
enrollment was caused by three major factors: (1) few school age children live in the
neighborhood; (2) high rates of underemployment and unemployment throughout the
city; and (3) her district's strategy of closing 6-8 middle schools like hers and opening
more K—8 elementary/middle schools in an attempt to attract parents and retain children
in the schools from kindergarten through eight grade. Kathy used the new condominium
complex located across the street from her school to highlight the issue of few school age
children living in the neighborhood. "First of all," she said," where I'm at [her school
location], you've seen it, there is new housing but there's no children. It's primarily
empty-nesters. So, even though it looks like a thriving neighborhood, it's not enough to
sustain the building.”

Commenting on the relationship between high unemployment in her urban

community and declining student enrollment, Kathy asserted the following:

Themajorityofmykidscamefiomthecharter,notfiomthelocalneighborhood...andagreat
number of thoseparentsare, you knowaremiddle-class parents. They'relosing theirjobs left, right
andcenter'mandtheyareleavingthecity. Weworrlddoirrterviewaanditwasalwayswelovethe

108

school, we love everything, but I got to find a job. As they were matriculating out, there was nobody
filling them in.

Kathy then explained how her middle school is being affected because, she disclosed,

"the district is changing more and more over to K- 8 schools:"

As more and more schools become K -8, well, who's gonna send their sixth-grader to me. If you
hear from the guy in the cubicle next to you [at work] that the school is a very good school, you can
transfer your child to the school. There's just some forms that you have to fill out saying I agree to

get them there, you know, there's no student transportation, that type of thing. If you get your child
into a good neighborhood school and they are K - 8, why change?

Unique urban school issues

Many school issues Kathy has to deal with throughout the school year are not
included in her building principal job description. As a result, those issues and her efforts
will likely not be discussed or assessed during her perfomrance evaluation. For instance,
a student's home environment or lack of parental support and guidance may be an issue
for Kathy, but her efforts to address the issue will not be reflected in her performance
appraisal. Kathy made it clear that she would never allow a lack of specificity in her job
description to inhibit or prevent her from attempting to do what she believes is the right
thing to support her students, school stafl', or parents. From her perspective, not having a
rigidly defined performance plan gives her the freedom and opportunity to develop a
leadership style and approach she believes is appropriate for her, and her school.
Summarizing her job, Kathy made it clear that she believes her role and responsibility as
principal is to provide each of her urban students with, “an excellent education.” She

says:

I understand my role is to be the executive of that setting [her urban school]. Whatever that mean.
Forinstance, itmaybeapeer,itmaybeacoach,amentor. Itmaybeamotheroritmaybean
educator. Whatever is needed. . .it may be a custodian. But, it's my responsibility to make sure
that active, persistent, excellent education takes place in that setting. Do whatever it takes to make

sure that happens.

The following story is an example of what Kathy means when she says, "Do

109

whatever it takes to make sure that happens."

One day, this parent thanked me for breaking into her house. Her child got a ride to school every
day. And the car pool lady said, well, is she here? I said no, she's not here yet. I went by the
house. Nobody was there. So I called the mom but we couldn't get hold of her. So I kept calling
the house, didn't get an answer, so myself and another teacher went over there and so we're
knocking, knocking, knocking, knocking. I said, I know this child is in there I'm breaking a
window and I'm going in. And the teacher said, well, I'll be waiting right over here when the police
come. I broke the window and I went in. The little girl said she wasn't feeling well and she had
taken some Benadryl, and then she took some more Benadryl, and she knocked herself out. So the
mother was like thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. So that's what she thanked me for
becauselscmpedthebabyupmdbmughthamschwlwimmemdsaidmmeomlet'swalk
arormdandthatkindofstuff. Sothat'swlurtshethankedme for... forbreaking intoherhouse.

Leadership preparation

Kathy argued that being prepared for urban school leadership is just as important —
if not more so - than her university academic training. University training, she admits,
does provide theoretical models of teaching and learning, exposure to research-based
educational practice, and help aspiring principals meet district and state certification
requirements for school administrators. However, being prepared for urban school
leadership is more about a person’s personal and professional commitment to serving
multiple needs of urban students and school staff. Academic training can help develop
academic leadership skills required to be efficient in the job but may not help prepare an
aspiring principal develop the personal commitrrrent Kathy feels is required to be
effective in getting the job done. From her perspective, the key to preparation is making a
conscious choice and career decision to become a principal in an urban school. The major
reason Kathy decided to work in an urban school setting was, she said, "Because I wanted
to be some place where I could effectuate change. . . not only in the classroom but
attitudinally as well." And, she continued, "I felt I could make the biggest impact in an
urbansetting-andnothavetospendalotoftimetryingtoprovewhoIwasandwhatmy

credentials are. That's awaste oftime... and I didn't wantto waste my time."

110

Urban school principals, she advises, must be prepared to be held accountable for
everything that happens in their school but, in many cases, despite not have the training,
skills or experience to do many of the things that need to be done. "You can learn
anything," she argues, "how to do the budget. . . use the student code of conduct. . .
curriculum. . . or how to rate a teacher as satisfactory or unsatisfactory, but," she
confessed, "I don’t pretend to know everything, but what I don't know I surround myself
with. Why spend my time trying to do something that I'm not good at when somebody
who is good at it can knock it out in an hour."

Kathy is an ardent believer that perhaps the most important preparation for urban
school leadership is, "having a genuine admiration and affection for the children." From
her perspective, empathy, compassion and caring are the best preparation because, she
said, "I think that drives the best...drives you not to want to see somebody harm

children... or to see no education taking place."

Leadership programs

When I asked Kathy how she might assess an urban school leadership training
program, she said she would start by asking two questions: First, "Ask the parents and
the kids if they believe their school is providing a good education?" And second, when a
principal completes the program she would want to know, "Does the urban school
principal have the necessary skills to get the job done?" Kathy has participated in
multiple district leadership development programs including, she noted, "the district's
leadership training program, as an assistant principal, before being promoted to principal
in 2002.” In addition, in 2005, Kathy attended the Harvard Urban Leaders Program. The

major benefit of the Harvard program, she said, was it helped her understand that many of

111

the issues she is facing in her urban school are also issues in rural and suburban districts,

wealthy school districts, and schools in other countries around the world:

Every day was focused on a different issue...Ruby Payne came and spoke on the framework of
poverty...someone else speaking about inclusion, and someone else about writing in a content area.
So every day it was a different focus. One of the things that I learned listening to my colleagues
from around the country, and around the world, is that we have a lot of the same issues. They may
manifest themselves slightly different but we have a lot of the same issues. For example, parent
involvement is a universal issue... but one thing that I've taken away from the program is it doesn't
matter if your mom is drugged out and selling crack or using crack or if your mom is at a conference
in Aspen, Colorado, you’re still neglected. Another thing is writing... the way that technology is
these days, young people have too many mechanisms not to be proficient in writing , you lmow,
with spell check and the creative spelling they see all around them... these are children that went
through that whole language bit when they were in elementary school... now they’re in high school
andit's like... theyspellboysBOYZ,youknow,becausethat'swhattheysay.

Mentoring is not a formal part of the district leadership training and preparation
program, however, during the four years she has been principal, Kathy has frmctioned as
a mentor for two assistant principals that have worked in her school. Three pieces of
mentoring advice Kathy says she has given aspiring and new urban school principals are:
First, "Love your job or get out of urban education." Second, "If you're in the game for
the dollar, or the horns, you'll be disappointed." And third, "Be who you are at all

times... don't try to be like me."

Seventh case study George, Principal 9-12 high school

GEORGE: Beinganinstructional leader, drivingtlrecrrrriculum,anddoingqualityconuolontheteaching
staff - accordingtothe district, me my primary responsibility. However, when I lookat whatthey ask me
todo...l‘m alsoanaccormtantandafacilities manager,andasecurityguard,andanurseand,allthat.
Theytellusdrflommajmrespmmibilhyisacademicmethaflflreseoflramspmsibififiesm
overshadowflragtlratreallydoesnottumouttobetlrebulkofmyday...70%ofmytimeisdoingthings
otherthanthat.

Participant profile
George is an African-American high school principal in his late 40’s or early 50’s.

He grew up in this urban community, attended public schools here and still lives in the

112

city with his wife and kids. After graduating flour a university in Michigan with a
bachelor's degree in physical sciences and math, George joined this urban school district
and worked as a middle school math teacher for five years. In 1982, frustration with
district politics, excessive bureaucracy and low pay drove George to quit his teaching job
and take a job in the private sector selling life insurance. George explained why he left
teaching and, equally important, why he returned:

I knew I wanted to work with our [African-American] kids, and... I loved fire classroom. To me it
wasfirebestjobIcouldeverhavecuzitwasenjoyableand,youknow,therewardswererightthere.
...all of these youngsters coming to you for the content, and that role model piece. I felt uplifted by
that...I loved it. But, I didn't feel like I'd influence enough children in fire course of a year... only
165 kids ayear... that's as many as you can touch... so I felt limited. In addition, I was so disgusted
with the [district] bureaucracy, fire politics we couldn't make achange. Sotheopportunitycame
to leave... and the money was better... so I left... sold irrsmmcemand made about double whatl
wasmakingasateacher.

AfteraboutayearJrealizcdfiratIreallymisstheteachingpartsoI...camebackinto
teaching school... forhalfthe money...buttherearerewardstheotherjobcouldn‘tprovide. Iwas
feeding my family but.... People would ask me, What do you do for a living? When I told firem I
wasateacher,Iwasproudofit...whenltoldfiremIwasininsurarrcerep,itwasjustajob.’l‘hatwas
reallywhatitwas. Sowhenlcamebackin l983,lrealizedfirat,okay,l‘minforfireduration...this
iswhatl'm supposedtodo.

After returning to the district in 1983, George worked for the next ten years as a
high school computer applications teacher. In 1993 George was promoted to the position
of Dean of students and, over fire next 12 months, worked as the Dean of students in two
difl‘erent high schools before being promoted to assistant principal of a middle school.
While still an assistant principal, George moved to the high school level and worked for
the next seven years in two different high schools. During the ten year period 1993 to
2003, George earned a Masters degree in Education Supervision and Leadership. In 2003
George was promoted to his current position as high school principal.

George estimates that 99% of the 1000 students in his high school are Afiican-
American and "upwards of 75% qualify for the free and reduced lunch program." Among

the 136 personnel working in his high school, 60 (44%) are regular education teachers

113

and 10 (12%) are special education teachers or special-education aides. Among the 27
members of his school support staff are 6 public safety officers; 8 bus drivers; 4 guidance
counselors; 7 food-service specialists; 4 secretary/bookkeepers; 3 boiler operators; and 5
custodians. The 10 administrators working in his high school include 5 curriculrun

leaders, 4 assistant principals, and George - as school principal.

Leadership training

George felt compelled to take ownership of his own training because he was
concerned about his lack of teacher leadership experience. ”Most of my colleagues," he
explained, "had spent some time as a content Department head... I have always felt as
though I missed something because, as Dean of students, and as an assistant principal, I
didn't have any teachers under my umbrella." The best training for the principalship,
George said, was on-the-job training he planned and initiated for himself. Because he
believed his lack of teacher leadership experience could make it difficult for him to get
promoted to building principal, George decided, while he was still Dean of students, to
implement his own leadership training strategy. His suategy was, he said:

Totakeonthetaskandjobsthatareessentialtoschooloperations,butnobodyreallywantedtodo...
like, for instance, Norfir-Central accreditation... orstrrdentandteachermasterscheduling... these are
fimeconsumingmsksthatmquueawholeIMOfpaperworkmdmordinafimwimawholelotof
people, insideandoutsidefirebuilding... brilwantedtolearnaflfirepiwesofthejob.

George did concede that "at the university level there are some big picture firings
that we really needed... like we really need to understand the laws and how schools are
funded... so some courses were useful." However, school leadership training provided by
the universities he attended were, he argued, "largely theoretical and didn't get into the

nuts and bolts... had no coursework on day-to-day school operations" From his

114

perspective, "most of his professors didn't seem interested in connecting the real world to
the theoretical." To illustrate his point, George described how he was treated in an
undergraduate teaching methods class when he attempted to discuss educating urban
students:

I was actually punished at [a university in Michigan]... had to take one class [Methods of Teaching
Science] twice. I made fire mistake of inquiring if firey were going to give us some methods that
would be more useful in the environment [urban] where children didn't come to school excited
about learning science... I got a very low grade. I got an A in everything we turned in, lesson plans,
materials, checklist, practice teaching in small groups... everything I did, I got an A, but... my final
grade was a D. And I never missed a class. I asked my advisor how I got fire low grade. He said,
well, we all agreed that you didn't seem to get it... and firat was as far as he went. The next
semesterltookitover,keptmyyapshut,andgotaB+. Sameinstructors,sameassignments. So
[fire university] really didn't want you to talk about that [urban students] back then [1972-
l973]...everything was fireoretical they didn't want you to relate firattheory to the real world.

George argued that fire professional development provided by his urban school
district is better than his university training. For example, George described two district
leadership training sessions he attended as informative, beneficial and encouraging. One
session was offered by the Skillrnan Institute, Center for School Leadership - "a series of
workshops that were up-lifting...rah, rah type of cheerleading... but" George said, "in firis
line of work you really do need those.” The second session was the Harvard Urban
School Leadership training program he attended during the summer of 2005. The major
benefit, George said, was hearing "experts from Ivy League schools” discussing
educational theory that served to validate and vindicate his current approach to urban high
school leadership and practice:

Therewereeighteenorsolectmersdurirrgthattendayperiod...manyoffiretheoriesfireyputout
firmwherebeliefslaheadyheldbruitwaserrcomagingtohearfireexpertsfiomprestigiouslvy
League schools agree with me. They weren't always points of view firat fire district espouses and
some of them were issues that frankly, I've gotten grief [from hisdistrict] for espousing... andtlren,
suddenly,Igettonardandalloftheseacclaimedexpertssay,welLyegfint'sthewayitshould
be. So,youknow,lthoughtthesessionwasverymcom'aging.

Each of the seven school principals George worked for during his 27 year career

have served as informal mentors — and several, he said, are still available to him if

115

needed. An important lesson he learned from all of his mentors, George confided, was
how difficult it was to communicate and implement a compelling vision for the future of
his urban school. Urban school principals, George suggested, should receive leadership
training that helps them understand (1) how to get all members of their school to buy-in
and support the principal’s vision and (2), how to use their vision as a tool to support a
tops-down and bottoms-up approach to urban school leadership. George described fire
difficulty he is having implementing his vision for his high school:

Iflwanttobringaboutsomesystemicchangeinmybuilding,Ineedmyteacherstobuy-in
fireydon‘tlgetlip service. .theygothroughthe motionsbutnothinghappens" .yougetintothe
nuts and bolts and they're doing exactly the same thing they had been doing. Teachers are.
independent people for fire most part. Your most effective teachers are somewhat eccentric..
you 've got to convince firem that this rs what they need to do.. y.ou can’t just boss them around.

I think a big part of my job is communicating vision....develop one and then share it... where
I think we can go, what our strengths are. You have to constantly revisit it... to the point where they
say, okay, we don't think we nwd to see fire vision again. But when it looks like we're straying fiom
the path we do revisit... and I seethe eyes roll... here we go again. Buttherecan'tbe any gray
areas,because,youknow,youstartmakingdecisionsbasedonfiratvision.

Leadership priorities

Improving his 60% high school graduation rate is one of George's highest
priorities. To achieve this objective George claims he is implementing a five-part
strategy that should help him meet the NCLB mandate of 85% high school graduation
rate by 2014 or, as he said, "come very close to it." Critical elements of his strategy are
(1) improving teacher quality; (2) enforcing current curriculum and academic content
standards; (3) helping his ninth grade students get ofl'to a fast start; (4) identifying and
closing gaps in student’s content knowledge; and (5) spending more time providing
instructional leadership.

The first part of his strategy, improving teacher quality will require working with
the district human resources department to help identify, hire, train and retain highly

qualified teachers and assistant principals. George admits his greatest challenge has been

116

finding highly qualified candidates because (1) fire district history regarding teacher
layoffs, (2) salary competition for highly qualified teachers and (3) a significant number
of unemployed white collar workers who may want to teach simply because firey need a
job - not because they have the requisite skills or passion George believes are required to
teach urban children. George explained the district's history regarding teacher layofl‘s:

When we did the layoffs last yearmey did an inefficientjob...they laid offtoo many and then we
can't get those people back. We don't pay the best.. .so when we nm a teacher away, they've got
families to feed, so they’re acquiring a position in a better paying district .. .and they're not coming
back. We already have to deal with some of the scrubs that other districts won't take...we don't get
fire pick of the litter. The only time we get those folks [highly qualified teachers] is when they are
people who have fire mentality that a lot of folks of my generation had when we came out of school
- we knew we were coming back home to teach...you wanted to teach African-American
children...and, you wanted to teach in [an urban district].

Salary competition, George explained, makes it diffith to attract and retain highly
qualified teachers and administrators:

Rightnow,threeofmy assismntpincipalsmakelessfiranmostoffirewachersfiratfireysupervise.
Teachers have set hours. assistant principals don't. Any one of my assistant principals could go
teach in [a suburban district]... and make morefiran what I pay them. Theydon't have aregularpay
scale anymore [beemmeassistmtprhcipalsmdschmlprmcipalsmmlmgermfireadminisfimn
rmion]...they [the district] looksatwhateverfireyweremakingasateachermdtackonalittlebit
moreandsay,okay,firat'syomassistarrtprincipalssalary

In Michigan's sluggish economy an increasing number of unemployed college
graduates are looking for a job with reasonable pay and good benefits. The challenge is
to identify and select highly qualified candidates who want to teach in urban schools
becausetheyarepassionateabouteducatingm'bankids-notjustbecausetheyneed ajob:

TheotherpartisqualitycontroLbecause,asyouknow,therearesomefolkswhohavedegreesin
education firat really shouldn't be in teaching. Nowadays, with fire economy beingfire way it is, and
fireapproximate startingsalary [teacherin this district] now about $35,000... fire salaryhasattracted
some people whoareonlyhereforfire money. Teachers get medical,dental,vision...they getallof
the peopleintheir families covered...so now we have some folks who justneedwork. Some of
firemaretmrringoutokayandsomeofthemarenot. Sonowwereallyhaveabigproblemwiththe
teacherwhodidn‘tcometohelpkids.Westillhavetoweedoutsome.

The second part of George's strategy to improve graduation rates is to get teachers

who are ”accustomed to being independent" to deliver instruction based on existing

117

district and Michigan curriculum and content standards. The challenge will be getting 42

teachers in his high school to change or modify their current classroom practice:

[This district] has really done a very good job of developing a curriculum that, if you can keep your
teachers aligned with the curriculunr, keeps instruction directly in line wifir what they've mapped
out. At the high school level we've got pages and pages of exactly what firey're [teachers] supposed
to do. If they walk lockstep with the district, we see improvement from the kids. The problem is
teachers are accustomed to being independent...that's been the tradition... ifpeople follow fire
curriculum...that's the hard battle... So, driving the curriculum is a big chrmk.

Helping ninth grade students get off to a fast start is the firird piece of his strategy.
From George‘s perspective, a ninth grade student's academic success in high school
depends on how well they learn to communicate, negotiate and resolve conflict wifir their
teachers, and their peers - both inside and outside of the classroom. To help smooth the
transition from middle school to high school, and get his ninfir graders off to a fast start,
George said, "I'm trying a different kind of orientation with my ninth graders.” He
explained:

Thedistrictwantsustogivethemanorientationontheacademicsmff... butmyninthgradersare
fallingoffthe path forbehavioralreasons, forfire mostparta lackofrefusal skills. Howtotellthat
kid, no, I don't want that marijuana. No, I'm not gonna skip. Or, no, I‘m not going to do premarital
sex firis early in my life. They just aren't getting those skills. I'm nmning fire orientation [one-week
during fire summer] like a seminar, a little video, question and answer, stand and deliver. My intent
is for me and my four assistant principals to establish one-on-one relationships with about 100 kids
each. At the end offirat week there'll be 100 kids that feel like they know the principal and 100 kids
that feel like they know an assistant principal. So, when they come [start high school in the fall] they
don't feel abandoned. If you look at an stats, the ones that are falling off the mark and not
graduating on time, fire damage is done in the ninfir grade, fireir first year of high school. They’re
supposed to come out of fire ninth grade with 60 hours... if they come out with 45, you know, I’m
losingthebattle. But iflcangetthemtowalkorrtoftheninthgradewithGOhorusmddevelopa
workrnan's likeapproachtoacquiringaneducation, andknowingthattheylnveapmttoplay,

Closing gaps in student knowledge is the fourth element of George's strategy to
increase the graduation rate. George recalls that as a middle school math teacher, "I had
youngsters come to me, sevenfir and eighth graders, with some serious gaps in their
knowledge. . . for instance some had actually not memorized basic multiplication facts.”

The challenge that presented for George was, he said, "At that point, I can‘t teach them

118

mafirematics if you don't know arithmetic." As instructional leader of his high school
George is trying to persuade, influence, or cajole each of his classroom teachers to use
appropriate assessments to identify student knowledge gaps that need to be filled or
reinforced. George understands the additioml burden on his teachers but, as he said, "I
took a pay cut to become a teacher. I really didn't feel as firough I was going to . . .do
anything other than what I thought was absolume right." He hopes the teachers will feel
and do the same.

The fifth and final piece of George's strategy is to spend more time on instructional
leadership versus school administration or operational issues. "Currenfiy" he says, "I
spend only something like 35% of my time on the instructional leadership side because I
have content area experts to do a lot of that." A key reason he spends approximately 65%
of his time on administrative and operational issues, George says, is excessive
bureaucracy at the district level:

Ideallylwould liketoswitchthosetwoaround [35/65%timespentoninstructionand
administration] but the demands of firejob... firat takes my time on the administrative side. There’s
so much... like my Title 1 money. At the beginning of the year [a district executive] changed all of
fire requirements and put in four or five more levels of approval. Now, fire same Title 1 program
firat's been good [approved] all of firese years, all of a sudden cannot be approved. The ofirer
principals... they’re all saying it...there's some bariers to us actually getting the job We... fire
bureaucracy downtown. For example, getting someone on the telephone is very difficult... if I need
to call physical plant or payroll, human resources, budget or any of firese divisions. .. you get voice
mailboxes firat are full... or set up so you can't leave a message. I would say that's about 80% ofit
[his 65% administrative workload] .. . dealing wifir this bureaucracy. They've always talked about
site-based management but it's never, ever, happened like firat.

Unique urban school issues

George discussed four major issues that negatively affect his urban high school: (1)
school building security and personnel safety; (2) the value his students place on
education; (3) the lack of academic rigor in the classroom; and (4) school finance reform.

Building security and personnel safety are a particular concern for George because of fire

119

urban setting of his school. Located in the center of this urban city, fire high school
campus sprawls across a two block square area in what appears to be a low income
residential neighborhood. The campus is bounded on all four sides by two or three story
brick apartment buildings or small wood flamed houses - many with sagging porches and
peeling paint. One or two abandoned homes accent each block. Streets adjacent to the
high school carry noisy car and truck traffic to nearby expressways. When I entered the
high school through the student entrance - approximately one and a half blocks fi‘om the
visitor parking lot - I passed through an airport like metal detector; had my briefcase
inspected by two uniformed public safety officers; signed fire visitor's log; and was given
detailed directions to "the principals office.” As I began the interview, George smiled
when he asked if I had enjoyed my "long walk" from the visitor’s parking lot to his office,
but was quite serious when he explained that his concern for the safety and security of his
students and staff made having "a single point of entry into the building" a critical part of
his "school security plan."

The second urban school issue George discussed was the low value many of his
urban students place on education. "You don't have to convince a middle-class child that .
there is a value to education" he argued, "because they are getting that from home." With
approximately 56% of his students qualifying for free and reduced lunch, George is
concerned that he has students from low income homes where the value and necessity of
education may not be visible, demonstrated or effectively communicated. While
acknowledging that his high school ”does play a role", George was adamant that the
primary responsibility for instilling education as a value - not just the dollar value of
education - rests with the parents of each of his students.

lhavefirrowawaykids...fireirparentshavetrunedfireirbacksonfiremorarejustnotconcemed. So,

120

we have to be fire school and the parent for that child, or we lose firem. I have two housing projects
in my boundaries and you know fire tradition in public housing . ..firere are households where they
don't have any person working. That means that child is not growing up with fire work ethic firat we
take for granted. That means we [urban school teachers and administrators] have to first convince
themfiratthereisavaluetoeducation.

George made it clear firat his comments regarding "throwaway kids" were directed
at only a subset of Afiican-American parents. Most Afiican-American parents, he
believes, have always placed a high value on education and, he noted, work hard to
provide the best possible education for their children. ”But these days” George notes, "it
doesn't seem as though fire parents value education at the same level.” He speculates that
partofthe issue mayberelatedtowhathehaswitnessedinhishigh school -parents
having kids while they themselves are still so young - kids having kids. George
explained:

Wehavealotofhigh school seniorswith3050meyearsoldmom'sand4050meyearold

. Theymenotpasshrgfirewisdomalongbecausefireydidnthavefimemacannulate
any before they were parents...in some cases the parents may not have had an opportrmity to receive
the value of education, and so firey just don‘t see it. And sometimes it's an issue with the parent. If
the parent is a dropout they may be unwilling, you know, to tell fireir youngster, look, 1 should be
doing better than this but I made some mistakes. I don‘t believe their morals are any worse or
anything likethat, they [youngerparentsljusthavenothadanopportrmitytoreapfirebenefitsofan
education-sotheycan‘tpassonthatopporurnity.

The third urban school issue George raised was the lack of rigorous academic
instruction his students were getting from their teachers. As George discussed academic
rigor, his focus shified from the lower expectations of younger parents to the lofty
expectations of NCLB - 100% passing and 85% graduation rate by 2014. NCLB, George
argues, has "changed the culture of education” by raising fire level of academic
performance expectations for all children - especially urban school students. In the past,
George explains, the prevailing expectation for urban students was "a certain percentage

of kids weren't gonna make it. . . you were gonna have a percentage of D's and F’s, and

121

that's just how it was, and everybody was okay with that." NCLB established new
expectations for students, as well as teachers, principals and parents - all schools and
students will be successful. "I don't think that’s realistic but that’s the name of fire game
we’re playing now" George says, "so we really need to do interventions now. . . we know
the interventions are out there. . .firere's been enough research."

The primary interventions George said are "the new firree R’s, . .. [which] used to
be reading, riting, and rifirmetic. . . now its rigor, relevance and relationships.” Rigor, he
explained, is fire notion of making school work more challenging for each student.
Relevance helps the urban student relate their classroom and academic activities to their
current urban setting and future academic or job activities. George believes his primary
responsibility as instructional leader is to ensure that all of his high school students
receive a rigorous and relevant education - despite current district practices that he feels

make firis more difficult to accomplish:
[lnommharrdisflict]wesayeveryninfirgraderhastotakealgebra... butweknowthateverychild
intheninfirgradeisnotalgebraready. I’macertifiedmafirperson,andldon'tfirirrkfirat’sreally
true [that every ninfir grader is ready for algebra]...but that's what we’re requiring. In the process of
pushing every ninfir grader into algebra, kids who are algebra ready are getting less algebra, fire first
yearofalgebra, nowthantheyweregettingyearsagowhenwewereselectiveaboutwhoweputin
thatclass. Theteachercan'tpushthemasfar,sowe'vedummieddownalotofstuff ‘

The lack of engaging instruction, he believes, ”is why we're turning a whole lot of
kids off." As instructional leader, George feels it is his responsibility to ensure all of his
students are challenged and academically engaged by their teachers. Rigorous
instruction, he believes, is the key:

Iffirey’mengagedfireywifldobetter. They [educational researchers] foundfiratmost ofthe high
schmldropwmsaymeymoppedmnbxause,eim«meydidntmmkmeworkmsmmmmLm
itdidn'tapplytoanythingthatfireywouldneedlateroninlife...orfireywerebored.Youknow,
fireyneedfirerigor...firey needtobechallenged.

The fourth urban school issue George discussed was the requirement for school

122

finance reform. In 1994 Michigan voters approved legislation, referred to as Proposition
A, which changed the way all K-12 public schools in the state were funded. Public
schools in Michigan are now funded by the state from general sales tax revenues, as
opposed to being firnded fiom local property taxes. One objective was to provide all
school districts with the same or similar per-pupil funding. That was the basic idea. From
George's perspective, a wide disparity still exists between the funding and resom'ces
provided for students in his low income urban district and wealfirier suburban districts.
He believes the fimding and resource disparity is due, primarily, to issues of property
values, personal income and race:

In Michiganwehaveahugedispmityoffrmdingforpubliceducafionbutthestatechmtersaysfire
state, not the local community... has fire responsibility for educating fire children of Michigan. So
we should be providing all children with an equal quality public education across the state. . .and, it's
just not fire people of color in Southeastem, Michigan either. Every school in fire state should have
equal funding. lfirink we need to have some real fundamental changes ...school finance reform

oughttobeaveryhighpriority...butnobodyreallywantstoaddressit...fireyjustwarrnacompare

The primary reason urban school issues will be difficult to resolve, George noted, is
because, "we have a hesitancy or reluctance to discuss racial issues in America.” Arguing
that the term urban is often used as a surrogate for race George said, "Urban, to me, is like
a code-word nowadays. . . earlier-on it was African-American. . . today it's Black.” George
is adamant that race is the primary reason his district is one of the most segregated
districts in the United States:

Wearemoresegregatednowinthiscity...andfirisisthemostsegregatedregioninthenation. We
aresegregatedhousing—wise.Astudyshowedfiratthebanksandrealtorssteerbasedonrace...but
nobodydoesanythingaboutthat. Ourrealestatevaluesareunmually loweronfirissideofthecity
becausethebankswon't...it'snotallfireenvironment.

Leadership preparation

George believes he was "prepared to be a principal" long before he was ”finally

123

promo " to principal, in 2003. Prior to his promotion, George had worked fifteen years
as a math and computer applications teacher, one year as Dean of students; and eight
years as an assistant principal. He believes there were two primary reasons it took him 24
years to become a school principal. First, ”prior to 1993, principal selection was "a
murky process" firat seemed to favor persons who were members of, what he refers to as,
"the good old boy network in fire district." The second reason was district politics.
District politics played a major role in principal selection up until 1993 when, George
confided, a new district superintendent raised questions regarding (1) fire criteria and
qualifications for principal candidacy; (2) fire complexity of the principal selection
process and (3) why "approximately 75% of the teachers [in the district] were female, but
the majority of principals were male." That same year in 1993 - George says the criteria
and process for principal selection were clarified and simplified.
Under the new process, candidates for principal were required to have a masters

degree related to education; at least five years experience as a classroom teacher; and a
minimum of two years experience as assistant principal. Candidates meeting these criteria
could be placed on an eligibility list for possible selection. When a principal job was
available a district executive would select three candidates fiom the eligibility list and
arrange for each of them to be interviewed by a school principal selection committee
consisting of five to six school stakeholders [teachers parents, union representative, and a
district executive]. The committee selected the person they thought was the best candidate
to be principal of their school. From George's perspective, fire changes implemented in
1993 helped make the process more objective, transparent and fair.

By 1997 George met all of the published criteria and was placed on the eligibility

list. However, in retrospect, he believes district politics and the fact that he was still not

124

considered a member of fire good old boy network, were the key reasons he was not

selected for an interview. He explained:

As an assistant principal at fire time... for two or three years I could not interview for principd...
even though there were several vacancies. District human resumes and fire superintendent made
decisions on who on the eligibility list would be allowed to interview for principal openings in the
district. They never actually said any thing...wouldn't respond to written communications. I was
eligible brrt I never made the list for fire selection committee... that's the politics firat they [the
district]had...andlthinkit's stillprettymuchinplace.

In 2003, George was selected fi'om the principal eligibility list, interviewed by the
principal selection committee of his current high school, and was selected to be principal.
Based on his experience pursuing the principalship, George tells aspiring principals
that being trained and prepared for urban school leadership and getting your name on the
eligibility list is simply not enough He advises candidates that "getting positive visibility
and making your mark on the district" is an effective way to increase the odds of getting
an interview with a principal for an assistant principal position or an interview with a
selection committee for school principal. The key is to "visibly" demonstrate your ability
to lead school change and deliver positive results. George shared the story of how, while
he was still a math and computer applications teacher he gained positive visibility and
made his mark by helping the Dean of students and his high school principal use
computer and telephone technology to significanfiy reduce in-school truancy. His story:

The district had a position called Dean ofstudents... a department head thathandled discipline...
always and still a big problem in [firis district]. I went to our Dean ofstuderrts and shared how
and why I didn‘t have a truancy problem in my classroom... and how my idea could work across
fire entire school. He presenmd the idea to fire principal... she agreed and invested about 32000.
We printed a card with a bareode for each child's name and ID number... each teacher had a stack
ofcards... afierteacherslndtaken attendance... cardsofkids whowereabsentwerescannedinto
the computer... 15 minutes after fire hour we were calling their home. Within a month we reduced
in-school truancy by about 60%. My stock went up with [the principal]. That turned out to be
veryhandylateron... whenlwaspursuingDeanofstudentjobsbecause,now,lhadatrack
record [visibility] for improving student attendance [the result]. I was selected for Dean of
students at [a different high school]... during that same year I returned to my previous high
school as Dean ofstudents. The following semester the assistant principal at [the first high
schoolwherelwasDeanofsfirdents]becameprincipalofanotherhighschooL..mdhhedmeas
an assistant principalmfirat was about 1994.

125

Leadership programs

George's district has a leadership training program for persons aspiring to become
an assistant principal or building principal. In 2003, when the program began, the district
administrator responsible for the program met wifir George and several other new school
principals and shared with them the reason fire district had decided to develop and operate
its own school leadership training program. The district adnrinistrator explained that,
"The district is experiencing a brain drain. . .most of the experienced people. . .are leaving
in droves and we have firis vacuum. We are promoting folks... all great new people. . .but
there's no experience."

During that meeting, George and the other principals developed a list of leadership
topics they believed should be included in the leadership program. George remembers the

following nine topics being suggested - all nine of which, George confessed, were "things

I had to learn on the job."
1. Student discipline
2. Conversations with parents
3. Purchasing and requisitions
4. Labor relations
5. Scheduling
6. Public relations
7. Planning and carrying out fire budget
8. Site management
9. Corrective discipline

George is not irnpressed with his district's current leadership training program. "I
had an opportunity" George said, "to interview some folks who came out of the assistant
principals’ academy, and some that came out of the principals’ academy, and I thought
they were about as disconnected from reality as the stufi‘ fire universities were providing."

His biggest complaint about the program was, he said, "I didn't see them getting the

126

hands-on that I thought firey were supposed to get really addressing what firese folks
needed to know."

Mentoring may be fire best way to train and prepare aspiring principals for urban
school leadership responsibilities, George argues. He is currenfiy mentoring all four of
his assistant principals - two of whom he says, "are assistant principals today because he
pulled them up through the ranks." Comparing the training and development he received
fi'om his mentors [seven school principals he has worked for] with his university and
district training, George said, "I think they [his mentors] were a more powerful influences
than the ofirers [university or district training]."

George's approach to mentoring his assistant principals is to create opportunities for
them to actively participate in key aspects of school instruction, administration, building
operations and decision-making. "What I do" he said, "is I try to give them the parts they
don't see, the parts that I didn't see as an assistant principal... the things that keep [the
principal] up at night." To illustrate his approach to mentoring George shared the
following example:

Forinstance,firedistrictreducedmyteacherallocation fornextyearandlgottacuteight
teachersmout of42. So, I shared with firem the whole process... and what fire district needs. I
showed them the way they [the district] give it to us [a blank spreadsheet to be filled in with teacher
Mandfirenreturnedtothedistrict]. They sayyougottoomanyteachersandtheygiveyoua
number that you’ve got to cut. . .and fire number of teachers firey allow me to have. .and the number
budgeted. Actually, what I tell them [the district] is what content areas firey can cut from and they
go by seniority [fire teacher with fire least amount of seniority is more likely to [be] cut]. Then, we
all sat down [George and his four assistant principals] and I said, okay, now, how do we do this?

As an assistant principal I didn't get involved m that part [decision—making]. .fire principals
[George worked for] would sweatitoutontheirown. Butthat'sthestufffiratkeepsyouupat
night. firethingsfiratyouhaveonfireto—dolist" .thatyounevergettotheerrdof.

George perceives and criticizes university educational leadership programs for
being overly theoretical, not covering the daily "nuts and bolts" of urban school

leadership and avoiding discussions that relate to the challenge and opportunities for

127

educating urban African-American students. Despite his harsh criticism, George strongly
supports fire notion of universities offering courses - and perhaps an entire curriculum -
focused on urban education. His support for university-based urban education leadership
training is evident in by his response to my questions regarding his training, experience
and preparation for urban school leadership:

Ithoughttheundergraduatepartwasinadequatemdirrelevant. ltdidn'tapplytowhatweactually
do. Grad school turned out to be a little more on point. The experiences outside of the formal
school setting [Harvard Urban LeaderProgranr] thoseturnedoutto be very useful and
appropriate. I firink the universities need to actually have schools of urban education, as a division
of the College of Education.

Eighth case study Henrietta, Principal 9-12 high school

HENRIETTA: arr high school has a technical career focus and we talk about what's happening globally.
Tom Friedman’s book The World Is Flm... helps us as we plan our crn'ricuhrm and work with our students.
Tom Friedman said his parents told him to eat all the food on his plate because there's a child starving in
China. Now, parents tell their kids, do all your homework, there's a child waiting for your job. They're not
starving now in China... firey're taking all ourjobs. We tell our kids... do your homework.

Participant profile
Henrietta believes she is well prepared for her cm'rent leadership role and

responsibility as principal of a technical career high school situated in an urban setting.
Her confidence is based on her formal university training; 15 years of private sector work
experience; 14 years of urban education teaching and school leadership responsibilities;
leadership training provided for her by fire school district; ongoing relationships with
multiple mentors; and her spiritual and professional commitment to serve the children,
parents and staffin her when high school.

Henrietta, an Afiican-American, earned her Bachelor's degree in business
administration in 1984 while working for a private sector company. However, after

working for this company for 12 years, Henrietta decided to quit her job as Human

128

Resorn'ce manager and, she said, "start a career in teaching." She explained why she
made firat decision:

I did a lot of soul-searching and praying, and remember feeling fire Lord leads me to education.
Quit your day job. .. go back to school. .. get a masters in education. My husband was supportive
and so, firat's what happened. I had been in fire [urban] schools... observed what was happening...
and was like, oh, wow, we [Afiican—Americarrs] need help and, I‘m not sure if I have the answers,
but, okay, I need to get involved.

In 1990 Henrietta began her career in urban education by working as a substitute
elementary school teacher in this public school district After one year substitute
teaching, she left the district and taught business math and computer application courses
for three years at a local private sector business school. In 1994 Henrietta retrn'ned to the
district as a high school business teacher and firen, just three years later, accepted a
position counseling students in a technical career high school. Henrietta believes that was
a major turning point in her career because the female African-American principal of the
high school agreed to become Henrietta's mentor.

After working in fire technical career high school for six years, Henrietta's
principal/mentor promoted Henrietta to assistant principal in charge of a technical job
training program for high school seniors. The program, according to Henrietta, "had been
nmning for about two years and they didn't lmve any success with the program."
Henrietta's challenge was to make the program successfirl. She did that in about a year.
The success of the program - and Henrietta's leadership ability - gained visibility across
the district, wifirin fire Michigan Department of Education, and with the two private sector
companies sponsoring the program. Both program sponsors - one a global manufactrning
company - "are now active members of the business partnership council" Henrietta has
established in her current technical career high school.

In 2004, Henrietta's mentor, who was by that time a district level executive,

129

promoted Henrietta to a district supervisor position responsible for technical career
training program across the district. Eighteen months later, two significant events
occurred in Henrietta's career. First, she says, "I completed my adrrrinistrator
certification... a Masters in teaching plus 30 [additional credit hours]." And second, in
May of 2005, "When firis [technical career high school principalship] became available. . .
I interviewed with fire school community [principal selection committee]. . . and l was
selected."

And, she noted, of the 700 students that attend her high school, "probably 98% are
Afiican-American." Henrietta then told the following story to help explain why she is
excited about the opportunity to work in a high school with a majority African-American
student population:

It has a lotto do wifir culture... and who you're comfortable with... separation by choice... firis is
whol'mcomfortable wifir... thesekids. lcaneducatearry childbutlreallyurrderstandfireir
needs... a lot more than someone else... that whole cultural piece. I was raised in firis community.
lattended elementary school justa few blocks away. ltell my kids, I cameoutof the same
community... and walked fire same streets you walking. If I made it... youcanmake it too. So
it's giving back... reaching back. Ithink about the statistics [high percentages] of Afiican-
Americans sitting in prison... that kind ofstrrff. All I have to do is reflect, and I say, I'm where I'm
supposedtobe,because... ifIcouldsaveafewofthem... fromgoingtoprison. Reallyprovide
themwiththeskillsandknowledgefireyneedtormkeittothenextlevelandmakeit. Notjrrst

graduate.
Leadership training

Henrietta characterized her overall training and preparation for W school
leadership as, "Necessary, helpful and, in some cases, practical." From her perspective,
most of her rnriversity training "was very little help" because, "it had very little
concentration on urban schools." However, she continued, there were two university
classes firat were, "very important and beneficial." One was, "school law and finance" and

the other, "supervision of instruction." The supervision of instruction class, she said,

130

"really helped me because they discussed writing a curriculum, the evaluation and
selection of curriculum, and supervising the teachers."

In contrast to her university training, Henrietta believes the district's leadership
training program she attended while she was an assistant principal, "was extremely
helpful" for three primary reasons. First, the cohort group of new principals that she
attended training with is a helpful network support group that, "meets together once a
month with the district director of leadership training." Second, she appreciated and
received great benefit fi'om class discussions and debates regarding servant leadership.
And third, during her leadership program, a self-assessment of her leadership style and
preferences helped reassure her that, "she was on the right track to get to, the next level of
responsibility" as a high school principal. She explained that during class, "we were given
the opportunity to have our team evaluate us," and then compare the class assessment of
our leadership style with "how 100 or 1000 exemplar principals responded to the same
questions." Henrietta was not surprised by her peer’s assessment and said she has used the

feedback to modify and improve her leadership:

Itwasn‘tatotal surprise...evenwhenpeoplesaid I neededtoworkonencouragingthe heart.
Understanding my own leadership style, personality and my makeup, I knew that was something I
needed to work on. My style is very, I get so bottom-line focus and so tight. I‘m so hands-on. I just
kinda run in the office. ..like nmning 50 miles an hour and, it's like, will she please slow down. I
forget sometimes to stop and say, you know, you're doing a good job. Thank you. This year,
because of the training and understanding my style, I had all my staff go through True Colors [an
assessment tool] and I learned that every one ofmy secretaries is a blue... and they have a gold
leader... I‘m a gold. Now I see it very clearly. My clerical support, they need a lot of encouraging,
a lot ofstroking, very sensitive...you can'tqu say it and let's move on...you have to remind them
how wonderfirltheyare. Toacertairrextentyouhavetodotlntwithallofyourpeople.

Leadership priorities
Discussing her leadership role, priorities, and the school activities she believes

requires her direct involvement and leadership, Henrietta said, "My role is the

131

instructional leader... and gatekeeper for student and staff safety." In the role of
instructional leader, Henrietta said:

I lead the learning... by modeling the way. If we're having professional development... I'm sitting
in their learning. . . right with you. Working with school improvement teams. .. working with
parents ...or business partners. I‘m a strong believer that the principal should be very visible... to
thepointthatldon'tgetallthestuffdonethatlshouldgetdone... Myouhavetoleadfromthe
front.

In her gatekeeper role, Henrietta perceives herself as, "the gatekeeper for safety
and security. This means," she says, "that my role is to keep folks out of my [school]
community who shouldn't be here" and, she continued, "we have other folks on guard, but
I'm going to decide who should get in here, who shouldn‘t, and who I should ask to
leave." Her primary objective is to, "keep our students safe and not allow anyone to
disrupt what we are trying to do here," she said.

Six school leadership activities that take a significant amount of Henrietta's time
are: returning phone calls; building security; translating student tests and assessments into
instructional strategies; student and stafi~ safety; student discipline; and parent and
community involvement. Even though she believes instructional leadership is her
primary role, Henrietta admits, "I probably spend, I‘d have to say, about 80% of my time
on administrative operations and only 20% on instructional leadership." Henrietta
attempted to rationalize her 80% and 20% ratio of involvement by saying, "yes, I spent a
lot of time [on administration] especially this year. I’m a first-year principal, that's why
so much. . . and [moving into] a new building. Wow." When I asked Henrietta, "Rather
than 80% administration and 20% instructional leadership, what do you think it ought to

be?" She replied, "Just the opposite. Flip it." She then elaborated on her answer:

WhenItalkaboutflippingit... inter-msofmovingthattimeovertoinsu'uctionaLyouknowmne
ofthethingsweneedtodoisfacethebrutalfacts...andalotoftimeswe‘rermcomfmtable. There
mesommybnlalfactsdntweneedtolookatdratwe'renoteventalkingabma Wemayraise

132

them but sometimes at central office it's kind of like, okay, yeah, we hear you, but... go back to
work. So we... How do you become a great school? How do we get there? 'Ihat's been tossed
around in my mind so often.... In our staff meetings I tell my staff, it won't hurt my feelings, it's
not about me, it's about us. It's about these students. What are some of the facts we really need to
address. I mean, let’s really talk about safety and fights, and then, once we address those little
facts, then, let's start looking at how we can deal with them...things we can put in place so that we
can move forward. You know, we talked about getting the right people on the bus, getting the
wrong folksofl‘thebuaandgettingtheright folksintherightseats. That'shardtodo,bytheway,
with the union.

Unique urban school issues
Discussing her graduation rate Henrietta said, "Oh, awesome, it's like 98%." In
spite of the school's impressive 98% graduation rate Henrietta quickly identified eight

issues, challenges, and "brutal fac " that she must deal with in her urban high school:

0 Lack of adequate resources

0 Ninth grader transition to high school

0 Parentswhovalueeducationbutdonothaveastrategyorplanfortheh'child'seducational
success.

0 Student and staff safety

0 Affect of neighborhood crime on her strdents

0 Building break-ins and property thefi

0 Poverty and low income families

0 Henrietta's estimate that, " 70% of her kids are from single parent homes"

Elaborating on the first and second issues, Henrietta commented that a good
example of her first "brutal fact" - lack of adequate resources - is that her high school
students were forced to attend classes in portable trailers for 13 years before they were
moved into their current high school building, a recycled middle school building, in the
fall of 2005. Henrietta explained that she, her assistant principd, and her secretary, only

had three months — May, ere and July - to get the school ready for students in the fall:

This building...beforewemoved in...was mothballed forthreeyears. So, yeah, itwasjustkindof
sittinghereforawhile...waitingtodecidewhattheywere goingtodowithit. Ididnotbelievethat
we would get it ready. Imean, weweresweating itout. My assistant principal and l, we werethe
onlyoneshere,andthesecretary. Andweweremovingfiomtheoldschooloverhere-andthey

weredemolishingtheportableswelndhadforyears...13years. 'I‘hatwasdemolished,so

133

everything was moved over. Everything was piled up in hallways and it was, ugh. This
building...it had been a middle school.

The second brutal fact is the difficult transition her ninth graders face as they move
from a middle school environment to a high school campus setting. Henrietta is confident
that helping her ninth graders have a smooth transition and get off to a fast start in high
school can help her maintain or improve her current 98% high school graduation rate. In
addition to helping with academic performance Henrietta is hopeful that a smooth
transition can help improve student behavior and reduce the growing number of discipline

issues she and her staff had to deal with. She said:

We‘vetransitionedintoanewbuilding,andbecauseofflratwe'velndsomeseriousissueswith
discipline. Students transitioned from a very small portable unit to a huge building and all of a
sudden, it's like, whoa, it's party time. I guess it's just like moving them to a college campus... you
haveallthisfieedomandopenspaceandthey haveasensethatnowletmejmttryanyand
everything I have a discipline log that’s probably mat thick of students.

During the summer of 2006, Henrietta and her stafi‘ will conduct a four-week
transition and orientation program for all of her ninth grade students. The program will
be based on "four pillars" that Henrietta believes will provide a solid foundation for her
ninth graders success in high school. Henrietta explained that the four pillars are: (1)
behavior expectations based on the district student Code of Conduct; (2) character
education to discuss "specific character traits that we value... and expect to see... like
respect, responsibility and achievement"; (3) new technology tools and techniques
students will be using in the fall; and (4) high school academic expectations and
requirements. The primary objective of the transition orientation program, Henrietta said,
isto, "Youknow, gettheminthebuilding,talktothem,andgetthemusedtosomeofthe
staff members so when they are arriving the first day, they're well-prepared to get

started."

134

Henrietta used the following story to highlight the "brutal facts" of profane
language and blatant disrespect for school staff, to highlight the importance she places on

character education for her urban students:

I'll give you an example. Last week I heard some rumblings, I mean, just like cattle, just rrrrrrr, just
nmningthroughmybuilding. Iranupstairsandmystudentshadbeenreleasedearlyfiomthe
lunchroom. So they were running down. .. and this was their last day of final exams. And I just
kind of stopped in the corridor like this [her arms open wide] and I said don‘t move. It was about
100 students. And I just really blasted them... like, I'm so disappointed, blah, blah, blah, blah. You
know, be quiet over here. I'm going through all of this, right. They were throwing water balloons
and they had been a smashing milk cartons in the lunchroom and all this, and I'm standing there... I
had to figure out what to do with these kids. if I let them go to class or release them, they'll tear my
building up.. .that's how excited they were. So, I'm standing there and they started chanting, 098,
098. They were calling me like the b, the bitch. That's their class, their ninth graders, they graduate
in ‘09. Okay, all my leadership skills, kick in, kick in leadership skills. I was praying...okay Holy
Spirit, show me what to do. So, I took them all down to the auditorium. My administrators came in.
Wemadesureeveryoneofthemwasthereandwesuspendedeveryoneofthem. Afierl lectured
them. . . and talked to them about the level of disrespect. Oh, Miss Henrietta it's just what we do. I
said itdoesn'tmatter. Ineedtosendamessagethatthis isnotgoingtobetolerated. BuLIbrought
that up because I remember thinking, okay, all right, kick in...what do you do when all the kids are
calling you a b? None of the [leadership training] classes helped me with that. I have other
examples .. .it was like, okay, you have to think on your feet, you know. In those classes, they don't
teachyouhowtothinkonyourfeet. Thoseareskillsyoureallyneed. Youreallyhavetojust
be...quick.

Leadership preparation

Two mentors, Henrietta said, have played important roles in preparing and
providing support at different points in her career in urban education. The first mentor
was the principal of the technical career high school where Henrietta was a teacher. That
mentor was responsible for two of Henrietta's promotions - one promotion to assistant
principal and another to a district staff supervisory position. Henrietta's second mentor is
a private sector attorney specializing in school law assigned by the district to support
Henrietta and six other members of her cohort group after they completed leadership
training for new principals. The cohort mentor, she explained, "was fimded by a grant
from the Skillman foundation and was a member of the Executive Services Corps [a local
group of private sector executives and professionals]." Describing her cohort mentor as

"awesome" Henrietta said:

135

The program... was very beneficial... and I‘ll tell you the reason why. We were assigned a mentor
through that group... he‘s an attorney... his specialty is school law. So I had access... any time I
hadan issue, I couldpickupthetelephoneandgetfieeadvice. Everytimewe wouldgovisithirn he
would give us any changes to child protective services... updates regarding No Child Left Behind.. .
anything. He would have it ready for us and say, this is something you need to look at. .. something
you need to study. Matter of fact, here is a binder he gave us on discipline of non-special education
students. So these are the types of things we would get fiom him when we would meet with him. I
mean, if I have a kid... where I have some child abuse concerns... looking at the law arormd that...
sharing this information with my staff. Suspensions and expulsions... teacher suspensions... search
and seizure. Can I go search that child's locker? Sexual harassment and this school
environment...what cases have set a precedent and what can I legally do? Religion...and dress
code... and fiee speech. Imean, he's coveredall ofthis...right here in this binder. ltwas a loton
me this year as a first-year principal... but to have someone like [her mentor] was awesome...” you

might imagine.
Leadership programs

Urban school leadership programs, from Henrietta's perspective, are, "only doing
an average job" of preparing aspiring principals for urban school leadership. Leadership
training and preparation programs could be improved, Henrietta said, by adding two
components that were missing from her training and preparation experiences. First,
"provide an opportunity for hands-on. . . actually putting us into the [urban school]
environment. . . and allow us to shadow principals on a regular basis, during the regular
school day," she said. And second, building principals should be required to expose their
assistant principal(s), "to everything that you may need" to know and understand the
principals job. For example, she said, "the school budget. . . teacher evaluation and
working with your school staff." In addition to hands-on and exposure, Henrietta suggests
the curriculum and content of leadership programs should include developing or
enlmncing an urban school leader’s skills related to the instructional supervision of

teachers. Henrietta explained why teacher supervision skills are important:

Ithinkthat'simportarrt...intermsofevaluatimofinstucfionandreaflyknowingand
rmderstandingandcanrelatetoteachers. Thereisahighregardfi’omteachers. Thefirstthing
they'll say is, How much time did she spend in the classroom? Imean, that's the first question. And
[really believe that's important, because I often pull fi'om my classroom experience when I meet and
talk with when. When I mentor teachers. When I go into their classroom and I‘m able to say to
memluiedhdriswaymdflrissuategyreallyworkedforme. Imean,thereisalevelofrespect
there,andlcanrelatetoit. I'vehad35kidslookingatme. l‘veworkedwiththemmkay. [know

136

what they're going through. Absolutely.

Henrietta confessed that her data analysis skills are weak. Urban school leadership
programs, she believes, should help aspiring, new and experienced principals develop
skills required to analyze student data and implement strategies to improve instructional
delivery for individual or specific groups of students. To address her weakness in this
area, Henrietta confided that, this summer, she will be attending the Harvard Urban
Leaders Data Wise program. "I'm really looking forward to that," she said, because,
"that's a huge issue for me. . . I really needed additional instruction on how to look at data,
analyze it and use it to improve instruction." Henrietta plans to use what she learns to
enhance and reinforce her instructional leadership role and responsibility as the "leader of
learning" in her school. Henrietta is confident that she, her staff, and her students will all

benefit from her attending the Harvard Data Wise program. She said

FirstofalLtherighttoolstouse. There'ssomewonderfulsoflwarewecoulduse...theyhavethese
Excel spreadsheetsthatotherfolks have doneandyoucanreally dig deep. I‘m gonnause itandI'm
gonnatrain them[herstaff]. Thisisgoingtobetrainthe trainer. I'm coming back,andl‘m goingto
beready. Imean, who elsecandoit? Imean, I‘m goingtothe session. Iknow Excelde loveto
work with it. Iworked with it in industry and there are some tools that they’re goingto give us.
Theyaskedustobringalaptop...soI‘mreallyexcitedaboutthat. Andwe'regoingtohearabout
somesuccessstoriesfromoflierprincipalsintheBostonareawhohaveuseddataandhaveseenflre
impact in student achievement. I‘m looking forward to meeting with other principals and how they
used it. But also looking at, you know, ways to analyze the data. What do you really focus on?
Andthen,onceyouhaveidenfifiedwhereyoruareasaredratneedtobehnpmvedhowdoyouget
there? Whatmesomesuategiesflratyou'veusedasaresrfltandyouknow...whatactionplansto
closethegap.

Ninth case study Marietta, Principal 942 high school

MARIET'I‘A: Thisdistrict's leadershipprogramain‘t worthapeep. Theyneverletthem [aspiring
principals] touch abudget. Theyneverletthemanalyzedata. Theylistentovisionaryleaderspresentations
about philosophy,l guess. lwanttoknow whentheAcademy is gonnastartteaching assistantprincipalsto
helpus[principals]. Soflntprogrammflrisdisuiahashelpedthembecomephflosophersofeducafion-
butthepracticalappliedlearningisnotdrere.

137

Participant profile

With "about 850 students, her high school is not the largest in this urban district”
but, she believes, may be one of the most diverse in terms of student p0pulation. African-
American students, she estimates, account for 55% of her student population, European-
American [white] students 20% and the remaining 24% are, "like Hispanic, Arabic,
Romanian, Asian, Russian, Vietnamese, Afiican, or Native American... and tomorrow."
She continued, "there could. . . be another one come in of a different ethnicity." Marietta
estimated that she has 107 personnel working in her high school. All working, she said, to
serve the academic, psychological, physiological and emotional needs of her students.
For example, of the 70 teachers in her school, 60 (56%) are regular education teachers
and 10 (9%) are special-education teachers. Members of her 30 person support staff
include a psychologist, social worker, librarian, guidance counselors, food-service
specialists, secretaries, public safety officers, custodians and building engineers. In
addition to herself as principal, the six other administrators include two assistant
principals, three curriculum leaders, and one curriculum coordinator.

Marietta has worked 38 years - her entire career — in this urban school district.
Starting in 1968, Marietta served for 15 years as a high school regular education teacher;
15 years as a high school assistant principal; and eight years in her current job as high
school principal. Marietta has a BS in education and an MA. in teaching, however, she is
convinced her best training and preparation for her current role and responsibility as high
school principal was, she said, "through the mentoring that I received. . . skimming
through reading and research... and learning from parents and from the children."

Marietta learned, "how to treat children from their parents," and, she continued, "I learned

138

from children to understand if there might be something wrong in their home."

Leadership training

Marietta believes her primary responsibility is to provide instructional leadership
that, "meets the needs of the school." Three things she believes an instructional leader
must do are, "You have to know how to analyze the data [school and student data] . . .
prioritize what you will teach. . . and, you have to learn how to work with your staff."
Reflecting on her last comment that an instructional leaders must "learn how to work with
their staff," Marietta expressed her disappointment that her district has not offered
training that would help her address a major issue she is facing in her high school - low

staff morale. She explained why that training would be helpful:

I“ could learn howto improve morale... because,they[thestafi]affeetthestudents ...andtheyare
just gloomy. They say all the time, to everybody but me, we need to improve morale around here.
Teachers say it to each other... they accused me of lowering their morale. [Why, I asked?] Because
I‘mtryingtogetthemtodowhattheyneedtodo,anddreycan‘thandleit. Theywouldnotsurvive
inanotherschool.

Training and mentoring for assistant principals and principals, Marietta says, is an
ongoing process. To make her point, Marietta noted that, "While I was an assistant
principal [for 15 years]. . . my high school principal [and mentor] sent me to everything."
Examples of training she attended included, "how to use the student code of conduct. . . or
a meeting about how to do the budget," she said. After each training session, Marietta
would meet with her principal to discuss the training content and, "then he would teach
me" how to apply in his school what I had just learned in the training. Marietta confided
that she always suspected that, in addition to mentoring, her principal's real motivation

was, "he was making me do the principals work [his job]." In her current role as principal,

139

Marietta confessed that, unless the memo specifically mandates that the building principal
must attend, she does not attend district training sessions.

' Marietta admitted that when she receives an e—mail or announcements of
administrator training, "she would decide which of her six administrators should atten ."
From her perspective she is, "only doing to my assistant principals what my principal [her
mentor] did to me." There are only two meetings that she attends on a regular basis: "I go
to our district superintendents meeting. . . once a month. . . " and, she continued, "I attend
the district executive’s [her boss] staff meeting." Marietta’s district provides school
administrators with good school operations training, however, she says, "the bulk of
district training for school administrators is at a lower level [for example assistant
principals or curriculum leaders]. . . because they [the district] like to promote from

within."

Leadership priorities

Marietta conceded that improving staff morale and providing instructional
leadership are both high priority issues that require a significant amount of her time and
leadership involvement. For example, she said, "as the instructional leader you have to
go into that classroom and see what they [teachers] are doing. . .if they need a little more
training, getthattrainingtothem,andthengobackandwatchthemconstantly." Whenl
asked Marietta to estimate how she spends her time between instructional and
administrative activities she said she spends, "55% of her time on instructional leadership
activities and 45% of her time on administrative issues."

In addition to instructional leadership and staff morale, Marietta identified six other

high priority issues, challenges or activities that she believes require her leadership and

140

involvement:

0 making AYP and achieving her school improvement objectives

0 student discipline

- maintaining high visibility with staff and students within her school
0 communication with her three curriculum leaders

0 classroom walk-throughs

o and paperwork

Discussing her school improvement activities and AYP status, Marietta disclosed
that in 2005, her school was, "in AYP phase 2." When I probed regarding her AYP status
in 2006, Marietta’s candid response was, "we're in bad shape" and "my high school
graduation rate is low. .. but I don't know the percentage." An August 2006 AYP report
published on the Internet by the Michigan Department of Education

(http://wwwmichigan.gov/documents/schools met AYP 169521 7.PDE ) confirmed that
because Marietta's high school did not make AYP in 2006 her AYP rating had dropped

 

from AYP phase 2 to AYP phase 3. High school graduation rates were not included on
this report.
Unique urban school issues

Marietta is convinced that the issues and challenges she faces in her urban high
school are similar to the issues and challenges high school principals are facing in
suburban school districts. From her perspective, the issues and challenges are the same,
it's the degree, depth and policy implementation at the school building level that makes a

difference, she said. To illustrate her point Marietta made the following statements:

I had a daughter who worked in a [predominately white, middle-class suburban school district]...
kid stole a gun. they fought... theyjust want to call it... the white kids need a psychologist and
our kids need jail. We're even talking about incompetent teacher's. They’re there. The challenges
in private schools, or the parochial schools are not different... the policies are a little different, but a
kid, isakid, isakid. It'swhat'shappeninginthesechildren'sheadsthatmake itdifferent. Soyou
have, you know, the big time private schools, the academy's... all mose children are children. Just

141

as you have in an urban school, you have a level of class that’s strictly the neighborhood, it's strictly
the parenting. So if you have parents who grew up in [a high poverty, high crime neighborhood]...
and they get to move out, their mentality is the same. They're still like, ghetto. The kid’s fiiends
and relatives are still here, so you know. I see that very, very clearly.

Leadership preparation

Preparing a principal for urban school leadership requires on-the-job exposure and
active participation in multiple genres of training. The best preparation for urban school
leadership, Marietta believes, is a combination of formal university classes, district
training and on-the-job training in an urban school setting:

Researchsaysdntwhenyouhavesrmesshthesemganimfimsmcompmies,theovafidingfadm
is experience. So people do need to get that university training... they need to get that. And then
they need to have something like a student teaching experience in an urban school. Once they get
that experience... then put them in a place where there is a real mentor, somebody who's been
exposed to all there is about the job. Doing the budget, doing this, doing that, you know, learning
how to talk to kids, learning how to follow the code... all that. They need to see all the language
buriersthatwehavemndseehowitinteractswithakidwhodoesn'tspeakEnglish,or,akidwhose
pantsaresagging. [don't letthatgothroughhere [baggyorsaggingpants]... butsomeprincipals
do. So you know. . .fieldobased experience.

In addition to training and experience, Marietta believes the mentoring she received
during the 15 years she was an assistant principal was both necessary and essential for
developing her high school leadership skills. Marietta confided that she loved the
mentoring, training and experience she received but did not like her mentor’s school

leadership style, or his approach to mentoring. She said:

Tlroseweretraurnatictimesformebecauselfeltusedandabused. Hegavemeanythinglwanted
buttherewasnotenoughhelpforme. Iwrotehimanoteandlaskedforatransfer,toldhiml
neededtoleavetheschool... andhesaidtheanswerisno...when you leaveitwillbefora

Iremember...hehiresthesepeoplewithoutmyopinionandthentellsmethey'remineto
trainandworkwith. Hesaidyomjobistonrakemystaffhappy. lsaidwhataboutme? Isn‘tthat
your job? He said, no, you just can‘t get your feelings hurt. Hewasdoingthatwithmebecausehe
thought there was no hope with the other administratorsthathe had... Ineedyoutodoit[hewould
say]...becausehekrrewl'dtakecareofit...andthekidswouldbeservedAndsoitwasallthat
traininglhad, learning how things shouldbedone fortlrechildren.

WhenlwasanmsistantprincipaLIwassobusyworking,sobusysittinginmeetingsforhim,
learning stuffwhohadtimeto go hometomake relationships? You'djust gohomeandtell your
husbandoryomcompanion...butevenmychildrenwouldsay...theytoldme,yououghtagetthat
schooLbecauseyou'vebeennmningiteveryday.

142

According to Marietta, her mentor appeared to be more focused on district politics,
personal relationships and patronage than providing instructional leadership or
administrative oversight for his school. Marietta’s frustration with her mentor and

ambivalence regarding his leadership is evident in the following story she told:

Everybody knew him. He walked those halls and he laughed a lot. He did personal favorites for
everybody. I want this summer school Title I program and I want the best ofthe teachersmbut hell,
I don't want her you [Marietta] tell her she can‘t teach. People were all upset at me thrnkmg I
had changed his mind. But he did not have the heart to hurt people. He could not manage. . .could
not take a hard time. He’d ealled me in and talk about the other AP... so I'd tell the AP, look, I'm
sick of you walking around with this clipboard looking like... I need you to help me.
But he [her principal] was a great thinker and he had a lot of experience. He was retiring on
the job to the point that, for one full year, he came in every two weeks, and he'd fiaternize the whole
day. Then he'd call me. Everybody liked him. They wantedhim to serve on this committee and
thisandthat. Andyeah,heworkedthatfiatboything. He washiringeverybody'ssonsand
daughteraandlsaid, look,butthisboycan'tevenreadgood. Whywegothimhere?
Leadership programs

Marietta believes the 15 years she spent as an assistant principal helped her develop
the instructional and administrative operations leadership skills she needed to function as
a high school principal. In stark contrast Marietta said she is aware of many assistant
principals in the district who have been promoted to the principal level with only several
years of experience. "Most of these principals," she says, "were assistants for three years,"
and, she continues "when you go to a meeting you can see the type of questions they
ask... I mean, I know the answers to that," she said. Marietta does not believe that it takes
15 years to prepare a person for the principalship, however, she does argue that, "it takes
more than three years to learn the high school principal job."

From Marietta’s perspective the district leadership training program has little value
or substance. According to her, the primary focus of the assistant principal training
program is to expose aspiring principals to conceptual models of school leadership and

encourage participants to apply the concept when they return to their respective school

143

buildings. Marietta is very concerned that the district program does not include on-the-
job leadership training and mentoring she believes is necessary to properly train and
prepare a person for urban school principalship. She says

This district's leadership program ain't worth a peep. They never let them [aspiring principals] touch
a budget. They never let them analyze data. They listen to visionary leaders presentations about
philosophy, I guess. I want to know when the Academy is gonna start teaching assistant principals
tohelpus [principals]. Sothatprograminthisdistricthashelpedmembecomephilosophersof
education - but the practical applied learning is not there.

144

CHAPTER 5

FINDINGS

Theprimaryobjective ofthisresearchistormderstandwhatitmeanstobeprepared
to be an urban school principal. In this Chapter, I discuss seven key findings and multiple
supporting themes that emerged from my analysis of data collected during this research
project. The first source of data was one-on-one interviews that I conducted with nine K-
12 school principals working in the same urban school district in Michigan. The second
source of data was two interviews I completed with the district’s director of school
leadership training. And third, data was harvested from my review of research
investigating the training and preparation of principals for K-12 public school leadership.
Unfortunately, only a scant amount of the research literature I reviewed focused on
preparing persons specifically for urban school leadership.

The fallacious operating assumption appears to be that the urban, suburban, or
rural setting or context ofthe school does not matter - that K-12 school principals can and
should be trained and prepared to address school issues and challenges and provide
necessary and sufficient school leadership in any context. Based on the findings of this
research, I offer a counter-argument that says context and contextual leadership does
indeed matter. Equally important, training and preparation for K-12 urban school
principals can and should be theoretically grounded in an urban context and school
leaderstrainedandpreparedinanurbansetting.

Ironically, the fact that research examining contextualized urban school leadership

is scarce may have at least two unintended consequences. First, the dearth of research on

145

urban school leadership may increase the research value of the findings presented in this
report. And second, scarcity of research on the urban school principal underscores the
importance of listening to the individual and collective voices of the nine highly
experienced urban school principals in this research report as they (1) share their unique
perspectives as urban school leaders; (2) provide perspective and nuance on urban school
leadership as a career choice; (3) explain the intricate and often punitive relationship
between student learning and the urban setting; and (4) speak with passion and candor on
the critical issue and daunting challenge of training and preparing aspiring principals for
urban school leadership.

The seven research findings presented in this chapter are derived from data and
information provided by my participants. For example, my participant’s perspectives on
their careers in urban education; leadership practice in the context of an urban setting;
issues and challenges they face in their schools; and their lived experiences during their
training and preparation for urban school leadership. Each finding is discussed within the
same six categories I used to flame each case study in Chapter 4 - participant profile;
leadership training; leadership priorities; urban school issues; leadership preparation; and
leadership programs. My seven key findings are:

1. Over the next ten years a large quantity of highly experienced principals
in this urban district will be leaving their job due to retirement,
promotion, or career change. (See Table 5.0 and Table 5.1)

2. In this urban school district, leadership training is not a program it is an
on-going process that employs seven genres of training to develop
participants skills, knowledge, and capacity for urban school leadership.
(See Figure 5.0 and Table 5.2)

3. Elementary, middle and high school principals place a different priority
on the school leadership issues and challenges they face.

146

. Urban principals must focus on a myriad of "nuts and bolts" issues and
challenges that are affecting their urban school. (See Table 5.x, Figure
5.3 and 5.4)

. Principal preparation for urban school leadership is a continuous process
with six distinct preparation activities. (See Figure 5.5)

. Principals in this district are only measured, assessed, evaluated, and
receive perfomrance feedback on three out of six categories of their urban
school leadership capacity. (See Figure 5.6)

. Leadership training and preparation programs offered by school districts,
universities, and private sector organizations have significant differences
in their program components, structure, and outcome objectives. (See
Figure 5.6)

. Being prepared for urban school leadership means having the skills,
knowledge, opportunity, and resources necessary to provide leadership in
seven critical areas: educational strategy; school issues and challenges;
multiple needs of urban children; helping urban children; professional
commitment to urban education; and meeting stakeholder expectations.
(See Figures 5.7, 5.8, and 5.9)

Participant Profile

Themes that emerged from the participant profile category of participant case

studies in Chapter 4 provide support for my first finding that, over the next ten years a

large quantity of highly experienced principals in this urban district will be leaving their

job due to retirement, promotion and career change. Emergent themes that support this

finding include baby-boom retirement possibilities; career and job changes; and the

difficult challenge of making adequate yearly progress (AYP).

Baby-boom Retirement Possibilities

Persons born between 1946 and 1964 are ofien referred to as baby-boomers and

considered to be members of the baby-boom generation. For example, in a report

published by the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO, 2006) the

authors discuss financial and healthcare implications of baby boomer retirement:

147

The first wave of the baby-boom generation, the 78 million Americans born between 1946 and 1964
and alive as of 2005, will turn age 62 and become eligible for Social Security benefits beginning in
2008. The retirement of the relatively large baby-boom generation, combined with other

demographic trends, is expected to strain the nation’s retirement and health systems.

One theme that emerged from participant case studies was the notion that a significant

number of the nine urban principals participating in this study are members of the baby-

boom generation and likely candidates to retire within the next 10 years. To better

understand the potential impact the phenomenon of baby boom retirement might have on

principals leaving this urban district, I estimated the birth-date and age of each of my nine

 

Table 5.0: Estimate of study participants age in 2006 and 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Participant’s School Year Yearstarted Estimated Estimated Estimated
alias name grade level participant working in year of age in 2006 age in 2016
received private birth"
university sector or
tmdergraduate urban
degree education
Male
Robert K-8 1966 1966 1944 62 72
elementary
Daniel 6-8 middle 1972 1972 I950 56 66
school
George 9-12 high 1976 1976 1954 52 62
school
Female
Ruby K-5 1980 1980 I956 50 60
elementary
Mary K-8 1970 1970 I956 50 60
elementary
Paula K—8 1973 I973 I951 55 65
elementary
Kathy 6-8 middle I986 1986 1964 42 52
school
Henrietta 9-l2 high 1982 1978 I960 46 56
school
Marietta 9-12 high 1968 1968 I946 60 70
school

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: Date of undergrad degree and year started working was provided by participant.
" Estimated year of birth based on assumption participant was rig 22 when undergrad degree was received.

 

participants. A summary of my calculations are shown in Table 5.0.

148

 

Working on the unsubstantiated assumption that each participant received their
undergraduate degree when they were 22 years of age, I calculated each participant’s date
of birth and their estimated age in 2006 and 2016. In column 6 of Table 5.0, we see that
two participants - Robert and Marietta - are estimated to be 62 and 60 years of age in
2006. Moving to column 7, we see that five other participants will be 60 years of age or
older by the year 2016. In summary, seven of my nine participants are prime candidates
to retire from the urban school principalship by 2016. In fact, baby-boom principals
have already begun to leave this urban district. An excellent, but unfortunate example is
Robert, one of my participants, with 40 years of urban education experience, retired in
2006 - only one month after] interviewed him for this study.

Career and Job Changes Based on Extensive Experience

In addition to baby-boom retirement, career advancement and changes in job
responsibility are two additional reasons participants in this study may be leaving the
principalship before the year 2016. For example, in the fall of 2006, Marietta left her
high school principalship to assume a support staff position within the district. A second
example of school principal career and job change occurred in early 2007 when another
of my participants, George, was promoted from high school principal to a director level
position within the district. Unlike Robert who retired from the district, the skills and
knowledge acquired by both Marietta and George will remain within the district.
However, in all three cases the district was faced with the challenge of selecting suitable
replacements for three highly experienced urban school leaders.

The last column of Table 5.1 validates the extensive amount of experience each
participant had accumulated - or was required to have - before they were selected to be

school principal. For example, Henrietta had 13 years of experience prior to becoming a

149

school principal while Robert had 33 years of experience before he was selected to be

high school principal. The last row of Table 5.1 confirms that, as of 2006, the average

 

Table 5.1: Participant's career history in private sector and urban education

 

Urban education experience as of June 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

§
§ 2
a is
9' 5 3 95 '3 c:
a E 8 g .9- §
g 0
a 3 8 a: '- 25-. 2
3 g E 8 § § 5 g "' a “9 a
Participant’s - School 3 m >‘ '3 2 .3 3 3 g .9.- ‘8 .9.-
' level 5 a '5 3 8 g E a '3 .0 g E
“W 8"“ s: s: 3'8 :2 a 0‘s 3 E n.
Male
Robert K—8 elementary I966 40 11 20 2 7 33
Daniel 6-8 middle school 1972 34 I8 13" 2 I 33
George 9-12 high school 1 1976 29 16 I” 9 3 26
Female
Ruby K-5 elementary 1980 26 13 5 4 4 22
Mary K-8 elementary 1970 36 16 4 16 20
Paula K-8 elementary 1973 33 13 4 3 13 20
Kathy 6-8 middle school 1986 20 14 2 4 l6
Henrietta 9-12 high school 15 I990 14 10 2 I 1 13
Marietta 9-12 high school 1968 38 15 15 8 30
Average: 30 14 4.6 6 24
Note:
All data supplied by participants

All participants are Afiican-American

‘ Served 10 years as assistant superintendent and 3 years as district superintendent in a smaller urban
school district.

" Dean of students

 

years of experience before participants were selected to be school principal was 24 years;
an average of 30 years total experience working in urban education; 14 years average
classroom teaching or school staff experience; 4.6 years average as an assistant principal;
and, as shown in column 10, as of 2006, the range of time participants have served as
school principal ranges fi'om 1 to 16 years - with an average of six years in the job.

If the pace and volume of baby boom retirements accelerates, or the number of

principal job changes continue to increase, I suspect that this urban district will find itself

150

 

in the tenuous and untenable position of not having an adequate number of candidates in
the district’s principal replacement pipeline who are trained and prepared for the
awesome responsibility of urban school leadership. The primary reason for my concern is
the long period of time — an average of 24 years — that it took for the nine participants in
this study to become principals.

Research conclusions posited by Murphy and Schwartz (2000) provides additional
support for my finding of highly experienced principals leaving or retiring from the
principalship:

In a 1998 survey of 403 school district superintendents, half reported a shortage of qualified

candidates for principal vacancies. The study cites a wave of principal retirements as the major

cause of the shortage... 37% were over age 55 by the 1993 -- 94 school year. For example, a 1999

University of Minnesota study estimated that, by 2010, about 75 percent of Minnesota principals

will be lost through retirement or attrition, even as school enrollments are expected to grow by 10 to

20% ..... Still, 86% of Minnesota superintendents reported in 1998 that filling principal positions was

”difficult" or "very difficult." Too few credentialed people are prepared adequately for the job. And

too few qualified educators want to be principals. Why? (P.5).

Leadership Training

Multiple researchers including Hess, 2003; Levine, 2005, and Murphy, 2003
argue that university educational administration and school leadership training programs
are doing a poor job of training and preparing principals for K-12 public school
leadership. Interview comments offered by the nine urban school principals participating
in this research indicate that they would agree with my assessment. From their
perspective, no one institution can provide a single program that would have adequately
trained them for the complex and difficult task of mban school leadership. Instead, a
recurring theme that emerged from each participant’s case study was the notion that each
participant had been actively involved in a series of on-going leadership training activities

throughout their career. Participants believe the major benefit of on-going training

151

throughout their career is the incremental accumulation of urban school leadership
knowledge, skills and experience that has occurred. The emergent theme of incremental
accumulation is the basis for my second finding that in this urban school district principal
leadership training is not a program it is an on-going process that employs seven genres
of training to develop participants’ skills, knowledge, and capacity for urban school
leadership.

In Figure 5.0 below I show the seven genres of training identified by my
participants: (1) on-the-j ob work experiences; (2) mentoring; (3) district leadership
training; (4) district professional development; (5) urban school leadership training at
other institutions; (6) Michigan school principal recertification requirements; and (7)

university training.

 

Figure 5.0: Seven genres of urban school leadership training.

 

l. On-the-job work experiences throughout each participant’s entire career.

2. Mentoring participants received from informal or new principal cohort mentors.

3. District leadership training program for aspiring, assistant and new principals.

4. District professional development sessions conducted within the district.

5. Urban school leadership training sessions offered by other institutions.

6. School leadership training Michigan requires for principd recertification every five years.

7. University undergraduate, Masters and advanced degree training in education.

 

Source: Participant interviews, focus group and case study analysis

 

 

On- The-Job Work Experiences

All participants believe the first genre of training, on-the-job work experience - as

152

 

a teacher, district staff member, Dean of students, or assistant principal - was the best
training they had because, as Mary, 3 K-8 school principal said, it helped them learn the
issues, challenges, and "nuts and bolts" of urban school practice. Examples of ”nuts and
bolts" might include the issue and challenge of getting multiple substitute teachers on
very short notice; implementing student discipline according to the district Code of
Conduct and then having to deal with an irate parent challenging your veracity and
aggressively questioning the disciplinary action regarding their child; or, getting teacher
buy-in on the first master teaching schedule you ever developed.
Mentoring

Mentoring, the second genre of training discussed by participants is an informal
versus formal practice in this urban district. Six of the nine participants discussed the
informal mentoring relationships they developed - and in most cases still maintain - with
district level administrators and building principals they worked for when they were
teachers or assistant principals. For instance, Marietta, a high school principal, discussed
the enormous amount of high school operations knowledge she acquired from her
principal while serving as his high school assistant principal for 15 years. Another
participant, Henrietta, commented on the value of the information sharing and informal
mentoring that occurred when she and her cohort group of new principals would meet,
"once a month with the district director of leadership training." Henrietta also
acknowledged how she was for the legal knowledge, data, information, and advice she
and her cohort members continue to receive fiom an Executive Service Corps private-
sector attorney specializing in school law. In slurp contrast, three participants, Robert, a
K-8 principal; Mary a K-8 principal; and Daniel a middle school principal, said they

never developed any form of mentoring relationship during their entire career.

153

District Leadership Training

The third genre of training is the district’s 12 month leadership training program.
In this urban district, Francis, the District Director of Leadership Training, has primary
responsibility for training teachers who want to become assistant principals, and assistant
principals who may be selected by a school selection committee to become an
elementary, middle, or high school principal. During May of 2006, I used the interview
guide shown in Appendix B in the appendix, to interview Francis and get (1) her
perspective on principal training and preparation for leadership and (2) better understand
the structure, curriculum, content, and outcome objectives of the district leadership
training program.

During our interview Francis, a white female, revealed that she has worked in this
urban district for 30 years - her entire career in education. She confided that in 1976, after
graduating flour a local university with a BS in Special Education and a MA in Education
Administration, she joined this urban school district as a K-8 elementary school special
education teacher. Eleven years later, in 1987, Francis was promoted to assistant
principal and three years later was selected to become principal of a 350 student K-8
elementary school. Francis shared, that in 2003, after serving 13 years as elementary
school principal, she was promoted to district director of leadership training.

Throughout her career in urban education, Francis’s primary objective has been
“to serve the whole needs of urban students and their families.” From her perspective, the
purpose of the district leadership training program is to help aspiring school principals
understand the importance of providing a form of “servant leadership” (Kouzes &
Posner, 1995) that serves the multiple needs of the families and children that will

someday attend their school. Francis believes the primary responsibility of an urban

154

school principal is to both educate and to serve urban children. She said:

As facilitators of the educational process if you have, you know, a family that moves in and they
are in a house illegally, and they don‘t have water, the kids don't have clothes, or whatever, you're
helping them obtain what it is they need in order for the kids to even get to schools sometimes,
OK. So it's helping the families, the whole family, in addition to the whole child... serving all of
them.

As shown in column ten of Table 5.1, five participants - Daniel, George, Ruby,
Kathy and Henrietta - have all been school principals less than four years. Each
confirmed that (1) they had participated in the twelve month district leadership training
program run by Francis (2) believe the program helped them better understand the
leadership challenges they would be facing and (3) incrementally improved their
leadership knowledge, skills and capacity. Kathy for instance referred to the program as
”exemplary" primarily, she said, “because the class leader [Francis] was recently an urban
principal herself. . . and knew what the needs were [for new principals] coming into this
[urban school] setting." Henrietta, a high school principal, also gave the district leadership
training program high marks because, while participating in the program, she gained
insight into her “private sector authoritative leadership style” and learned how she could
modify her leadership approach in a way that would help improve morale among her
teachers and support staff in her high school.
District Professional Development

District professional development sessions were described by several participants
as, “important, beneficial, inspirational or essential.” For instance Robert, a K-8 principal
with 40 years experience in m'ban education, believes his district professional
development was important and beneficial because the training was always focused on
school operational procedures or instructional programs he was responsible for

implementing in his school. Each participant had positive comments about the variety,

155

session content, knowledgeable presenters, or the fact that a principal could decide if
other persons from his or her school should attend a particular development session.
Urban School Leadership Training Conducted at Other Institutions

Six participants said they had attended urban school leadership training conducted
at a variety of institutions outside the district such as Harvard, Yale, North Central
Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL), the Skillman foundation, or an Independent
School District (ISD) in Michigan. On example is that George, a high school principal,
attended a 10 day urban principal leadership training session at Harvard. From his
perspective the major benefit of his Harvard training was "hearing experts fiom Ivy
League schools” discuss and validate research-based leadership practices he was
attempting to implement in his urban high school that has 1000 students and a total of 136
school personnel.
Principal Recertification Training

The sixth genre of training is school principal recertification training required by the
state of Michigan. School principals in Michigan must submit documentation and evidence
to the Michigan Department of Education confirming that they have completed the equivalent
of a least six credit hours [equivalent to 18 State Board Continuing Education Units
(SBCEU’s)] of school leadership and administration training within the last five years. In this
urban district all principals submit their documentation to Francis, the district director of
leadership training, for her review before the documentation is forwarded to the state of
Michigan. One participant, Kathy, a 6-8 middle school principal, believes the five-year self-
directed recertification approach allows her to (I) customize her training to address what she
perceives as leadership skill gaps and (2) gain knowledge and review current data related to

unique issues and challenges she may be facing in her middle school.

156

During my review of literature, I found no research specifically focused on self-
directed urban school principal leadership training. I did however discover two websites that
summarized individual state requirements for principal licensure. The first website is the
Education Commission of the States (ECS)
http://mb2.ecs.orWemn.§px?id=878&maH and the second website
http://ncei.com/2003_Principa_ls_S_uperintendents/index.hg for the National Center for
Education Information (NCEI). Both sites provide information regarding university degree
requirements and years of education related experience required to apply for the job of school
principal.

University Training

The seventh genre of training that participants discuss in their case studies is the
formal university training they had engaged in to receive their Bachelors, Masters or
advance degrees in education. In this district, candidates for the principal position are
expected to have at least a Master's degree in education. As shown below in Table 5.2,
George, a high school principal, has a second master's degree in Secondary School
Leadership while four of my nine participants have additional graduate degree training
and education beyond their Masters degree. For instance, we see that in addition to a
master's degree, Robert, a high school principal has an Education Specialist degree, and a
Doctor of Education degree. Paula, a K-8 principal, also has a Doctor of Education
degree and Henrietta has completed an Education Specialist degree program. Daniel, a
6-8 middle school principal, confided that he has completed the course work and only has
to complete his dissertation to receive his Doctor of Education degree, as he said,
"probably by spring of 2007."

Overall, participants were not satisfied with their university training. Three of the nine

157

participants, Mary, Marietta, and Daniel expressed mixed feelings regarding their
university training. For example, Mary said, "the university level does a wonderful job
with the theoretical background of education and that type of thing but, there are some

nuts and bolts things that when you walk in the door, people hand you. . .and expect you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5.2: University and district leadership training of participants
Education District
Specialist leadership
and/or training
Pmticipant School Bachelors degree Masters Doctorate program
alias name e level degree degree
Male
Robert K-8 BS Music MS Guidance Education
elementary Counseling Specialist
Doctor of
Education
EdD
Daniel 6—8 middle BS Education MA Education Doctor of Yes
school English and Supervision Education
Social Science And Leadership EdD
(ABD)
George 9-12 high BS Physical MA Education Yes
school Science And Supervision and
Math Leadership
MA Secondary
School
Leadership
Female
Ruby K-5 BS Early MA Early Yes
elementary Childhood Childhood
Education Education
Mary K-8 BA Elementary MA Urban
elementary Education Education
Paula K-8 BS Education MA Teaching Doctor of
elementary Special- Education
Education EdD
Kathy 6-8 middle BS Psychology MA Teaching Yes
school
BS Biolggy
Henrietta 9-12 high BS Business MA Teaching Education Yes
school Administration Specialist
Marietta 9-12 high BS Education MA Teaching
school
Note: Data provided by participants.

 

158

 

to handle.” Mary, I should point out, is the only participant that has a degree in urban
education. From her perspective her Masters degree in Urban Education provided her
with, she said, “a considerable amount of urban school leadership data, information and
knowledge" primarily because "all of our work had to be done in an urban setting."

The third mixed rating and evaluation of university training was provided by
Daniel, a 6—8 middle school principal. Daniel had served as an assistant superintendent
and district superintendent in a smaller urban district before he retired with 32 years of
service and joined this larger urban district just three years ago. In his case study, Daniel
discussed why he believes his university training was very appropriate for his executive
responsibilities at the district level in his former school district, however, he continued,
"the training was not applicable to the [current] job responsibility of a building principal."

Unlike Mary, Marietta, and Daniel, six of the nine participants were dissatisfied
with their university training - for three primary reasons. First, participants believe their
university training had minimum practical value because it was too theoretical. Second,
the university training did little to prepare them for urban school leadership in an urban
setting. And third, many complex and pernicious urban school issues and challenges they
face on a daily basis were never discussed or even introduced during their undergraduate,
Masters, or advanced degree programs in education. For example George, a high school
principal with a Bachelor of Science in Physical Science and Math, and two Masters
degrees in education, said this about his university training, ”Everything was
theoretical...they didn't want you to relate to the real world." In his case study, George
described how he was "actually punished" for asking one of his university professors how
the theoretical teaching methods the professor was discussing in class could be used to

get an urban student excited and engaged in learning if that student ”didn't come to school

159

excited about learning science."

Kathy, a middle school principal, also had unfavorable comments about her
university experience. She said, "It gave me pedagogy to refer'to, however, it didn't give
me a real-life explanation of what I would be facing in the [urban] classroom. It was an
ivory tower experience. It didn't connect the dots. . . not at all. . . and I wish it had."
Similar to Kathy, Henrietta expressed the concern that her university training was more
theoretical than practical and shared in her case study a provocative story that emphasized
how little she believes her university training prepared her for the “real-world” issues and
challenges she would face in her urban high school. Following is a’brief excerpt fiom her
story:

I remember drinking, okay, all right, kick in [her university training]...what do you do when all the
kids are calling you a b [a bitch]? No, none of the classes helped me with that... it was like, okay,
and you have to think on your feet, you know, and those [university] classes, of course, they don't
teach youhowtothinkonyourfeet. Thoseareskillsyoureallyneed. Youreallyhavetojust
be...quick.

During her interview, Francis, the district director of leadership trarmn' ' g, attempted
to balance her negative comments regarding her university training by including positive
comments regarding certain aspects of her training. Francis said:

My [university] classes were worthless. I had a professor who said ‘I lurven‘t been in a school in 15

years’. I said, then why are you teaching me... you obviously don‘t know what I‘m dealing with out

there [in her urban school]. You know, its way too theoretical. They didn‘t do anything on data
analysis or any of that. Now that's 30 years ago, but... I mean, it's not that I didn‘t learn anything at

[the university]. I had two professors that were really good at... how leadership really works... you

putallthese ingredientstogether,anditjustbecomesthisbeautifirl msterpieceofpeople,andthe

giftsthattheybringtotheorganimtion. Ithinkthat'swhatl learned...l learnedtoappreciate
diversity. '

Research by Murphy (2003) and Hess and Kelly (2005) provided me with insight
and a plausible explanation of why the majority of my participants believe their university

training did such a poor job of preparing them for the job role and responsibility of an

160

urban school principal. Murphy (2003) investigated the structure of university masters
level school administration programs and concluded that the content of current Masters
programs are the result of a gradual, incremental build up of ideas, concepts, and theories
borrowed from professions and disciplines outside of the school administration profession
(p.5). Other researchers have also expressed concern with the curriculum and course
content of university leadership training programs. For instance, after examining the
course content of 31 educational leadership programs, Hess and Kelly (2005) reported
that, "the evidence indicates that preparation has not kept pace with changes in the larger
world of schooling, leaving graduates of principal preparation programs, ill-equipped for
the challenges and opportunities posed by an era of accountability" (p.35). Hess
continued and posits that, "meaningful reform of principal preparation programs must
retool the contents so that it matches the challenges confronting principals in 21 st

century's schooling" (p.38).

Leadership Priorities

My third finding is that elementary, middle, and high school principals place a
different priority on the school leadership issues and challenges they face. This finding is
supported by three themes that surfaced from interviews and participant case studies. The
first emergent theme suggests that the leadership priorities of my participants should be
grouped and categorized as common, grade-level, or school building priorities. Second,
all participants place a higher priority on school administration and building operations
than instructional leadership. And third, the priority each participant places on making
adequate yearly progress (AYP) appears to depend on the school’s AYP phase, goals, and

objectives.

161

Common, Grade Level, 0r School Building Priorities

During focus group and one-on-one interview discussions each participant
responded to questions that probed their leadership role, responsibilities, and priorities as
urban school principals. I show in the first column of Table 5 .3 the 24 leadership
priorities participants said require their time, attention and focus. In the second column I
show the number of participants that mentioned each priority. The last two columns in the
table represents five urban school leadership priorities posited by (Forsyth, 1993) and
seven priorities suggested by (Taylor, 2002) based on the results of their research
investigating the relationship between urban school effectiveness and leadership provided
by the urban school principal. It is important to note that the five leadership priorities
posited by Forsyth, and the seven identified by Taylor were mentioned as a priority by
one or more of my nine participants.

Research findings by Taylor (2002), for example, argues that seven correlates of
improving effective schools include a clearly stated school mission; safe and orderly
climate; high expectations; student time-on-task; instructional leadership; fiequent
monitoring; and positive home and school relations (p.377). Research by Forsyth (1993)
contains similar findings and suggest that the ten ”areas of greatest challenge" for the nine
participants in this study would likely be understanding the urban context and conditions
of practice; motivating urban children to learn; managing instructional diversity; building
open climates in their schools; collecting and using information for problem-solving and
decision-making; acquiring and using urban resources; governing their schools; effecting
change in their school; establishing mission, vision and goals; and accountability for all

school activities and outcomes.

162

 

Table 5.3: Participant’s leadership priorities and related research

 

Principal’s 24 leadership priorities

mentioning this priority

Participants

 

Elementary

Middle school

High school

District

Related Research

 

Ruby

Robert

Daniel

x Francis ‘

" Forsyth (1993)

x Taylor (2002)

 

Instructional leadership

x Kathy

” George

 

Student discipline

 

Parent concerns

x x x Paula

" x x x Henrietta

x x " Marietta

><

 

Time allocation

XXXX

X

 

Teacher evaluations and
informal walk-throughs

" ”' °‘ °‘ °° Number of principals

XXXXX

 

Paperwork

 

AYP phase

3

 

School merger activity

X

 

Staff meetings and staff morale

 

Teacher quality

 

Student and staff resources

wNNwwaw

 

Ninth grader high school orientation
and transition

 

Declining student enrollment

 

Student assessment and testing

X

 

School culture, rituals and routine

 

Support staff resources and focus

 

High visibility with staff and
students

NNNNW

 

Staff buy-in and support

 

Substitute teachers staff managment

 

High school graduation rate

 

Closingitudent knowledge gaps

X

 

Enforce current curriculum
and content standards

I—NNNI—

 

Student and staff safety;gatekeeper"

—

 

Returningghone calls

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

K-8principalinthisdistrict.

 

Source: Participant interviews, case studies and literature review.

Note: “ = priority for Francis, director leadership training, during 13 years she was

 

163

 

In Figure 5.1 the leadership priority mentioned by each participant is (l)
categorized by grade level and (2) the number of principals that mentioned that particular
priority is shown in parentheses. We see in Figure 5.1 that only 4 of the 24 leadership
priorities - instructional leadership; teacher evaluations and informal walk-throughs; AYP
phase; and declining student enrollment — are considered a priority by principals at the
elementary, middle, and high school grade levels. Due to page restrictions of this report I
will only discuss two of the four issues that are common across the three grade levels:
instructional leadership and AYP phase
Instructional Leadership is a Lower Priority Than School Administration

Based on my review of research literature, instructional leadership is a term that is
often used but appears to lack common definition or meaning. Educational researchers are
more likely to describe instructional leadership in terms of surrogate measurements of
expected outputs or expected academic results rather than provide a cogent definition of
instructional leadership or their perceptions or findings regarding instructional leadership
behavior. For example, multiple researchers (Carlin, 1992; Center on Education Policy,
2005; P. Hallinger & Murphy, 1986; Jackson, 2005; B. S. Portin, 2000; Wanzare & Da
Costa, 2001; Waters et al., 2003) argue that instructional leadership provided by the
school principal is a critical success factor for improving urban school effectiveness and
then quickly shift their discussion to focus on surrogate measurements of instructional
leadership results such as making adequate yearly progress; successful implementation of
educational policy; getting teacher buy-in and support; or significant improvements in
student academic achievement. Despite the lack of common definition, the fiequency
with which researchers highlighted the importance of principals providing instructional

leadership prompted me to ask each of my study participants, including Francis, the

164

director of leadership training, the following two questions: What does it mean to be an

instructional leader of an urban school? And, What percentage of your time do you spend

 

Figure 5.1: Summary of urban school principal’s grade level leadership priorities

 

Elementary/middle/high school - 4 priorities Middle/high school - 3 priorities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 Instructional leadership‘ (8 principals) - Teacher quality"I (2)

0 Teacher evaluations and o Ninth grader high school orientation
informal walk-throughs (4) and transition (3)
AYP phase (4) 0 Closing student knowledge_gaps (2)
Declining student enrollment (3)

Elementary - 2 priorities
Elementary/middle school - 3 priorities 0 Support staff resources and focus (2)
0 School merger activity (3 principals) 0 Substitute teachers staff management (2)

 

0 Student and staff resources“ (2)
0 School culture, rituals and routine (2) Middle school - 1 priority
0 Staffbuy-in and support‘ (I)

 

 

 

Elementary/high school - 6 priorities
0 Student discipline (6) High school - 5 priorities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 Parent concerns (6) o Higr visibility with staff and students (2)

0 Time allocation“ (5) 0 High school graduation rate (2)

o Paperwork‘ (3) 0 Student and staff safety ”gatekeeper" (l)

0 Staff meetings and staff morale (3) o Returning phone calls (I)

0 Student assessment and testing (2) o Enforce current crn'riculum and content
standards (1)

 

Source: Participant interviews and case studies.
Notes: (x) = Number of school principals mentioning this priority.
" =mdicatesmiswasaprimityfmanciaanheaorleadashipuammgdmingthe 13 years
she was a K-8 principal but is not included in the principal vote cormt shown in parenthesis.

 

 

 

providing instructional leadership for your school? The following summary of
participant’s responses to these two questions provided additional evidence that support
my finding that elementary, middle, and high school principals place a difl‘erent priority
on the school leadership issues and challenges they face.

As shown below - similar to educational researchers - each participant in this
study offered a different definition and ascribed a different meaning to the term
instructional leadership:

Elemengy school Em M
0 Ruby said instructional leadership means," Being involved in instruction... knowledgeable about
her students and school data... being in the classroom... and modeling lessons for teachers."

165

Robert said: "Helping students achieve passing scores on the MEAP test."

Mary said: She did not have a definition of instructional leadership

Paula said: "That I am supposed to provide leadership to the instructional staff in terms of
instruction that impacts students."

Middle school principals

Daniel, the only participant in the restructuring phase, phase 5 of AYP, said: "Being the
instructional leader means I am the educational leader... charged with making sure that the school
makes AYP. . . that's my primary responsibility."

Kathy said: "Leading by example, focusing on student academic excellence, minimizing
distractions and disnrptions of classroom instruction, and providing her teachers and staff with the
resources they need to teach."

Hi school 'ci 3

George said: "To persuade, influence, or cajole each of my classroom teachers to use appropriate
assessments to identify student knowledge gaps that need to be filled or reinforced,” and, he
continued, "I have content area experts [five curriculum leaders] to do a lot of that."

Henrietta said: "1 lead the learning... by modeling the way," and, she noted, "the principal should
be very visible... to the point that I don‘t get all this stuffdone that I should get done but, you have
to lead from the fiunt."

Mariettasaid: "Astheinstructional leaderyoulnvetogo intothatclassroomandseewhattheyare
doing... see ifthey needa little more training, getthattrainingtothem, andthen goback and
watch them constantly."

Francis, the Directorofleadershiptrainingsaid: "Whatdoes itmeantobethe instructional leader
of an urban school?" First of all it's having the right people who give the instruction. It's like,
having been good at instruction as a teacher in a classroom, you know what to look for because
you know what good teaching looks like. It's understanding what works and wlmt doesn‘t work. It's
practical experience... and understanding the needs ofthe students that you serve.

In addition to ascribing a different meaning to instructional leadership,

participants also confessed that they each place a different priority on providing

instructional leadership in their schools. In the last row of Figure 5.2 we see that this

group of principals only devote an average of 24% of their time to providing what they

define as instructional leadership and devote an average of 76% of their time to what they

perceive are administrative and operational activities within their schools. In addition, we

see in column 2 of Figure 5.2 that the amount of time the four elementary school

principals spend on instructional leadership ranges fiom 10% to 20%; the two middle

school principals 20% to 25%; and the three high school principals devoting 20% to 55%

of their time providing instructional leadership. Across the entire group, participants

estimated they only spend 10% to 55% of their time engaging in instructional leadership

166

activities.
Despite different definitions, perceptions, descriptions, and percentages of time

devoted to instructional leadership, all participants agree that (l) instructional leadership

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5.2: Percentage of time participants spend on instructional or
administrative leadership activities.

Instructional Administrative
Urban school principal leadership activities leadership activities
Ruby — Elementary school 20% 80%
Robert — Elementary school 10% (Lowest) 90% (Highest)
Mary — Elementary school 20% 80%
Paula —Elementary school 15% 85%
Daniel — Middle school 20% 80%
Kathy — Middle school 25% 75%
George — High school 35% 65%
Henrietta — High school 20% 80%
Marietta — High school 55% (Highest) 45% (Lowest)

Average: 24% instructional 76% administrative

Source: Participants interviews and case studies.

 

 

should be a top priority for all urban school principals; (2) each of them should be
devoting more time and providing more instructional leadership; and (3) the key reason
they don't devote more time to instructional leadership is they honestly believe it is more
important for them to spend the majority of their time (average of 76%) actively involved
in school administration and operational activities. When I asked participants how they
thought urban school principals should allocate their time between instructional and
administrative activities, several responded by saying “Just flip it” — meaning flip from

24% instructional and 76% administration to 76% instructional and 24% administration.

167

However, when I asked participants why they didn’t ‘just flip it’ they quickly responded
that ‘flip it’ was easy to say, but difficult, and maybe impossible, to do. In her case study,
Henrietta, one of my three high school principal participants, offered this explanation:

When I talked about flipping it, in terms of moving time over to instruction, one of the things we
needtodois,“facethebrutal facts” [Henrieuaquotefi’omthebookGoodtoGreatbyJimCollins
(Collins, 2001)] and a lot of times we're uncomfortable. I mean, let's really talk about safety, and
fights, and then, once you address those [brutal] facts, then let's start looking at how we can deal
with them. First of all, if you don't have the right people on the team? We talked about getting the
right people on the bus, getting the wrong folks off the bus, and getting the right folks in the right
seat. Okay. That's hard to do by the way, with the tmion, and with what's happening now [a
significant decline in student enrollment resulting in severe district financing issues and school
budget cuts].

A YP Priority Depends on the School ’s Current A YP Phase

The third theme supporting my finding that urban principals have different
leadership priorities related to the mandate of NCLB and the increasing pressure on my
participants to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) towards achieving their assigned
AYP goals and objectives. Using data I extracted in May 2006 from the Michigan
Department of Education website
(www.Michigan.gov/documents/school_s__ met AYP 169521 7.ndf ) I summarized in
Table 5.4 the AYP status and phase of each of the nine participants. As shown, only
three of the nine participants - Ruby K-S elementary, Mary K-8 elementary and Paula K-8
elementary - made AYP in 2006.

Robert K-8 is among the six that did not make AYP. His school is coded as AYP
phase 99, because his school was recently merged with another school - AYP phase
definitions are provided in the bottom section of Table 5.4. When Daniel was selected in
2005 to be principal of his 6-8 middle school, the school was already in phase 5 of AYP
and had a school restructuring plan that had been approved by the district. Daniel is now

accountable for improving the school’s AYP performance and is expected to implement

168

 

Table 5.4: Summary of pmticipant's 2005-2006 adequate yearly progress (AYP)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Students
a passing
0 ,8 -8- 2006 AYP MEAP test‘ g
5 E. 45, .c:
“ a 3 E to g?
g :3 E " % 5° <
a 15 § §1 8 73 .5. §
..- °- .0- < ’5 ll '5 N
E grade level >.. E 2 .5 : g If] g 8 Notes.

Male

Robert K-8 elementary 7 No No No 99 School merger in 2005 — new
school did not have MEAP
data prior to 2005 - 06

Daniel 6-8 middle school I No No No 5 Implementing restructuring
plan

George 9-12 high school 3 No No No 3 Corrective action

Female

Ruby K-5 elementary 4 Yes Yes Yes

Mary K-8 elementary 11 Yes Yes Yes

Paula K-8 elementary 13 Yes Yes Yes

Kathy 6-8 middle school 4 No - - 0 Student subgroup did not
make AYP forfirsttime ina
subject.

Henrietta 9-12 high school I No No Yes 2 Continuing improvement.
Students did not get passing
score in math

Marietta 9-12 high school 8 No No No 3 Corrective action

 

 

AYP: Michigan Department of Education

www.Michigan.gov/documents/schools met AYP 169521 7.2glf May 2007

Phase 0 = School did not meet AYP for the first time in a subject. Federal requirements do not start until
school does not meet AYP for two consecutive years in the same subject.

Phase 1 = School improvement - must offer choice and transportation.

Phase 2 = Continuing school improvement - must offer choice, transportation, and supplemental services.
Phase 3 = Corrective action - school must continue choice, transportation, and supplemental services and
take further corrective action.

Phase 4 = Restructuring - school must continue choice, transportation, and supplemental services and
develop a plan to restructure the school.

Phase 5 = Implement restructuring plan -- school must continue choice, transportation, and the
supplemental services and implement restructuring plan.

Phase 6 = Comprehensive school audit by external team; mandatory assignment of coach; limited to no
decision on technical assistance funding options. School must continue choice, transportation, and
supplemental services and continue to implement the restructuring plan.

Phase 7 = Comprehensive school audit by external team; mandatory assignment of coach; no decision on
technical assistance firnding options; recommendation to district on status of school; intermediate school
District intervention. School must continue choice, transportation, and supplemental services and continue
to implement the restructuring plan.

Phase99=AYPadvisory~anew schoolthatdidnothave MEAPdatapriorto2005- 06. This school is
givenadvisorystamsbecausedataarenotavailable forsafeharborcomparisonormultipleyearaveraging.

 

 

169

the restructuring plan that has been developed. In his case study, Daniel made it clear that
he understands what is expected in terms of improving student test scores and other AYP
objectives - but is concerned with the lack of support he is receiving for building repairs
and the large and growing number of special education students in his middle school.
Kathy's 6-8 middle school is in the process of being merged with a K-8 elementary school
and is in phase 0 of AYP because a student subgroup did not make AYP for the first time.
The three high school participants - Henrietta, George and Marietta - did not make AYP
in school year 2005-2006. Henrietta's 9-12 technical career high school which has, she
says, "a 98% graduation rate," failed to make AYP because students did not pass the math
portion of the state standardized test. Henrietta has only been principal of this high
school for one year and is taking steps to address her math AYP issue. Henrietta is
confident her students will make AYP in 2007. Both George and Marietta's high schools
are in phase 3 ofAYP because their students failed to pass both math and English
language arts. Marietta summarized her perspective of her AYP phase and status by
saying, "We're in bad shape." Her top priority and strategy to improve her AYP status,
she said, is to address and resolve some serious issues she has that have resulted in "low
staff morale."

George, another high school principal that did not make AYP, is attempting to
improve his AYP phase by (l) improving the academic and social transition of ninth
graders into his high school and (2) attempting to identify and close what he calls, "the '
knowledge gaps" that many of his students exhibit, especially in math. His top priority is
to provide his students with classroom instruction that is both rigorous and relevant to the
student because, as he says in his case study, “the lack of engaging instruction, it's why

we're turning a whole lot of kids off." The fact that each of my participant’s priorities and

170

strategies regarding AYP consistently referred to their specific “area of greatest
challenge” (F orsyth, 1993) provides additional support for my finding that in this urban
school district elementary, middle, and high school principals place a different priority on

the school leadership issues and challenges they face.

Urban School Issues

My fourth finding is urban principals must focus on a myriad of “nuts-and-bolts”
issues and challenges that are affecting their urban school. Five divergent themes
materialized from participant interviews and case study analysis to provide support for
this finding: (1) as a group, participants identified thirty-one nuts-and—bolts issues and
challenges that they perceive are unique to their urban school; (2) how the urban school
setting is perceived and defined may directly or indirectly influence how sustainable
solutions to pernicious urban school issues and challenges are debated, implemented, or
resolved; (3) the challenge of ensuring student and staff safety in an urban setting; (4)
participants do not have adequate supply of three critical school resources — time, money,
and people; and (5) time management is a diflicult issue and perplexing challenge for all
participants — including Francis, the district director of leadership training.

Thirty-One Nuts-and—Bolts Issues and Challenges

While discussing how leadership training could be improved, Kathy explained in
her case study that, "There are some nuts-and-bolts things that, when you walk in the
door, people hand you. .. and expect you to handle.” The second column of Table 5.5
contains thirty-one "nuts and bol " issues and challenges that Kathy and her peers
perceive are unique to their respective rn'ban school. The total number of participants that

mentioned a particular issue is shown in column three while issues or challenges

171

 

Table 5.5: Summary of thirty-one nuts-and-bolts issues and challenges affecting participant’s schools.

 

Participants

 

Elementary

Middle
school
school
Drstrrct
Research

in
m

 

Participant’s
Issue “nuts-and-bolts”
category issues

Participants mentioning this issue

Henrietta

Francis

Marietta

 

Ruby
Robert
Mary
Paula
Daniel
Kathy
x Geor e

X
X

Urban Student and staff safety‘

 

Poverty and unemployment

 

X
XX

Neighborhood crime‘I

 

" " " " " Leithwood(2003)
x x x x x Sammons (2006)

Abandoned buildings

 

School break-in and theft

 

O
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

Resorn'ces Time management“ "

 

X
X
X

Building maintenance repair

X

 

Student’s with mulfifle need“

 

Custodial staff

 

School finance reform

 

Classroom technolpgy

 

Alternative middle schools

 

Single building administrator

 

Ethnic textbooks

 

Students Merger and consolidation"

 

Student count process

 

Class size

 

Special-education diagnosis"I

 

Ninth-grader transition

 

Student not value education

 

WNUNNNA—WH———NN———INNA
X

Teachers Academic rigor and
relevance”

 

Low staff morale

 

Substitute teachers

 

Focus on readingskills

 

Teachers hired by District HR

 

N——-NN
X
X

Parents Parents angry about discipline
and family

 

Parent involvement

 

Student home environment

 

Single-parent household

 

AYP Negative AYP impge x x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u—INt—Ir—Ir—I
X

High school gguation rate

 

 

Source: Participant interviews, case studies and literature review.
Note: ‘ = Francis, director of leadership training, while she was K-8 principal.
" = Issue at all three grade levels: elemental-y, middle and high school.

 

172

 

mentioned by individual participants are indicated by an ‘X’ in columns four through
thirteen. In columns 14 and 15 of Table 5.5, Leithwood (2003) and Sammons (2006) offer
research based evidence that urban school principals should be trained and prepared to
provide school leadership necessary and sufficient to address at least fifteen social,
financial, political, and educational issues and challenges they will face in their urban
schools.

In Figure 5.3 the thirty-one issues and challenges identified by participants are
shown grouped into six categories — urban school setting; resources; students; teachers;
parents and family; and AYP. Due to the brevity of this paper I will only focus on four of
the thirty-one issues and challenges participants say are affecting their schools - the urban
school setting; student and staff safety; adequate resources of time, money, and people;
and time management.

Perception and Definitions of the Urban School Setting

Leithwood and Rich] (2003) argue that school principals must be capable of
providing "six generic forms of leadership. . . instructional, transformational, moral,
participative, managerial, and contingent forms of leadership" (p. l 3). In addition, urban
school principals must have the capacity to provide school leadership that is necessary
and appropriate in an urban school setting in which the majority of students may be
nonwhite, economically disadvantaged, and facing multiple issues and challenges due to
systemic issues of race, politics, economics or societal issues that may pervade the urban
school setting. From my perspective, how the discussion of an urban school setting is
framed and defined will strongly influence how sustainable solutions to the issues and

challenges affecting my participant’s schools are debated, implemented, or resolved.

173

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5.3: Six categories of nuts-and-bolts issues and challenges mentioned by participants.
Urban school setting Students
0 Student and staff safety‘ (4) 0 School merger and consolidation (4)Ml
0 Poverty and unemployment (2) 0 Student count process (2)
0 Neighborhood crime*(2) 0 Class size (2)
o Abandoned buildings_(l) - Special-education diaflsis“ (2)
0 School break-in and theft (1) o Nmth-gpader transition orientation (3)
0 Student does not value education (2)
Resources Teachers
0 Time management" (10)" - Academie_rigor and relevance (3)"
0 Building maintenance and repair (2L 0 Low staff morale (2)
o Student’s with multiple needs*(2) 0 Substitute teachers (2)
o Custodial staff (I) 0 Focus on readingskills (l)
0 School finance reform (I) 0 Teachers hired by District HR (1)
0 Classroom technology (1)
0 Alternative middle schools (1) Parents and family
0 Single buildigpdministrator (3) 0 Parents angpy about discipline (2)
0 Ethnic textbooks (l) 0 Parent involvement (1)
0 Student home environment (I)
o SEE-parent household (1)
AYP
0 Negative AYP image (2)
o 60% high schoolgpaduationrate (I)
Source: Participant interviews and case studies.
Note: " = Issue for Francis, director leadership training, during 13 years she was K-8 principal in district.
" = Issue at all three grade levels: elementary, middle and high schooL
(x) = Number of participants mentioningghis issue.

 

 

In the top section of the first column in Figure 5.3, five pernicious issues and
challenges participants say they face are framed by my capriciously selected title of urban
setting. The five issues and challenges captioned include student and staff safety; poverty
and unemployment; neighborhood crime; abandoned buildings; and school break-in and
theft. Due to the brevity of this paper, I will only focus on the perception and definition of
my participant’s urban school setting as opposed to discussing the debate, implementation
or resolution of the five issues and challenges listed in this category.

Mark Gooden (2002) and Michael Dantley (1990) argue that critical leadership and

174

servant leadership are two forms of urban school leadership that may be appropriate for
schools situated in an urban setting. From her perspective, Francis, the district director of
leadership training believes that, unfortunately, race and class are two immutable factors
of the urban setting that may serve to inflame the debate or inhibit resolution of the five

issues and challenges shown in Figure 5.3 under the category of urban school setting:

When you say urban you have to define where you are in the city... it makes a difference in terms

of the population that you‘re dealing with. For example... in a school that was primarily Hispanic,

I may have a day like you [a principal in a different school] but I will never have a week like you.

I could deal with parent issues for a whole week, a different one every day [when she was in

elementary school principal in the district] but I was in a high poverty, high crime, you know, high

drugs, high mental illness [neighborhood]. I mean, I had all those variables. In a Hispanic
community... you could call the parents and say... and they were like, we'll take care of it, and
they did. The student wouldn't do it again, right. Okay. So, there are uniquenesses between the

neighborhoods and between city and suburb. You just deal with so many more social issues. I'm

not saying they don't have issues in the suburbs, but not like we have. Urban school principals are

much more involved in the problems with the socio-economics oftheir community that impact
learning.

It is important to note that how an issue or challenge is framed by definition can
directly or indirectly affect how a solution to the issue or clmllenge might be crafted. A
multiplicity of definitions of the urban setting emerged from my review of research
literature and participant case studies. From my perspective, based on this diversity of
urban setting definitions, key stakeholders in this urban district may find it difficult to
frame and implement sustainable solutions for the issues and challenges participants say
are affecting their urban schools. For example, my contribution to the conundrum is
evident in the definition ofthe urban settingthat I presented in Chapter 1. Inthe
definition section of Chapter 1, I framed my research and examination of urban school
leadership preparation by using the U.S. Census Department definition of urban that is
solely based on housing and population density within a given geographic area (US
Office of Management and Budget, 2005).

When I asked each of my participants, "What does the term urban mean to you?"

175

they responded with a variety of answers. For instance, one participant said, "When we
talk about the socioeconomic picture [of this district] you think of crime. Then, when you
look at the demographics, typically. . .you think of African-American." Another
participant, Marietta, a high school principal expressed a similar view when she said,
“Well, it's a euphemism for Black. When I was trained [referring to her university
training] that's what it was, you know, because I'm talking mid-60s, late 503. It was a
way not to say Black. Urban, I think, basically means that now, too, but it also means
inner-city.” Other participant responses included perceiving or defining urban as (1) a
code word often used to refer to race; (2) inner-city areas with a large minority
population; (3) a large concentration of lower income families; (4) stagnant or declining
property values; or (5) underachieving public schools.

Paula, an elementary school principal offered a different perspective than her peers
when she discussed the urban setting by focusing on the similarities rather than the
differences between urban, suburban or rural schools. One important similarity, she
highlighted is the fact that all public school principals in Michigan, regardless of the
geographic location of their school, must accept every child that enrolls in their public
school and attempt to provide that child with the best possible education. Based on 32
years of experience working in urban education, Paula argues that the discussion should
not center on the stark differences between students or their geographic school location —
a more important and fruitful discussion would focus on the ‘degrees of difference’ that
may exist between urban, suburban or rural schools and school children. All children, she
believes, will face challenges that may be related to race, gender, family issues or social
status. One significant degree of difference, Paula believes, is, "With urban students

you’re dealing with children who have more challenges." To make her point Paula said:

176

You may have urban students who don‘t have two parents at home, or a parent in jail, or a parent on
drugs. I know at least two children off the top of my head whose mothers are in jail, and I know one
of the children is very depressed. It's not uncommon to have children that come to us that may not
have eaten, so they're not going to be focused, and that's a reality. And yet, in spite ofthese and
other stressful circumstances they're still expected to achieve."

Kathy, a middle school principal, provided an additional perspective on degrees of
difference when she talked about the wide variety of potential challenges any child might
face and the degrees of difference in how the challenge itself might be defined. Reflecting
on an urban school principal leadership training session she attended at Harvard
University, Kathy said:

One ofthe things that I learned listening to my colleagues finm around the country, and around the
world, is that we have a lot of the same issues. They may manifest themselves slightly different but
we have a lot of the same issues. For example, parent involvement is a lmiversal issue... but one
thingthatl‘vetakenawayfi'omtheprogramisitdoesn‘tmatterifyommomisdruggedoutand
selling crack or using crack or if your mom is at a conference in Aspen, Colorado, you’re still
neglected.

Student and Stafir Safety in an Urban School Setting

In Figure 5.3 and Table 5.3 we see that four participants - one elementary school
principal, two high school principals and Francis, the district director -believe staff and
student safety is a significant issue and a challenge in the urban school setting. For
example, in her case study Henrietta described the gatekeeper role she has assumed in her
high school to "keep folks out of my building who shouldn‘t be there." Artifacts of
student and staff safety issues and challenges include the metal detectors and single point
of building entry into his high school building mentioned in George's case study; multiple
examples of neighborhood crime discussed by Francis; Mary’s concern that rats fiorn
abandoned buildings might compromise the health and safety of students playing in her
elementary school playground; and Henrietta’s unforttmate experience and on-going
concern with break-in and property theft in her high school.

Over the past 30 or 40 years, the issue and challenge of ensuring student and staff

177

safety in my participant’s urban school district have increased as a diverse collection of
once vibrant and thriving urban communities have eroded into what I think of as "toxic
neighborhoods." Toxic neighborhoods where urban youth, many serving as youthful
parents, are enticed and encouraged to participate in dangerous activities, are
disproportionately affected by high underemployment or unemployment, and constantly
exposed to illegal, harmful or life threatening behaviors. Behaviors and activities such as
youth violence and victimization researched by (F eigelman, Howard, Li, & Cross, 2000;
Nadel, Spellrnann, Alvarez-Canino, Lausell—Bryant, & Landsberg, 1996); mental health
issues exposed by (Xue, Leventhal, Brooks-Gunn, & Earls, 2005); early childhood
behavior problems examined by (Winslow & Shaw, 2007); high-risk behaviors including
drug use, drug trafficking or weapons carrying reported by (Black & Ricardo, 1994); a
rising trends in asthma prevalence and severity exposed by (Wright & Steinbach, 2001);
and adolescent sexual behaviors that include early first sexual intercourse and increased
risk of pregnancy and exposure to sexually transmitted diseases documented in research
studies completed by (Cubbirr, Santelli, Brindis, & Braveman, 2005; Upchurch, Levy-
Storms, Sucoff, & Aneshensel, 1998). From my perspective a major issue contributing to
toxic neighborhoods in the Afiican-American urban communities include poverty levels
that contribute directly and indirectly to family stress and conflict, adolescent children
with a negative sense of self-worth, a propensity for violent behavior among urban youth,
and high school graduation rates of African-American children that are significantly
lower than the national average (Ensminger, Lamkin, & Jacobson, 1996; Paschall &
Hubbard, 1998).

Time, Money, and People Resources

In this paper, I use the term resource to refer to time, money or people. All

178

participants discussed multiple issues and challenges regarding the lack of adequate
resources they have for their schools. As shown in Figure 5.3, participants identified nine
resource related issues and challenges that they believe have a deleterious effect on their
leadership capacity, students, staff, and the efficient Operation of their schools. The nine
issues and challenges include: (1) their inability to manage and control their time; (2) old
school buildings in need of maintenance and repair; (3) addressing the multiple needs of
urban children; (4) maintaining an adequate custodial staff; (5) the need for school
finance reform that increases the amount of money for student instruction and school
operations; (6) additional classroom instructional technology; (7) the lack of gender-
based alternative schools for middle school students; (8) building principals not
authorized to have an assistant principal; and (9) the lack of ethnic textbooks.

Marietta, a high school principal, and Francis, the district director, both discussed
the issue and challenge of serving the multiple needs of urban students. In her case study
Marietta used the example of the district’s zero-tolerance policy and practice to argue that
one key difference between serving the needs of suburban versus urban children is the
degree of judgment that can and should be exercised at the school building level. Francis,
the district director of leadership training, confessed that during her 13 years as an
elementary school principal, she attempted to maintain an appropriate balance between
her teachers and support staff that she thought necessary and sufficient to meet the diverse

needs of her urban student population. She explained:

Myconceptwhen I wasaprincipal wasthatwe [herelementary school] wereafull-service agency
and all those things [support staff skills and capabilities] were available, and that's how I spent my
Titlelmoney. Ihadanurse, I hadafull-time socialworker,lhadafilll—timeattendaneeofficer. I
bought another day forthe psychologist. So, I didn't put my Title I money into supplies as much as
I put it into people. Yeah, people.

179

Figure 5.4 shows administrator, teachers and support staff personnel positions

participants said that they are authorized to have in their schools - assuming they have

adequate frmds. Based on my review of school personnel data supplied by eight of the

 

Figure 5.4: Urban school personnel classifications.

 

 

0 Curriculum leader
0 Cmrieulum coordinator

 

0 Art

0 Computer

0 Physical education
0 Home economics
0 Music

0 Literacy coach

 

Administrator Teachers Support staff

___Administmtor mm. W

classifications 0 Classroom teacher 0 Psychologist
0 Principal 0 Special education 0 Social Worker
0 Assistant principal a Special education aide 0 Nurse

0 Speech and Language Impaired
0 Guidance Counselor
Student and staff safety
0 Public Safety Officer
0 Crossing Guard

m
0 Food Service
- Noon hour aide-Lunchroom
Assistant
Transmrtation
0 Bus Driver
0 Bus Driver Special-Education
Assistant
Academic suppgrt
o Librarian
0 School Service Assistant
0 Education Technician

0 College graduate aide
Building maintenance

0 Engineer
0 Boiler Operator
0 Custodian

Administrative sgpmrt
o Secretary/Bookkeeper

 

 

Note: Personnel classifications derived from participant interviews.

 

participants I calculated that 33% of the total employees working in the eight schools are

support staff personnel, 62% are teacher resources and 5% are school administrators. The

percentage of support staff resources ranged fiem a low of 28% in Marietta’s 850 student

high school to a high of 53% in Mary's 587 student K-8 elementary school. Looking

across my participant’s schools, the teachers, as a percentage of total school staff, ranged

180

 

fiom 44% to 65%. Participants explained that the number of teachers in the school is
determined by the district based on grade level, class-size considerations and student
enrollment. Support staff positions however, are recommended and firnded by the district
but, as Francis indicated earlier, participants have limited amounts of categorical or grant
fund dollars that the principal can use to hire additional support staff personnel. Multiple
participants acknowledged that they do have limited flexibility to assess their school
support staff resource requirements and then attempt to serve the academic,
psychological, and physiological needs of students in their school - as best they can.

Case study research conducted at the Harvard Medical School emphasizes the
importance of having adequate support staff in schools located in an urban setting.
Research conducted by (Wright & Steinbach, 2001)) explored the rising trend in asthma
prevalence and severity among poverty level minority youth living in high risk m‘ban
neighborhoods. Wright's research findings suggest that youth who face persistent
exposure to street violence, domestic violence, or victimization in the form of threat or
actual physical assault may incur increased levels of stress that may increase their risk for
asthma - or exacerbate a preexisting asthma condition. Wright’s research findings serves
to illustrate and provide additional support for my fourth finding that the urban school
principals participating in the study must focus on a myriad of “nuts-and—bolts” issues and
challenges that are affecting their urban school.

Time Management Issue and Challenge

We see in Table 5.3 that time management was identified as a major issue and
challenge by all participants — including Francis the director of leadership training. All
participants indicated that the dynamic and unpredictable nature of the urban school

setting makes managing their time a major challenge. Francis was quick to point out that

181

time management training is included in the leadership training she provides for aspiring
and current school principals; however, fi'om her perspective the training has not helped
principals develop effective strategies or skills for managing their time. She explained
why time management training was such a challenge:

...fimemmagemeoraprhcipaLmdfimemmagemMasifsmuglumahrsmessclass,for
example, they collide. So we‘ve [the district] struggled with how to web that...because they’ll
[private sector] say shut your door and say, you know, for 30 minutes, nobody can botherme. Well,
if a [angry] parent walks in the door, and you don't come out, they're either gonna flip out, or they‘re
gonnagodowntownandsaythatprincipalwasinthereandwouldn‘topenthedoor. Imean,soit's
kindofasuuggle.AnddlafswhyIthmkmostofbeingaprineipalisinsfincfive. Ithinkit'sagift.
Thetraining [time management] canhelpyoubut...

Francis concluded:
TobeagoodlubanprincipaLyouhavetobeabletomultitask. Solagreewithwhatpeoplesay
about how, you know, it should be [flip it] but the reality of; you know, what we have, it is what we
have. It was very rare that I did paperwork during the day, [I only did] something that had to be
downtown. My paperwork got done after people left, because people were more important to me
thanpaper. Myschooldaywaslike,well,itwasusuallyfi'om7z30inthemorningtill7z30atnight,

youknow. lcouldgetalotofpaper...butldidn’tallowittointerfere,becauseIdiditatadifferent

time.

Leadership Preparation

My fifth finding is that leadership preparation in this urban school district is a
continuous process that includes six overlapping activities that help aspiring and
experienced principals acquire the knowledge, skills, and experience required to develop
and enhance their capacity for m'ban school leadership. Three supporting themes,
summarized in Figme 5.5, emerged as participants shared stories, artifacts and their
perception and understanding of the district’s preparation process input, activities, and
output. The first emergent theme suggests that the primary input to the preparation
process is participants who will have the time, money, and people resources their
elementary, middle, or high school requires. Second, the preparation process consists of

six overlapping activities that include personal reflection and self-assessment; school

182

leadership training; leadership opportunity and visibility; exposure to urban settings and

 

Figure 5.5: Urban school district leadership preparation process

 

Preparation process input:

0 Principals with time, money, and people resources their school requires
Preparation process overlapping activities:

0 Personal reflection and self-assessment

c School leadership training

0 Leadership opportunity and visibility

0 Exposure to urban settings and urban research

1- Mentoring

o On-the-job experiences in an urban school
Preparation process output:

I Principals with urban school leadership capacity

 

 

 

Source: Participant interviews, focus group, and case study analysis.

 

urban research; mentoring; and on-the-job experiences in an urban school. And third,
participants believe the primary output of the preparation process is principals with
leadership capacity necessary and sufficient to address the nuts-and-bolts issues and
challenges they will face in their urban schools.
Process Input of Time, Money, and People Resources

Unless urban principals are provided with adequate resources of time, money, and
people participants in this study believe a principal may be prepared to provide school
leadership but find it extremely difficult to do their job and to get the job done. In the

first column of Figure 5.3, participants cited specific examples of a lack of time, money,

183

or people resources having a negative effect on their ability to provide effective
leadership for their respective school. The nine specific resource issues and challenges
mentioned by participants included: (1) their inability to manage and control the amount
of time they devote to instructional leadership or school administration activities; (2) old
school buildings in need of constant maintenance and immediate repair; (3) the on-going
challenge and difficulty of addressing multiple needs of the children attending their
school; (4) the challenge of maintaining an adequate number of school support staff due
to declining student enrollment and school budget cuts; (5) the lack of significant reform
of Michigan’s current approach to school financing; (6) the need for additional classroom
instructional technology; (7) the lack of gender-based alternative schools for middle
school students; (8) the fact that some participants are not authorized to have an assistant
principal; and (9) the lack of an adequate quantity of ethnic textbooks.
First Process Activity Personal Reflection and Self-Assessment

During interviews each of the nine participants commented on the importance of
being introspective and honest with themselves about their reasons and motivations for
seeking the urban school principalship. Kathy, a middle school participant reflected on
her mental preparation for urban school leadership and confessed that making the
commitment to pursue an urban school principalship was just as important as her decision
to pursue a university degree in education. Her primary motivation for seeking the
principalship was, she said, "I really believed I could make the biggest impact in an urban
setting."

Mary, a K-8 principal, shared a similar story of personal reflection and
introspection regarding urban school leadership. She noted that during the 16 years she

worked as a classroom teacher and four years as an assistant principal, she developed an

184

understanding and appreciation for just how difficult and challenging it would be if she
were to become an urban school principal. It took her 20 years to finally get the principal
job, but now, after serving 16 years serving as an urban school principal Mary is
confident that she made the absolute right decision. Her advice to aspiring principals is to
assess and then reassess their personal aspirations and career goals before deciding to
become an urban school principal because, fi'om her perspective, "urban school leadership
is something you absolutely have to want to do."

In his case study, George, a high school principal admits that his strong sense of
personal responsibility to Afiican-American children and desire to play a professional
role in urban education are two key reasons he feels privileged to have had a 33 year
career in this urban district. In 1982 his mounting frustration with district politics,
excessive bureaucracy and low pay drove George to quit his teaching job in the district
and take a private sector job selling life insurance. George explained why it was not long

before he returned to his teaching job in the district:

Afterabordayear,lrealizedthatlreallymissedtheteachingpart,sol ...camebaekintoteaehing
school... forhalfthe money...butthelearerewardstheotherjob couldn'tprovide. Iwasfeeding
my family but.... People would ask me, Whatdo you do fora living? When I told them I was a
teacher,lwasproudofit...whenltoldthemlwasaninsuraneerep,itwasjustajob.Thatwas
reallywhatitwas. Sowhenlcamebackin 1983,1realizedthat,okay,l‘minforthe
dmationmthisiswhatl‘msupposedtodo.

Personal reflection and assessment is equally important for experienced urban
school principals. Henrietta is an excellent example. In her case study she explains that
taking stock and assessing her leadership style and capability against the leadership
requirements and needs of her urban high school was an activity that helped her better
understand how the "bottom-line focus" leadership style she had developed working in

the private sector was not appropriate for her high school staff. Henrietta said after

185

personal reflection she decided to modify her leadership style by, she said “slowing down
and taking time to stop and say, you know, you're doing a good job. . . and thank you."
Henrietta believes her personal reflection and self-assessment helped prepare her to be an
even better urban school leader.
Second Process Activity School Leadership Training

The second preparation activity participants mentioned was their training. The
consensus of all participants was the combination of university training, district
professional development, multiple in-service sessions, and Michigan recertification
training had done a good job of proving the data and knowledge they need to fimction as
an instructional and administrative school leadership. Ruby, a K-5 principal, has 26 total
years of service in the district and 4 years experience as a principal. From her perspective,
her ongoing training has helped her to develop and implement strategies that address a
wide range of both student and staff issues that could have negatively affected her K-5
elementary school. Ruby is one of the three elementary school principals participating in
this study that made AYP in 2005-2006 and the only participant that has consistently
achieved her AYP or other school improvement objectives for 13 years in a row.

Third Process Activity Leadership Opportunity and Visibility

Several participants emplmsized how important it was for them to have had the
opportunity to be the leader of a school work-group, school-wide project, or district '
program while they were still a teacher, on district stafl‘, or an assistant principal. The key
point made by several participants was how important it is for aspiring principals to
demonstrate that they Imve the confidence, ability, and leadership skills required to get a
group of people - who may or may not report directly to you - to focus on and

successfully complete a task or achieve a common objective. In addition, aspiring

186

principals should welcome the opportunity to learn from their leadership mistakes,
recover from unexpected obstacles, and deal with the inevitable political issues that will
arise in an urban school building or district as different parties attempt to satisfy their
diverse needs and personal self-interest.

Demonstrating leadership ability and meeting or exceeding expected results can
result in positive visibility within the district and help to launch or accelerate the career of
an aspiring principal. In her case study Henrietta explained how her success leading
several projects while she was a teacher and later on district staff gained her positive
visibility both within the district and with the Governor of Michigan. She believes her
promotion to high school principal was due in large part to her project success,
demonstrated team leadership, and consistently producing positive results. While it took
Henrietta 13 years to get promoted to principal, it took George 26 years to get his
promotion to principal. The similarity, and the irony, is that George is convinced that the
primary reason he was finally promoted was the successful implementation of a high-
visibility project that resulted in a drastic reduction of student absence within the high
school where he was a math and computer science teacher. George gained district-wide
visibility when his approach was implemented in many other schools within the district.
In 1994 George was promoted to assistant principal and in 2003, was selected from the
principal eligibility list, interviewed by the principal selection committee of his current
high school, and was selected to be principal.

In his case study George advises aspiring principals that being trained and
prepared for urban school leadership and getting your name on the eligibility list is
simply not enough. He advises aspiring principals tint ”getting positive visibility and

making your mark on the distriCt" is an effective way to increase the odds of getting an

187

interview with a principal for an assistant principal position or an interview with a
selection committee for school principal. From his perspective, the key is to take full
advantage of opportunities to "visibly" demonstrate your ability to lead school change and
deliver positive results.
Fourth Process Activity Exposure to Urban Settings and Urban Research

The third component of preparation in this district is daily exposure to a variety of
urban school settings and professional development sessions centered on urban school
research. This theme began to emerge when two participants, Daniel, a middle school
principal and George, a high school principal, discussed how their exposure to multiple
grade levels - middle school and high school - had helped prepare them to develop
strategies and programs that they believe will help middle school students get off to a fast
academic start in high school. George for example, discussed the one-week transition and
orientation program he and his four assistant principals were conducting during the
summer of 2006 for all ninth grade students coming into his high school. Daniel, the
middle school principal, is taking a different approach to the issue of ninth graders
transitioning to high school. Based on his review of mban school research that examined
the outcome and results of single gender schools for African-American urban students-
especially African-American boys - George has developed and submitted a proposal and
recommendation that the district establish a single gender alternative school for middle
school students. In his case study I quote Daniel as saying, "we have alternative high
schools in urban areas but the problems we see kids experiencing they don‘t just start in
the ninth grade."

A good example of research helping to prepare participants for urban school

leadership is provided by George in his case study when he discusses research that

188

invested teaching and student learning in an urban school setting. Based on his research
(Schlechty, 2002) concludes that the primary role and responsibility of urban teachers and
urban school principals are to provide engaging classroom instruction and insist that all
student participate in learning experiences that are academically rigorous and relevant to
the current environment and future aspirations of each urban student. Using Schlechty’s
research as his touch-stone, George shared in his case study that he is implementing a
strategy and plan in his high school to increase the "academic rigor and relevance" of the
classroom instruction all of his teachers provide for the 1000 students that attend his
urban high school.
F iflh Process Activity Mentoring

Mentoring was the fourth preparation component to emerge. Each participant
discussed how mentoring hand helped increase or improve their leadership skills,
knowledge or career within the district. Because this urban district does not have a formal
mentoring program for aspiring principals the mentoring participants received was based
on informal relationships that participants had established and maintained throughout
their careers. For instance Marietta, a high school principal, insists that the majority of
her high school administration and operations skills and knowledge are the result of
informal mentoring she received while working for the same high school principal for 15
years as his assistant principal. Another high school principal, Henrietta, explained that
she did have a formal mentor during the 12 years she worked in the private sector before
joining leaving that company to start her career in 1990 as abusiness teacher inthis urban
school district. After joining the district Henrietta feels she was fortrmate and spiritually
blessed as a new teacher to develop and be able to maintain an informal mentoring

relationship with her building principal. Her mentor, Henrietta says, has remained

189

actively involved throughout Henrietta’s career by (1) teaching her small and large group
communication skills; (2) helping her to improve her school leadership knowledge and
skills; (3) assigning her to high visibility projects that have helped to accelerate and
advance her career; and (4) actively supporting Henrietta’s promotions to higher levels of
school and district level responsibilities - up to and including Henrietta’s nomination and
selection in 2005 as principal of her current high school.

Each participant shared wonderful stories and memories of the mentoring they had
received from a variety of mentors. Mentoring, for example, they had received from past
principals they had worked for, new principal cohort group members, or educational
professionals working in the private sector who are working with the district on a
consultative basis. The five participants that had the opportunity to attend the district’s
assistant principal leadership training program that began in 2003 all commented on the
value of the informal mentoring they had received from Francis, the district director of
leadership training who runs the training program. Participants were unanimous in their
belief that informal mentoring is an effective method for improving an aspiring
principal’s leadership skills, knowledge and preparation for tu'ban school principalship.

Sixth Process Activity On-the-Job Experience in an Urban School

The fifth principal preparation component participants identified is on-the-job
experience. Although I discuss it as the seventh and last component in the district
principal preparation process all participants believe it is perhaps the most important and
valuable component of their leadership preparation. Marietta, for example, believes 15
years of on-the-job experience as a high school assistant principal made her a much better
high school principal. She also believes 15 years as an assistant principal was too long.

From her perspective she is convinced she was well qualified and prepared for the job

190

long before she was promoted into the job. The most important ingredients of an urban
school leadership preparation process, Marietta believes, are university training, on-the-
job training, mentoring, and lots of on-the-job experience. She said in her case study:

People do need to get that university training... they need to get that. And then they need to have

something like a student teaching experience in an urban school. Once they getthat experience...

thenputtheminapraeewhoethereisarenrmemor,somebodywho'sbeenexpoeedmnrrmaeis
about the job. So, you know... they get that field-based experience.

The question of how much experience is enough, how long does it take to prepare a
principal for urban school leadership, and should mentoring be formalized or remain
informal in this urban district or all important questions — but, unfortrmately, well beyond
the scope of this research.

Primary Process Output is Urban School Leadership Capacity

The primary output of the district leadership preparation process is principals with
the leadership capacity necessary and sufficient to address the nuts-and—bolts issues and
challenges of their urban school (see Table 5.3 and Figure 5.3). Linda Lambert (2005)
notes that "educators use the term ‘leadership capacity’ as an organizational concept
meaning broad based, skillful participation in the work of leadership that leads to lasting
school improvement" (P.38). A different interpretation of leadership capacity is offered
by Richard Elmore (2000) who argues that the school principal must have the leadership
capacity to perform two key functions. First, the leadership capacity to guide and coach
classroom teachers as they provide classroom instruction at the "technical core" of the
school. And second, the capacity to manage and control the administrative and
operational "structures and processes arormd instruction" that provide teachers and
students with a ”buffer" of protection from “outside inspection, interference. . . and [shield

teachers and students fi'om] dealing with disruptions inside and outside the system" (p.7).

191

Participants in this study did not use the term leadership capacity when responding
to my interview question regarding the attributes and characteristics of an outstanding
urban school leader. Instead, in their case studies, participants talked in terms of the
knowledge, skills, resources, and experience an urban principal must have in order to be
effective in what participants believe are six major categories of urban school leadership.
The six categories include: (1) implementing strategies that educate urban children; (2)
active participation in urban school leadership preparation; (3) meeting urban school
stakeholder expectations; (4) minimizing the effects of external forces on urban students
and school staff; (5) addressing multiple needs of urban children; and (6) demonstrating
professional and personal commitment to urban education.

Based on participant case study comments regarding principal performance
evaluations and my review of the district’s school principal evaluation form, my seventh
finding is that, as shown in Figure 5.6, principals in this urban district are measured,
assessed, evaluated, and receive performance feedback on only three out of the six
categories of school leadership capacity participants believe are necessary to be an
effective urban school principal. For example, in the first category - implementing
strategies that educate urban children - a principal’s capacity for instructional leadership
is assessed and evaluated based on student scores on standardized tests, AYP results, and
staff professional development activities that have occurred during the school year. In
this same category, a participant’s capacity for school administration and operations is
assessed based on financial audit results; timely submission of reports; procedural
efficiency; progress towards school improvement goals; maintaining a clean and safe
school building; emergency procedure documentation and practice drills; and

implementation of student discipline according to the district code of student conduct. In

192

 

Figure 5.6: Urban school principal leadership capacity

 

Principal leadership capacity being assessed and evaluated:

1. lrnplement strategies that educate urban children

instructional leadership academic rigor and relevance

school administration and operations -management and procedures
allocation of time, money, and people resources

grade level nuanced solutions elementary, middle, high school

2. Active participation in urban school leadership preparation
0 mentor aspiring principals
0 staff mentoring
o peer mentoring
o principal’s professional development

3. Meet urban school stakeholder expectations

students — test scores and academic achievement

parents — communication and relationships

staff — performance evaluations and professional development
boss — produce results

community — interaction and partnerships

Principal leadership capacity not being assessed or evaluated:

4. Minimize effects of external forces on urban students and school staff

family - family structure, value for education

poverty - rmderemployment, unemployment, generational poverty
class, race, ethnicity and gender — systemic societal issues
neighborhood — property values, abandoned homes

urban setting - crime, drugs, violence, victimization

lack of resources - declining student enrollment, school finance reform

5. Address multiple needs of urban school children

special education - eleven categories in IDEA 1997

psychological —stress, trauma, victimimtion

physiological — sex education, health screening, lunch programs, safety
social - negations, mediation, communication, conflict resolution
growth - nurturing, self-actualimtion, life skills

future —- high school graduation, college, dreams, aspirations

6. Demonstrate professional and personal commitment to urban education
0 urban school principalship - average 30 years working in urban schools
0 education organimtions - active membership
0 action research - best practice implementation, sharing results

 

 

Source: Participant interviews and case studies and research literature review.

 

193

 

the second category, entitled active participation in urban school leadership preparation,
school principals are evaluated and assessed based on assistant principal participation in
professional development, providing mentoring opportunities for school staff, and active
participation in school principal professional development sessions.

In the third category participants are assesses and evaluated on his or her ability to
meet or excwd the expectations of key stakeholders in their school. For instance, student
test scores may be used to determine if student expectations for academic achievement
are met. Parent expectations could be assessed based on how well the school principal
provided timely commrmications and maintained positive relations with parents.
Documentation of professional development activities and completed performance
evaluations could be used to assess and evaluate how well the principal is meeting the
expectations of the school staff. The principal’s boss expects the building principal to
address and resolve issues and challenges that arise in the school and only escalate to the
district executive level when necessary or appropriate. The principal’s boss also expects
no negative stories about the school will appear on TV or in the newspaper. The local
urban community is a major stakeholder in each of their urban schools and expects school
principals to establish effective partnerships and maintain positive interactions with
parents, businesses, institutions and community-based organizations.

Assuming my analysis of participant interview data and case studies is correct, it
appears principals in this district are only being assessed, evaluated, and receiving
feedback on the first three leadership capacity categories shown in Figure 5.6: (1)
implementing strategies that educate urban children; (2) active participation in urban
school leadership preparation; and (3) meeting urban school stakeholder expectations.

Unfortunately, principals may not be receiving performance evaluation feedback in the

194

three categories of leadership capacity shown in the bottom of Figure 5.6 that each of my
participants believe are critical for effective urban school leadership: (4) minimizing the
effects of external forces on urban students and school staff; (5) addressing the multiple
needs of m'ban school children; and (6) demonstrating their personal and professional
commitment to urban education.
Capacity to Minimize the Eflects of External Forces

As shown above in Figure 5.6, six external forces of family, poverty, class and
race, neighborhood, urban setting, and lack of school resources are included in the
capacity category of minimizing the effects of external forces on students and school
staff. Individually and collectively these six diverse and overlapping exterml forces can
make it extremely difficult for an urban school principal to serve the multiple needs of
their students. For example, an urban school principal must have the capacity to help
students who may be underachieving in the classroom due to the stress of family
homelessness, a nontraditional family structure, family members incarcerated in prison,
or extended family members who have a low level of education and cannot effectively
commrmicate or visibly demonstrate the value or benefits of getting a good education.

Multiple researchers (Kozol, 1991; Payne, 2005) have explored the detrimental
effects poverty can have on the maturation and educational experiences of urban children
struggling to survive in a family environment where underemployment, chronic
unemployment, or generational poverty is the norm. In this particular mban school
district in March of 2008 the percentage of unemployed Afiican-American adults is more
than three times the national percentage of 5.2% unemployed workers in the United
States. One reason the external force of unemployment has a disproportionate effect on

African Americans is that high percentage of African-Americans who live in this urban

195

community. The primary causes of the high unemployment are major downturns in local
industry revenues and massive job layoffs as businesses in Michigan attempt to survive.
The high percentage of African—Americans living in this urban community are reflected in
the student population. My participants estimate that 87% of the 5,821 students enrolled
in their nine schools are African-American and 82% qualify for free and reduced lunch
(see Table 3.1 in Chapter 3). This high percentage of Afiican-Americans student is one
reason why the majority of my participants believe socio-economic class is more of an
external force on their students then race, ethnicity, or gender. Several participants make
the point in their case study that, from their perspective, children who have similar
socioeconomic backgrounds will likely exhibit similar classroom behavior and a similar
value for education - whether they attend an urban, suburban or rural public school.

The majority of my participants provided vivid examples of their leadership
capacity to deal with the mostly negative external forces exerted by their local school
neighborhood on the teaching and learning activities of students and staff in their
respective school. For example, each participant commented or shared stories about the
prevalence, proliferation and potential hazards of burned buildings, abandoned homes,
unsafe structures, drug houses in close proximity to their school building, and the daily
exposure of their students to these highly visible structures each day as they journeyed to
and hem school. In several instances, participants told stories or actions they were forced
to take in an attempt to decrease the potentially harmful affects these neighborhood
hazards might have on students or school staff.

Thelasttwo external forcesinthiscategory-them'bansettingandlackof
resources - are inextricably linked together by the continuing decline in student

enrollment across the entire school district. In Michigan the per-pupil funding provided

196

by the state of Michigan flows directly to the school district where the student is enrolled.
From my participants perspective the dramatic decrease in student enrollment and school
district financial resources that has been occurring over the past 40 or 50 years appears to
have accelerated over the past 10 or 15 years. As a result, my participants confided that
their students and school staff have been affected by significant cuts in district support
services, school closures, school mergers, relocation to different schools within the
district, and mandatory reduction of teacher and support staff personnel. School principals
afl‘ected by the decline in student enrollment have been reassigned to other schools,
accepted district staff support assignments, gone back into the classroom a teacher, or
retired from their chosen profession.
Capacity to Address Multiple Needs of Urban School Children

Urban principals must have the resources, knowledge, skills, and experience to
address multiple needs of the urban children attending their elementary, middle, or high
school. As shown in Figure 5.6, principals having leadership capacity in this fifth
category would attempt to address each student’s need for (l) special-education for l 1
different classifications of disability defined by the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act Amendment ( IDEA) of 1997; (2) psychological services for stress,
trauma, or victimization; (3) physiological support services for sex education, food
programs, vision, dental, and health screening; (4) socialization skills for negotiations,
mediation, communication, and conflict resolution; (5) personal growth focusing on
maturation, self-actualization, gender roles and responsibilities, and life skills; and (6)
each student planning for the future based on their dreams and aspirations afier high
school or college graduation. Detailed discussions of programs, approaches, or services

that might be appropriate for each of these areas of student need are outside the scope of

197

this paper, however, each of the nine participant case studies in Chapter 4 do provide
examples of how my participants are attempting to address the unique needs of their
students.

For example, similar to her peers, Mary's approach to addressing the multiple needs
of her 587 students appears to be based on her allocation of teaching and support staff
resources. In her case study she provides insight into her rationale and approach for
resource allocation by explaining that the 94 personnel working in her K—8 school
includes 41 teachers, 50 support specialist, and three school administrators. Twenty one
(22%) of her staff are regular classroom teachers; sixteen (17%) are special-education
teachers for aides; and three (3%) are school administrators — an assistant principal, a
curriculum leader, and herself as building principal. The fifty four (55%) support staff
personnel roles and responsibilities in her school includes psychologist, social worker,
language impaired, guidance counselor, food service, building engineer, and custodian.
In her case study Mary disclosed her rationale for staff allocation and explained why she

has more support staff and administrators than teachers on her school staff:

Thesociologicalneedsofthechildren,Iamnotgoingtosaytheyoutweightheacademicneeds,but
theyareextremelyimportant. lknowit'ssomethingtlntpeopledon‘tliketohearbeeausetheysay
thaturbanadministlatorsareusingitasanexcuse. Iabsohrtelybelieveallchildrencarrlearnl
thriveonthat.Butlalsoknowthatthcnegativesociologiealfactorsthatimpactfamilieshavea
directbearingonhowaschoolfirnctions.

In his case study Daniel explained that 100% of his 652 students are Afiican-
American, 81% qualify for the fiee and reduced lunch program, and that the percentages
of students in his school that require special-education services are perhaps twice the 13%
district average. Daniel also made it clear that (1) his middle school is already in AYP

phase 5 restructuring and (2) serving the special-education needs of his 6—8 middle school

198

students is one of his top priorities. Research conducted by (Dentith & Frattura, 2004)
highlights the focus and accountability No Child Left Behind (NCLB) places on school
principals to address the special-education needs of urban students. In their research they

comment that:

Moreover, since the enactment of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the reauthorintion of

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) the necessity of inclusion has been even more

consistently legislated. The NCLB legislation clearly delineating the inclusion of even children with

disabilities, academically at-risk, and those with English as a second lmguage must be assessed and
provided instruction through content-licensed personnel.
Daniel shared that his strategy for addressing the special-education needs of his students
involves reallocating his school staff resources and developing and enhancing his
capacity for providing special-education leadership within his school.

After receiving permission from the district, Daniel reallocated his school staff so
that 40 (38%) are regular education teachers; 26 (26%) are special-education teachers or
aides; 30 (31%) provide a variety of stafl‘ support services; and six (6%) are in school
administrator positions. It is interesting to note the contrast between Mary, who we
learned in an earlier paragraph, has 587 students that attend her K-8 school and 16 (17%)
of her 94 school staff personnel are special-education teachers or aides versus the 26
(26%) special-education resources Daniel has allocated for his school. The dramatic
difference in school resource allocation serves to highlight the importance of each urban
school principal having the knowledge, skills, experience, and resoru'ces to address the
unique needs of their urban students.

Anne Price (2008) notes that IDEA legislation passed in 1997 lists 11 separate
disability categories: mental retardation; hearing impairments (including deafness);

speech or language impairments; visual impairments (including blindness; serious

199

emotional disturbance; autism; traumatic brain injury; orthopedic impairments (physical
impairments; other health impairments; specific learning disabilities; or developmental
delay (p.2). The following warning posted by Price is particularly appropriate for Daniel
and other urban school principals who may have little or no special-education training but
are required by NCLB and their district’s practices of inclusion or mainstreaming to
provide site-based leadership for special-education activities and services within their
school:

Thedisabilitiesarebasedonwhatissometimesreferredtoas“educationaldiagnosis”asopposedto
a“medical diagnosis”. Thismeansthatthecriteriaforspecialeducationmaybedifferentthan
diagrrosticcriteriaforthemedicalormentalhealthprofessiomThisisoftenconfmingtopmentsand
doctors, psychologists and others not familiar with the criteria necessary for special education.

Daniel is convinced that he and his entire teaching staff - both regular and special-
education teachers - would benefit fiom special-education in-service training that would
improve their skills and leadership capacity to assess, diagnose and understand which of
his 652 students need, or do not need, special-education services and support. In his case
study Daniel explained why he believes special-education training is an important first
Mephmmfinngaddressmcissueachallengeamdwsoumenwdsofhisspwial
education students:

This whole special ed piece... training would help. Students who have been misdiagnosed or who
areborderline,howdowerecognizethosestudents? Wehadaworkshopyesterday... focusingon
students exhibitingthe same types of behaviors as kids in special-ed but the parents refused to sign
the documents. How do we in-service teachers who have been teaching [for] 25, 30 years, but who
don‘t understand what inclusion means. ..don‘t know how you reach that populatirm of youngsters...
howtodoalessonplanthatwouldallowthemto...getthestudartsstartedandpullacoupleofkids
outtogivethemsomeadditionaloneonone? IfIweremorelmowledgeableabouthowthat'sdoneI
couldprovidetlratto my staff... when there wasaneed.
Wemaynotbeabletotapintospecial-educationfimdingbecausethestudentshavenotbeen
diagnosed... butflrereareotherresourcesoutthere. Wecouldpossiblyreduceclass sizesina
couple ofareas... toprovidemoreone-on-one instruction... butwhenyou've got 32 kidsandone
teacher, there'snoway...notawhole lot oftime youcandevotetooneortwo rndrvrdualswhoneed
more time than you‘re able to give them. Or, their parents don‘t want the stigma. Or, in some
instances,parentshaveagreedtohavethemplaced,buttheytestedalittlebitabovetheareathat
wouldallowthemtomeivetheservices.Alotofdresekidshavenotbeendiagnosedandthcy‘re

200

sitting there, and they're failing.

Professional and Personal Commitment to Urban Education

As shown in the sixth category of Figure 5.6 three themes emerged from participant
case studies to help validate and provide convincing evidence of my participant’s
individual and collective commitment to urban education. For example, strong evidence
of their collective commitment is the fact that, as shown in Table 5.1, their years of
service ranges from Henrietta's 14 years to Roberts 40 years of service - with a group
average of 30 years working in this urban school district. With 29 years of service in the
district, George testified to his personal and professional commitment when he shared the
following story of why, at one point in his career, he left urban education and, equally
important, why he returned:

I knew I wanted to work with our [African-American] kids, and.. I loved the classroom. To me it
was the best job I couldever have cuz it was enjoyable and, you know, the rewards were right there.
...all of these youngsters coming to you for the content, and that role model piece. I felt uplifted by
that...l loved it. But, I didn't feel like I'd influence enough children in the course of a year... only
165 kids ayear... that's as many as youcantouch... so I felt limited. In addition, I was so disgusted
with the [district] bureaucracy, the polities we couldn‘t make a change. So the opportunity came
to leave... andthe money was better... so I left... sold insurancemandmade aboutdouble whatl
wasmakingasateacher.

Afteraboutayear,lrealizedthatlreallymisstheteachingpartsol ...camebackinto
teaching school... forhalfthe money...buttherearerewardstheotherjob couldn't provide. Iwas
feeding my family but.... People would ask me, What (hi you do for a living? When I told them I
wasateacher,lwasproudofit...whenltoldthemlwasininsurancerep,itwasjustajob.Tlntwas
reallywhatitwas. Sowhenlcamebackin1983,Irealizedthat,okay,l'minfortheduration...this
iswhatl‘msupposedtodo.

Active membership in educational, community based, state-wide, or national
organizations provided additional evidence of my participants’ personal and professional
commitment to both urban education and their urban community. During one-on-one
interviews participants discussed or provided documentation of their active participation

in: the Optimist Club; Michigan Reading Council; the Professional Women's Network;

201

church music and choir director; NAACP; Urban League; Boy Scout urban scouting
program; National Association Of Black School Educators; board member of the
Michigan Association Of Secondary School Principals; board member a community
Ashelter for battered women; church affiliated prison ministry and literacy program;
president of a national women's organization; Phi Delta Kappa; Michigan Elementary
And Middle School Principals Association; Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development; Michigan Alliance For Leadership Development; Business Professionals
Of America adviser; member of the North Central accreditation steering committee.

The third theme providing support for my participants’ capacity for personal and
professional commitment to urban education were stories they shared regarding the
implementation educational past practice and sharing results. For example, George and
Henrietta have both implemented and shared the results of transition programs they have
implemented to help middle school students acclimate and integrate into their respective
high school. In his case study George explained that based on his objective of finding a
way to smooth a student’s transition from middle school to high school, and get his ninth
graders off to a fast start, he said, ”I'm trying a different kind of orientation with my ninth
graders." He then explained:

Thedisnictwantsustogivethemanorientationontheacademicsmfi‘... butmyninthgradersare
fallingoffthepath forbelurvioralreasons, forthe mostpartalackofrefirsal skills. Howtotellthat
kid, no, I don‘t want that marijuana. No, I'm not gonna skip. Or, no, I‘m not going to do premarital
sex this early in my life. They just aren't getting those skills. I'm running the orientation [one-week
during the summer] like a seminar, a little video, question and answer, stand and deliver. My intent
isformeandmy fornassistantprincipalstoestablishme—on—onerelafionshipswifllm lOOkids
each. At the end ofthat week there'll be 100 kids that feel like they know the principal and 100 kids
that feel like they know an assistant principal. So, when they come [start high school in the fall] they
don'tfeelabandoned. Ifyoulookatom'statsfiheonesthatarefallingoffthemarkandnot
graduating on time, the damage is done in the ninth grade, their first year of high school. They’re
supposed to come out ofthe ninth grade with 60 hours... ifthey come out with 45, you know, I’m
losingthebattle. But iflcangetthemtowalkoutoftheninthgradewith60hours,anddevelopa
workrnan's Iflreapproachtoacquirhrgmeducafion,mdknowingthattheyhaveapmtmplay,

202

While George is focused on improving his high school graduation rate up from an
estimated 66% Henrietta is confident that helping her ninth graders have a smooth
transition and get off to a fast start in high school can help her maintain or improve her
current 98% high school graduation rate. In addition to helping with academic
performance, Henrietta is hopeful that a smooth transition can help improve student
behavior and reduce the growing number of discipline issues she and her staff had to deal

with. In her case study Henrietta said:

We've transitioned into a new building, and because of that we've had some serious issues with
discipline. Students transitioned from a very small portable wit to a huge building and all of a
sudden, it's like, whoa it's party time. I guess it's just like moving them to a college campus. . you
have allthis fieedom andopenspaceandtheyhaveasensethatnow letmejusttryanyand
everything. I have a discipline log that’s probably that thick of students.

During the summer of 2006, Henrietta and her staff planed to conduct a four-week
transition and orientation program for all of her ninth grade students. The program will
be based on "four pillars" that Henrietta believes will provide a solid foundation for her
ninth graders success in high school: (1) behavior expectations based on the district
student Code of Conduct; (2) character education to discuss "specific character traits that
we value. . . and expect to see. . . like respect, responsibility and achievement"; (3) hands-
on orientation to introduce the new technology tools and techniques students will be using
in the fall; and (4) high school academic expectations and requirements. The primary
objective of the transition orientation program, Henrietta said, is to, ”You know, get them
inthebuilding,talktothem, andgetthemusedto someofthe staffmemberssowhen
they are arriving the first day, they're well-prepared to get started."

Despite the difference in duration of one wake versus four weeks both George and

Henrietta are personally and professionally committed to achieving the same outcome

203

objectives - improving the high school graduation rate of their urban students. George
and Henrietta both confided that they had gotten the idea for a middle school to high
school transition program while listening to an urban school principal present both the
results and the failures of the transition program he had attempted in his urban high
school located in state. Based on their personal and professional commitment to
improving urban education both George and Henrietta brought the idea back to their
respective teaching and support staffs and eventually developed a transition program that
their school action team members believe is appropriate for their urban school climate
and urban schools students.

My deep concern is that without the benefit of performance feedback and
improvement coaching in all six categories, principals in this district may miss the
opportunity to develop or enhance their capacity in leadership categories that are just as
important - maybe more important for some urban children - than the three leadership
capacities that it appears are being evaluated. Fortunately, my cross-case analysis of
participant case studies suggest that the district leadership preparation process has
intentionally, or perhaps unintentionally, provided the opportunity for each participant to
develop critically needed knowledge, skills, and experience in all six categories of
leadership capacity.

Leadership Preparation Process and Leadership Capacity Outcome Matrix
Earlier in this chapter we saw in Figure 5.5 that personal reflection and self-
assessment; school leadership training; leadership opportunity and visibility; exposure to
urban settings and urban research; mentoring; and on-the-job—experience are key activities

within the district leadership preparation process. A critical assumption is that these six

overlapping activities are essential to the development of the leadership skills, knowledge

204

and opportunities required to develop and enhance the leadership capability and capacity
of aspiring and new urban school principals. Said another way, the district leadership
preparation process can help provide aspiring, new, and experienced principals with the
knowledge, skills, opportunities, and resources required to develop and enhance a process
participant's capacity in the six urban school leadership categories shown in Figure 5.6:
implementing strategies that educate urban children; active participation in mban school
leadership preparation; meetings urban school stakeholder expectations; minimizing the
effects of external forces; addressing multiple needs of urban children; and demonstrating
professional and personal commitment to urban education.

The process outcome matrix (see Patton, 2002, p.477) depicted by Figure 5.7,
indicates how the six preparation process activities shown in the first row of the figure
can help principals achieve the desired process outcomes of skills, knowledge, and
opportunity and visibility they will need to develop and continually enhance their
capacity for urban school leadership. In this urban district critical school resoru'ces of time
money people shown in the last column of Figure 5.7 are strongly influenced, tightly
controlled, or allocated to each school principal by the district. In the first column of
Figure 5.7 I show the six categories of urban school leadership capacity previously
discussed in Figure 5.6. An ‘X’ in an intersecting cell indicates a positive relationship
between that process outcome and a category of leadership capacity. For example, row
six indicates that principals need skills, knowledge, money, and people to develop the

capacity to minimize the effects of external forces on urban students and school staff.

205

 

Figure 5.7: Urban school principal leadership preparation process and leadership capacity

outcome matrix

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Training - Training - Reflection - Time
- Mentoring - Mentoring and self- - Money
Preparation process activities >' On-the-job ' Exposure to Essessment ' People
. experience urban setting - xposure to
and resources (See F lgure 5. (OIE) and urban urban settings
research and urban
- OJE research
- Mentoring
Leadership preparation I\ Skills Knowledge Opporttmity Adequate
process outcomes: > and visibility resources
Urban school principal
leadership capacity
requirements
(See Flare 5.6) 7
V x = time,
I. Implement strategies that educate X X X money, and
urban children. people
2. Active participation in urban school X X
leadership preparation
X = time,
3. Meet urban school stakeholder X X X money and
expectations people
X = money
4. Minimize effects of external forces X X and people
on m'ban students and school staff
X = time,
5. Address multiple needs of urban X X X money and
schoolchildren people
6. Demonstrate professional and X X X X = time

personal commitment to urban

education

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Participant interviews, case studies and related research.

 

206

 

Leadership Programs

In this section I discuss my eighth and final research finding, which argues that
school leadership training and preparation offered by my participants’ urban school
district, universities, and a private sector organization New Leaders for New Schools,
have significant differences in their leadership training and preparation activities,
structure, and outcome objectives. In Figure 5.8 the major activities, structure, and
outcome objectives of the three program providers are summarized and serve as a frame
of reference for discussing (1) each program and (2) what I believe are major similarities
or differences in each of the three different approaches to leadership training and
preparation.

The data and information contained in Figure 5.8 was derived from a variety of
sources. For example, participant interviews and case study analysis helped clarify and
explain the leadership training program and career-long preparation process in my
participants’ urban school district My lmderstanding of university educational leadership
programs was improved by a wide variety of research literature related to university
program curriculum; course content; leadership standards; principal certification; internal
and external university pressures; university program assessment and critiques; school
principal role and responsibilities; and urban school leadership requirements (Anderson,
1991; Atkin & House, 1980; Bruss, 1986; Cleveland State University, 2003; College of
Education at Michigan State University, 2007; Cuban, 2001; Cusick, 1992; Davis et al.,
2005; Eikenberry, 1930; Fenwick & Pierce, 2002; Hale & Moorman, 2003; Hess & Kelly,
2005; Hoyle, English, & Steffy, 1998; Jackson, 2005; Kottkamp & Orr, 2005; Lashway,
2002, 2003b; Levine, 2005; J. Murphy, 2003; National Center for Education Information,

2003; Norton, 2002; B. S. Portin, 2000; Thomson, 1993; UCEA et al., 2005; Wolcott,

207

1973; Michelle D Young et al., 2005). And last, data and information related to the New
Leaders for New Schools (NLNS) private sector program was harvested from multiple
research studies, program reports, and several websites of urban school districts where the
NLNS program has been implemented (Baltzell, 1983; Boysen, 1992; Carlin, 1992;
Center on Education Policy, 2005; Cuban, 2004; Delpit, 1995; Edmonds, 1979; P.
Hallinger, 1992; Hill & Celio, 1998; Kimball & Sirotnik, 2000; Lipman, 1998; Memphis
City Schools, 2005; National College for School Leadership, 2004a; New Leaders for
New Schools, 2005; New Leaders for New Schools, 2006; G. Orfield et al., 2003;
Osterman & Sullivan, 1994; Shen et al., 2000; U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
Data extracted from the U.S. Department of Education (2004) Innovations in Education:
Innovative Pathways to School Leadership report allowed me to create the concise
summary of key aspects of the NLNS program shown in Figure 2.3 in Chapter 2 of this
report.
Urban District Training Program and Preparation Process

Activities: In the previous section of this paper, I discuss the fact that leadership
training and preparation in my participants’ urban school district is not a program - it is
an ongoing process that employs the six genres of leadership preparation activities shown
in the first row of Figure 5.8. The six activities are personal reflection and self-
assessment; leadership training; leadership opportunity and visibility; exposure to tuban
setting and urban research; mentoring; and on-the-job experience. Collectively the six
leadership preparation activities constitute a career-long process to train and prepare (1)
teachers who aspire to become an assistant principal, (2) assistant principals who aspire to
the principalship, and (3) experienced principals attempting to enhance their leadership
capacity.

208

 

Figure 5.8: Program and process activities, structure, and outcome objectives of three
different providers of K-12 school leadership training and preparation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Training and
preparation Activities Structure Outcome objectives
provider
Personal reflection Continuous career-long Develop and enhance K-l2 school
and self-assessment process - no process owner leadership knowledge, skills,
Surdy experience, and capacity
participants 12 month leadership Key activities are -
K-12 urban training program “loosely-coupled” Prepare participants to be urban
school elementary, middle or high school
district School leadership Participant responsible for assistant or building principal
leadership opportunity and his/her active participation
training visibility Assistant principal candidates
program and Candidate selection interview with school principal
preparation Exposure to urban criteria, screening and
process settings and urban assessment coordinated by Principal candidates entered into
research director leadership training eligibility pool
Mentoring Cohort groups Principal candidates interview
On-the-job urban No participation fee committee
school experience
Training 2 to 7 year advanced Graduation with MA, Bd.S. Ed.D.
University 0 Teaching degree program or Ph.D.
K-lZ school 0 Administration
leadership . Leadership Core curriculum and Education theory
training . policy cognate courses
programs Research methods
K-12 urban, Cohort swims
suburban, or rural Satisfy urban, rural, or suburban
school internship Student tuition fee district degree requirements
Four phase candidate 12 month program Placement as principal or assistant
assessment principal and commit to stay in
NewLeaders Candidateselection thatmbandisu'ictfor3-Syears
for New Persom reflection criteria and screening
Schools Will prepare traditional and non-
(NLNS) Training University leadership traditional candidates from outside
' 0 Localuniversity classesinadditionto ofeducationformbanschool
sectorK-12 0 Urban school 6week universitysurnmer leadership
principal . Field based Graduates satisfy prom
training training 12 month internship completion criteria
program and . Problem—based
preparation in case study School leadership Graduates satisfy district and state
process , Action research performance standards principal certification
requrrements
(See Figure Formalmentoring CohortgroupreceivesZto
2.3in . Coaching Syearsofcohortsupport Programassessmentandfeedback
Chapter 2 for
more details) On -the-j ob urban District, university, and 3 to 5 year program delivery
schoolexperience privatesectorpartnership conn'actwitheachmbandistrict
authentic I g No participation fee Nonprofit objectives

 

 

Source: Participant interviews, case studies and litelamre review.

 

209

 

Structure: Candidates for the urban district leadership training program are
nominated by the person to whom they report. Participants in the program pay no fee to
participate in the training but are required to actively participate and learn together in
cohort groups. It is important to note that the leadership preparation process is not a
formal, rigidly structured process. As a result, each participant in the preparation process
must be proactive and aggressive as they create and then take advantage of opportunities
to engage in the six preparation activities. The one exception is the 12 month school
leadership training program that is managed and facilitated by Frances, the district
director of leadership training.

Outcome objectives: The primary outcome objective is to develop or enhance
participants’ urban school leadership knowledge, skills, experience, and capacity.
Aspiring principals and assistant principals who complete the leadership training program
have their names listed in the district "eligibility pool" indicating they are eligible to be
selected to interview for an available assistant principal or building principal position
within the district. Assistant principal candidates are interviewed and can be hired by a
school principal. Candidates for building principal are interviewed by a five or six person
school principal selection committee representing the school teaching staff, teachers
union, parents, and the district executive to which the principal would report.

University Programs

Activities: In the second row of Figure 5.8 we see that the university K-12
education leadership preparation program has two major program activities. First,
students participate in an academic curriculum intended to prepare them for a professional
role in teaching, school administration, leadership or education policy. And second, each

student may be required to participate in a teaching or administration internship at the

210

elementary, middle or high school grade level in an urban, suburban or rural school
district.

Structure: University school leadership programs may be structured to allow
students to select cognate courses that supplement and hopefully complement required
classes within their core curriculum. Students pay tuition for each credit hour of
instruction, attend classes according to their class schedule, and may be expected to meet
several times during each semester as a cohort group of learners.

Outcome objective: Students in the Michigan State University, College of
Education who satisfy all program requirements for graduation may receive a BS, M.A.,
Ed.S., or Ph.D. in their area of study. Advanced degree graduates are expected to
demonstrate their knowledge of educational theory and research methods skills. Based on
the job requirements of the institution, organization, urban, suburban or rural school
district where the student might apply for employment, the students undergraduate or
graduate degree in K-12 education will likely satisfy the employer’s educational
requirements.

NLNS Urban School Principal Training Program and Preparation Process

In the research report Innovations in education: Innovative pathways to school
leadership (U .S. Department of Education, 2004) the author states that the primary focus
of the New Leaders for New Schools (NLNS) program is to prepare principals to serve in

urban K-12 school districts:

New leaders forNew Schools is a rational, New York City basednonprofit organization whose
mission is to foster high academic achievement for every child by recruiting and developing the
next generation of outstanding leaders for the nation’s urban public schools. It has aheady
established successful partnerships with public school systems and charter schools in New York
City, Washington, DC, Chicago, Memphis, and the San Francisco Bay Area, and plans call for
expansion to additional urban areas each year (p.49).

Activities: The five key preparation and training activities of the NLNS program

211

are (1) candidate assessment; (2) personal reflection; (3) training; (4) formal mentoring
and coaching; and (5) on-the-job "authentic learning” experience in an urban school
setting. The report notes that in 2004, of the 1,100 applicants that applied only 6% or 56
candidates were admitted into the program (p.50). After acceptance into the program,
participants are required to attend university leadership training classes at a local
university that is working in partnership with the urban school district and the NLNS
program. Each participant is assigned an experienced urban school principal who serves
as his or her formal mentor and coach throughout the 12 month program period. When
not attending class, participants are required to work as interns in an urban school. The
objective of the urban school internship is to get hands-on, on-the-job experience working
directly with members of the urban school’s leadership team who are attempting to
address and resolve ‘nuts and bolts urban school issues and challenges’ similar to those I
discussed earlier in this chapter (see Table 5.3 and Figure 5.3).

The third row of Figure 5.8 shows that all applicants are subjected to a four phase
applicant assessment and screening that consist of an online applieation, multiple
interviews, written response to a case study, and communication assessment tools to
assess each candidate against the following nine selection criteria:

An rmyielding belief in the potential of all children to excel academically; Persistence and
determination; Problem-solving skills; Project management skills to deliver results; Knowledge of
teaching and learning; Self-awareness and commitment to ongoing learning; Excellent
communication and listening skills; The ability to build successful relationships; and the ability to
collaborate and build teams (U.S. Department of Education, 2004).

Structure: The Innovations in education: Innovative pathways to school
leadership report (U .S. Department of Education, 2004) claims that the NLNS
preparation program is structured to help each participant develop 12 standards-based

leadership competencies that NLNS believes are exhibited by successful urban school

212

principals. The competencies were not specifically identified or discussed in the report
and I was only able to confirm that the urban school 1 principal competency standards
NLNS claims to have established for its program participants fall into three categories -
personal competencies, school competencies, and operational leadership competencies.

Participants work in cohort learning groups and contractually receive between two
and five years of mentoring and coaching support after they satisfy and complete all
program criteria. Leadership training provided by the university partner is intended to
satisfy local school district and state requirements for principal training and certification.

Outcome objectives: The primary objective of NLNS is to develop a three to five
year contractual relationship with an urban school district to train and prepare assistant
principals and school principals to work in that urban school district. Participants who
complete all NLNS graduation requirements are contractually obligated to work in the
urban school district for a period of three to five years. Candidates with private sector
management and leadership experience can be and have been accepted into the NLNS
leadership training program and preparation process. The school leadership training and
preparation that the NLNS participants receive will satisfy principal certification
requirements for that school district in the state in which the school district is located.
NLNS is reported to be a nonprofit organization (U .S. Department of Education, 2004)
Similarities and Drfi'erences in Activities

On-the—job experience in an urban school setting is the primary difference
between a university educational leadership training program and an urban school district
or NLNS program. For example, a university student may not participate in an internship
or in-service training in an urban school setting because (1) an internship or in-service

training is not a program requirement (2) may be optional or (3) the student may prefer to

213

do their internship or in-service training in a suburban or rural school district. By contrast,
NLNS participants are, hopefully, immersed in urban school issues and challenges during
their mandatory 12 month internship. In a similar fashion, participants in an urban school
district preparation process are exposed to the urban school setting and immersed in urban
school nuts-and-bolts issues and challenges on a daily basis.

Similarities and Difilerences in Structure

Discussing the concept of loosely coupled systems Karl Weick (1976) notes that:

. . .when people describe loosely coupled systems they are often referring to (1) slack times-times
when there is an excessive amount of resources relative to demmds; (2) occasiom when any one
of several means will produce the same end; (3) richly connected networks in which influence is
slow to spread and or is weak while spreading; (4) a relative lack of coordination, slow
coordination or coordination that is dampened as it moves through a system; (5) a relative absence
of regulations; (6) planned unresponsiveness; .. .(9) infrequent inspection of activities within the
system; (10) decentralization; (12) the absence oflinkages that should be present based on
somememy-fmexampk,meducafionalmganinfimsmeexpeaedfeedbacklmngefiom
outcome back to inputs is often nonexistent. (p.5)

Using Karl Weick’s brief discussion of loose coupling as my frame of reference, I submit
that each of the three approaches to principal preparation -— the urban district training
program and preparation process; the university educational leadership training programs;
and the NLNS urban school leadership training program and process - are loosely coupled
systems that are structured and being implemented to (1) satisfy the school leadership
requirements and objectives of their respective K-12 school stakeholders and (2)
accomplish the mission and achieve the short and long term goals of each provider
institution.

Similarities across the three loosely coupled systems include (1) applicant
assessment and selection, (2) school leadership training, (3) school leadership preparation
activities, (4) cohort learning groups (5) program and process completion criteria. These

loosely coupled components appear to be the basic structural ingredients that get mixed,

214

matched, and packaged into different configurations, and then marketed to key
stakeholders as an effective approach for preparing a large number of candidates for
school principalship.

Significant structural differences among the three approaches are (l) the duration
of the training program and preparation process; (2) definition and variety of training and
leadership preparation activities; (3) candidate interview and selection process; (4)
mandatory placement as an urban school assistant principal or principal; and (4) fee or
tuition requirements for program or process participation.

University training programs: University leadership program activities are
structured around a predefined core curriculum supplemented by the students’ selected
cognate courses that hopefully supplement and complement the teaching, administration,
leadership or policy degree programs offered by different departments within the college
of education. Two themes emerged from participant’s case studies regarding the structure
of university training programs. The first theme was a collective concern that rmiversity
training programs are maniacally focused on educational theory versus helping
participants understand why, how, and when educational theory should or could be
translated into educational practice. And second, participants believe rmiversity
professors are incorrect when they espoused or discussed educational theories of teaching,
learning, and school administration as if the theories are equally applicable to urban,
suburban, or rural K-12 students and schools. Participants believe there are degrees of
difference between urban, suburban, and rural environments and that aspiring principals
and school principals must be aware of and understand.

Urban school district training and preparation: Earlier in this report I noted that

leadership preparation in my participant’s district is not a program it is a process. As

215

ll|lll

shown in the middle section of Figure 5.5, the leadership preparation process in my
participants’ urban school district includes the following six activities: personal reflection
and self-assessment; school leadership training; leadership opportunity and visibility;
exposure to urban settings and urban research; mentoring; and on the job experiences in
an urban school. From my perspective each activity - with the exception of school
leadership training - appears to be undocumented, unstructured, participant driven, and
unpredictable.

I use the term undocumented because the only documentation available regarding
principal training and preparation was documentation I received from of the aspiring and
new principal school leadership training program rrm by Francis, the district director of
leadership training. The five undocumented preparation activities emerged fi'om my cross
case analysis of participant case studies and one-on-one interview discussions.

In addition to being undocumented the five leadership preparation activities also
appear to be unstructured. For example, the mentoring activity tlmt each participant said
they actively engaged in at some point in their career was in reality an informal
relationship that had evolved between the participant and a person who volunteered to
serve as the participant’s informal mentor. Another example of an unstructured leadership
preparation activity is the opportunity and visibility that resulted from participants taking
the initiative to volunteer for opportunities to lead projects or participate on instructional
or operational project teams while each participant was still a classroom teacher or
working as a district staff specialist. These two examples of rmstructured activity also
help support my argument that the five leadership preparation activities participant driven
activities. Each of the nine case studies provides multiple examples and evidence that my

participants’ supervisors, principals, or school district executives were not involved in the

216

vast majority of my participants’ leadership preparation activities. From my perspective
my participants structured, implemented, and controlled their involvement in five of the
six leadership preparation activities.

My major concern is not that leadership prepmation activities are undocumented,
unstructured, or participant driven - my major concern is that preparation activities in my
participants urban school district appear to be unpredictable. If, as I predict, a large
number of baby boom age principals decide to leave this district within the next 10 years
as I predict (see Table 5.0), the district may not have an adequate number of aspiring
principals who are prepared, ready, and perhaps more important, aspiring principals who
want to assume a school principal leadership role and responsibility within the district.

New Leaders for New Schools training and preparation: As I show in column 6 of
Figure 2.3 in Chapter 2, the NLNS training curriculum is structured around 12 essential
competencies that emerged fi'om NLNS’s research of successful urban school ‘turn—
around’ principals (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). On their website (New Leaders
for New Schools, 2005) NLNS notes that, "Our curriculum is organized into three
strands, which align to our Principal Leadership Competencies, the critical skills of
successful principals as identified by New Leaders for New Schools.” The 12
competencies are divided into three curriculum strands entitled personal leadership,
school leadership, and operational leadership. The 12 competencies are the building
blocks for a customized training curriculum that is developed for each new NLNS ruban
school district customer by selecting competency elements from each of the three NLNS
strands and integrating them with leadership competencies desired and required by the
urban school district that has signed a contractual agreement with NLNS for principal

training and preparation services.

217

As shown in column 8, 9 and 10 of Figure 2.3 in Chapter 2, NLNS preparation
activities documented in each new and existing urban district contract may include, for
example, a 12 month internship within the district, mentoring, coaching, local university
training, and summer institute training at the Wharton school of management. The
important point is the urban school district is required to document its wants, needs,
leadership training outcome objectives. In addition, a specified number of program
participants are agreed upon before NLNS training resources and preparation capacity are
structured, aligned, and documented in a legally binding contract and clearly defined
partnership agreement is agreed upon by the district, local university, and NLNS. Each
contract is structured with the intent of providing the urban district with a specified
number of assistant or school principal candidates by the end of the contract. As noted in
column 5 of Figure 2.3 since 2001 NLNS has placed 230 or 95% of its program graduates
-— each contractually committed to work a minimum of three years in the urban district
that sponsored their NLNS training and preparation.

Similarities in Diflerences in Outcome Objectives

The primary objective of the university, district, or NLNS approach is to select,
train, and prepare aspiring principals to fill new or vacant school principal job openings.
Study participants believe a school principal selection committee in their urban district
would prefer school principal candidates that have prior urban school experience and a
portfolio that includes examples on successful project implementation and instructional
and operational leadership experience in an urban school setting. An applicant with 12 or
more months of urban school exposure and work experience gained in the NLNS or an
urban school district program would likely have a significant advantage over a university

graduate with little or no on-the-job experience attempting to resolve nuts and bolts issues

218

and challenges an urban school principal will face.

University training programs: In their case studies my participants say they believe
the primary objective of university preparation programs are to graduate a large number
of students who satisfy the education decree requirements for entry level employment in
urban, suburban or rural school districts. In addition, participants believe university
programs graduate students who (I) understand theories of teaching, educational policy
and administration; (2) may have participated in an internship or in-service training; and
(3) can design, conduct, and interpret educational research projects. However, unless the
student has years of experience working in an urban school district, participants do not
believe they would be successful as an assistant principal or school principal in an urban
school setting. From my participants prospective, while the myriad of issues and
challenges facing urban schools can be discussed in theoretical terms, the best equipment
for attacking end resolving urban school issues and challenges are experience,
knowledge, and skills developed and enhanced while working in an urban school setting.
From their perspective, students completing university requirement for an undergraduate
or graduate level degree in education will have satisfied the outcome objectives of the
university but will not be adequately trained or prepared for urban school leadership.

Urban school district training and preparation: The primary outcome objective of
the urban district leadership preparation program is to prepare aspiring principals for
assistant principal and school principal leadership within the district. Francis, the district
director of leadership training, explained that when a principal job is available in the
district, a school principal selection committee consisting of teachers, parents, a teachers
union representative, and the district executive to whom the principal would report,

interview and hopefully selects a qualified candidate to fill the vacant school principal

219

position. From my perspective, the districts seemingly undocumented, unstructured,
participant driven, and unpredictable approach to principal preparation appears to be
satisfying the districts objective of having at least three aspiring principals who are ready,
prepared, and eager to interview for vacant or new school principal positions. A major
test for my participants urban district training program and preparation process will be
meeting the district objective of filling a large number of vacant positions when and if
baby boom age principals decide to retire and leave the district within the next 10 years.
New Leaders for New Schools training and preparation: As noted in the
Innovations report (U .S. Department of Education, 2004), and as shown in column 6 of
Figure 2.3 in Chapter 2 of this paper, 95% of the aspiring principals who complete the
New Leaders for New Schools (NLNS) preparation program are hired within the
contracted urban school district as either an assistant principal or school principal. The
report notes that of the 230 participants that graduated fi'om the NLNS program between
2001 and 2004, 60% have been placed in urban schools as principals and 35% as assistant
principals. It is interesting to note that approximately 60% of the program participants
were African-American, 30% were white, 77% were Hispanic and 3% of all participants

were Asian American (U .S. Department of Education, 2004).

220

CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Conclusions

The eight findings that emerged from this research will hopefully stimulate
vigorous discussions regarding (1) urban school principal leadership training and
preparation, and (2) urban school district replacement strategies for the large number of
baby boom generation school principals who may retire or leave urban education between
2006 and 2016. These findings should serve as a call-to—action for principals,
superintendents, and school boards in every K-12 urban school district.

The first research finding is that during the ten year period between 2006 and 2016,
a significant number of baby boom generation principals will be leaving their job as
elementary, middle, or high school principal in my participants’ urban school district in
Michigan. While baby boom school principal retirement may not be a cause for
immediate concern in some urban school districts, I believe all urban school districts
should develop or expand their knowledge and understanding of principal training
programs and the leadership preparation process within their district. Key inspection
points should include (1) a projection and forecast of when and how many assistant
principals and principals may be leaving the district; (2) an assessment of the quality,
quantity, and career aspirations of aspiring principals within the district; and (3) the
districts current resources and capacity for training and preparing an adequate number of
assistant and school principal replacements over the next three to five year time period.

My second research finding is that urban school leadership training and preparation

is not a program it is an ongoing process that employs seven genres of training to develop

221

participants skills, knowledge, and capacity for urban school leadership. Case study
analysis revealed that the nine mban school principals that participated in this research
study worked in the district for an average of 24 years before they were selected to be
school principal. Two interesting questions for stakeholders in my participants’ urban
school district are, How long does it take to prepare a candidate to be a school principal in
your district? And, second, How do you know when a candidate is ready for the
principalship?

The third finding is that elementary, middle, and high school principals have
different issues, challenges, and school leadership priorities. This finding suggests that
the district’s training and preparation process should be designed or redesigned to
facilitate the training and preparation of principals assuming they will have elementary,
middle, or high school grade level leadership responsibilities.

The fourth finding argues that urban school principals face a myriad of what they
call ‘nuts-and-bolts’ issues and challenges that fall into one of six general categories: (1)
the urban setting; (2) lack of adequate time, money, and people resources; (3) student
related challenges; (4) school teaching staff; (5) parents and family concerns; and (6)
achieving AYP and NCLB goals and objectives. Classifying each issue or challenge as
instructional or administrative highlighted the interesting fact that study participants said
they spend 76% of the time on administrative and only 24% of their time addressing the
instructional leadership issues and challenges within their respective school.

My fifth finding makes a sharp distinction between program-based leadership
training and leadership preparation process activities by arguing that, unlike episodic or
programmatic training often delivered in the form of a seminar event or classroom

lecture, principal preparation for urban school leadership is a continuous process with six

222

distinct ongoing preparation activities. The six leadership preparation process activities
include personal reflection and self-assessment; school leadership training; leadership
opportunity and visibility; exposure to an urban setting and urban research; mentoring;
and on-the-job experiences in an urban school. Based on this findings I believe it would
be prudent for urban school district principals, superintendents, and school boards to
understand how long it would take for their current district training and preparation
process to produce an adequate number of candidates who are trained and prepared to
replace experienced school principals if and when they leave the district.

The sixth finding is that, urban school principals are responsible and accountable
for providing school leadership in six critical areas of urban school leadership:
implementing instructional, operational, staff and student support strategies that help
educate urban children; actively participating in preparing aspiring urban school leaders;
meeting school stakeholder expectations; minimizing the effects external forces such as
poverty, the urban setting, and the lack of resources may have on their school, students
and school staff; addressing multiple needs of their urban students including special-
education, psychological, physiological, social, and personal growth needs of urban
students; and demonstrating a professional and personal commitment to urban education.
Despite the importance participants placed on each of these six leadership responsibilities
my sixth finding also found that principals in my participant’s urban school district are
not being measured, assessed, or receiving performance evaluation feedback in the last
three areas of school leadership. My concern is tint without feedback on their
performance an urban school principal may miss an opportunity, or not be aware of the
need to develop or improve his or her leadership knowledge and skills in a particular

areas.

223

Case study analysis and extensive review of research literature confirmed that
urban school leadership training and preparation can be provided by a school district,
university departments of education, and private sector organizations such as New
Leaders for New Schools. However, my seventh research finding makes it clear that
leadership training and preparation programs offered by school districts, universities, and
private sector organizations have significant differences in their program activities,
structure, and outcome objectives. Based on this finding I strongly encourage urban
school districts to establish and maintain a school leadership training program and
preparation process that is based on a collaborative, contract-based partnership with other
urban school district leadership training and preparation provider organizations.

The purpose and primary objective of this research is to examine the research
question, "What does it mean to be prepared to be an urban school principal with a
majority Afiican-American student population?" Based on my review of research
literature, participant focus group and interview discussions, cross case analysis of nine
participant case studies, and synthesis of the seven research findings just discussed, my
response to my original research question is summarized below in Figure 6.0. As shown,
being prepared to be an urban school principal with a majority African-American student
population means having the resources, knowledge, skills, experience, and opportunity to
demonstrate urban school leadership in six critical areas: (1) developing and
implementing school-wide instructional, administrative, operational, school staff and
student support strategies that help to educate urban children; (2) active participation in
principal professional development sessions in addition to coaching, mentoring, and
helping to prepare aspiring urban school principals; (3) meeting the expectations of
students, parents, staff, district, and community stakeholders ; (4) minimizing the effects

224

of external forces such as poverty, class, race, neighborhood, and the urban setting on
students and school staff; (5) addressing the special-education, psychological,
physiological, social, and personal growth and development needs of urban school

children; and (6) demonstrating a professional and personal commitment to urban

 

Figure 6.0: What does it mean to be prepared to be an urban school principal with a
majority African-American student population?

 

Bemgprepmedmbemmbmschmlprincipalmeanshavhrgmeleadershipresmnces,
knowledge, skills, experience, and opportunity to:

1. Implement strategies that educate urban children
2. Active participation in urban school leadership preparation

3. Meeting m'ban school stakeholder expectations

h

. Minimizing the effects ofextemal forces on urban students and school staff
5. Addressing multiple needs of urban school children

6. Demonstrating professional and personal commitment to urban education.

 

Source: Participant interviews, case studies, review of related research, and research findings.

 

 

 

education based on years of service in urban education, active membership in educational
organizations, and sharing the results of action research conducted within the urban
school.
Implications
Ironically, the fact that research examining K-1 2 urban school leadership is scarce may
have at least two unintended consequences. First, the dearth of research on mban school
leadership may serve to increase the research value of the findings and conclusions

presented in this report. And second, the scarcity of research on the urban school principal

225

underscores the importance of listening to the individual and collective voices of the nine
highly experienced urban school principals in this research report as they (1) share their
unique perspectives as urban school leaders; (2) provide insight, perspective and nuance
on urban school leadership as a career choice; (3) explain the intricate and often punitive
relationship between student learning and the urban setting; and (4) speak with passion
and candoronthecfificalissueanddamfingchaflengeofnainmgmdprepmingaspifing

principals for urban school leadership.

226

APPENDICES

227

Appendix A

Participants focus group and interview consent form and confidentiality agreement

228

Appendix A: Participants focus group and interview consent form and confidentiality
agreement

Informed consent for participation in research to understand how urban school principals
perceive the adequacy of their training, experience, and preparation for instructional
leadership of majority Afiican-American schools.

You are being asked to participate in a Michigan State University Ph.D. doctoral
research study of principal preparation for instructional leadership of urban schools. The
research is being conducted by James D. Smith, a 4th year Ph.D. Candidate in K-12
Educational Administration at Michigan State University. The purpose of this research is
to understand how urban school principals perceive the adequacy of their training,
experience and preparation for instructional leadership of majority Afiican-American
schools.

The themes, findings and conclusions that emerge from this research may be used
to (1) review, modify or adjust the structure, curricular components and delivery of
principal preparation programs, and (2) serve as input data for follow-on research studies
focused on urban school leadership preparation programs. In addition, the output of this
research project may be of interest to the following audiences: policy makers and
educational leaders responsible for the development and implementation of educational
leadership policy; urban school district superintendents; faculty members of colleges and
universities offering educational administration and leadership courses and degree
granting programs; district administrators involved in principal selection, training, and
on-going support; persons external to the district providing professional development for
principals; and aspiring or current principals.

Data for this study will be collected between April and June 2006 from one focus
group session, nine one-on-one interviews, and analysis of documents and artifacts of
principalship training, experiences and preparation programs. One two hour focus group
will be conducted with nine Principals. During the focus group session an individual one
hour one-on-one interview will be scheduled with each Principal participant. A ninety
minute interview will be conducted with a district level administrator to understand the
district’s approach and perspective on Principal training and preparation for instructional
leadership.

All study participants will be asked for written consent to audio tape their focus
group and/or one-on-one interview discussions. Your consent to be audio taped is
voluntary and will not affect your ability to participate in this study. If you do not consent
to being audio taped, but agree to be interviewed, the researcher will make hand written
notes during your interview. The researcher will keep the audiotapes after the study data
has been analyzed and may use the tapes for future analysis and presentations. All data
collected will be stored in a locked cabinet that will be accessible by the researcher and
his Ph.D. dissertation chairman, Professor Christopher Dunbar, Michigan State
University.

229

All interview, focus group data, and study findings will be treated with strict
confidence. Each study participant will be assigned an alias name to prevent comments
being attributed to a particular individual. The names of study participants will not be
identified in any reporting of research findings. The privacy of participants will be
protected to the maximum extent allowable by law.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you are willing to participate, a time
and place acceptable to you will be determined. You are under no obligation to agree to
participate in additional interviews or focus group sessions.

If you have any questions, please contact the researcher, James D. Smith,
jdsmith2@conflst.net Or the principal investigator, Dr. Chistopher Dunbar, Ph.D.,
Associate ProfessOr, College of Education, 407 Erickson Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824.
If you have questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant or are
dissatisfied at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact- anonymously, if
you wish — Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Chair of the Michigan State University, University
Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (U CRIHS), by phone, fax, e-mail or
regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824.

#1 - General Agreement: Your signature below indicates your voluntary agreement to
participate in this study;

Date:

 

Name:

 

Signature:

 

#2 - Agreement to be audio taped: Your signature below indicates your voluntary
agreement to be audio taped for this study.

Date:

 

Signature:

 

230

Appendix B

District director of leadership training interview guide

231

Appendix B: District director of leadership training interview guide

9.99339;—

“99°39

l3.
14.
15.
l6.
l7.
l8.
19.
20.

21.
22.

23.

24.

25.

26.
27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

What does the term urban school mean to you?

How do you perceive and understand the role and responsibility of an urban school principal?
What is the typical route to the principalship and has that changed over the years?

Were you an urban school principal? Where? How long? What grade level?

How did you get to be an assistant principal?

As the district director of leadership training, what leadership training programs do you offer?
How large is your staff?

How many persons have gone through yorn' training?

How often do you offer the leadership training?

. What three instructional leadership activities take the majority of an urban school principal's time?

. What three administrative leadership activities take the majority of an urban principal' s time?
. When you were a principal, what percentage of time did you spend on instructional leadership and

what percentage did you spend on administrative operations?

In a perfect world, what do you think that percentage split should be for an urban school principal?
How and when were you prepared for the urban school principalship?.

What best prepared you for your role and responsibility as an rn'ban school principal?

What academic degrees have you completed?

What does it mean to be the instructional leader of an urban school?

To what extent are university based educational leadership training and preparation programs
useful to an urban school principal?

To what extent does the school district contribute to principalship training, preparation or
professional development? ’

Are there issues or challenges you believe are unique to urban public school principals?

What artifacts or documentation of principalship training and preparation can you share?

What training and professional development do principals receive after becoming a principal and
how does that training help address major issues and challenges in an urban school?

What words or phrases would you use to characterize principals' training, experience and
preparation for urban school leadership?

In retrospect, what do you believe is missing from the training and preparation of an urban school
principal and why are those things important?

What does it mean for a principal to be adequately prepared for urban school leadership?

What are the implications of principals not being adequately prepared for urban school leadership?
What additional training, experience, or professional development would improve the instructional
leadership of an urban school principal?

To what extent do you believe current educational leadership programs are preparing aspiring
principals for urban school leadership?

What would you recommend be included in a preparation program specifically designed for
aspiring urban school principals?

If you were a mentor in a principal preparation program, what advice would you give an aspiring

or new urban school principal?

Last question, what are the characteristics and attributes of an outstanding urban school principal?

232

Appendix C

Urban school principal interview guide

233

 

lllrlf r‘rl’ .l‘l )4 ill.
1 A." 1"!
[III III!
111‘ ......Illli
“ 1] 1‘
I‘ll
llll
1 1

 

Appendix C: Urban school principal interview guide

#1: How urban principals perceive and understand their role and responsibilities?

1A: What do you do as an urban school principal? What five things require the majority of your time?
18: Are there issues and challenges that you believe are unique to urban public school principals?
1C: What does it mean to be the instructional leader of an urban school?

1D: What are the characteristics and attributes of an outstanding urban school principal?

1E: How do you perceive and understand your role and responsibility as an urban school principal?

#2: How urban principals characterize the usefulness of their training, experience and preparation for
leadership?

2A: What words or phrases would you use to characterize your training, experience, and preparation for
urban school leadership?

28: What training and professional development have you received after becoming a principal and how has
that training helped you address major issues and challenges you face in your school?

2C: What artifacts or documentation of your principalship preparation do you have? Can I get a copy?

2D: ln retrospect, what was missing from your training and preparation for the urban school principalship?
2E: Did you have a mentor when you first became a principal? What was that experience like?

#3: How does the urban school setting affect urban school principalship?

3A: What does the term ‘urban school’ mean to you?

3B: To what extent do you believe current educational leadership programs are preparing aspiring
principals for urban school leadership?

3C: What would you recommend be included in a preparation program specifically designed for aspiring
urban school principals? Why those program components?

3D: If you were a mentor in a principal preparation program, what advice would you give an aspiring or
new urban school principal?

#4: What are the implications of principals being trained and prepared for urban school leadership?

4A: What additional training, experience or professional development would improve your instructional
leadership as an urban school principal? Why?

43: What does it mean for a principal to be “adequately” prepared for urban school leadership?

4C: What are implications of principals no; being adequately trained or prepared for urban school
leadership?

234

REFERENCES

235

 

REFERENCES

Anderson, M. E. (1991). Principals: How to train, recruit, select, induct, and evaluate
leaders for America 's schools: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management,
University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403.

Atkin, J. M., & House, E. R. (1980). The Federal Role in Curriculum Development,
1950-80 (141 Reports--Descriptive). District of Columbia.

Baker, J. (2004). The urban Iearnerfiamework (Unpublished paper). Lansing, Michigan:
Michigan State University.

Baltzell, C. D., and Robert A. Dentler. (1983). Selecting American School Principals: A
Sourcebook for Educators. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Abt Associates, Inc.

Black, M., & Ricardo, I. (1994). Drug use, drug trafficking, and weapon carrying among
low-income, African-American, early adolescent boys. Pediatrics, 93(6), 1065-
l 072.

Blase, J ., & Blase, J. (1998). Handbook of Instructional Leadership: How Really Good
Principals Promote Teaching and Learning. California.

Bogotch, I. E., Miron, L. F., & Joseph Murphy Jr. (1998). Moral leadership discourses in
urban school settings: the multiple influences of social context. Urban Education,
33(3), 303-330.

Boysen, T. C. (1992). Irreconcilable Differences: Effective Urban Schools versus
Restructuring. Education and Urban Society, 25(1), 85-95.

Broad Foundation & F ordham Foundation. (2003). Better leaders for America ’s schools:
A manifesto: See www.cdexcellence.net/doc/manifesto.pdf.

Brown, F. (2005). African Americans and School Leadership: An Introduction.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(4), 585-590.

Bruss, L. R. (1986). A University Initiated Model for Developing Instructional Leaders.
Theory into Practice, 25(3), 197-202.

Carlin, P. M. (1992). The Principal's Role in Urban School Reform. Education and Urban
Society, 25(1), 45-56.

Center on Education Policy. (2005). NCLB: urban schools are tagged for improvement at
higher rates than suburban or rural schools (Policy brief). Washington DC:
Center on education policy.

Center on Education Policy. (2006). A Public Education Primer Basic (and Sometimes
Surprising) Facts about the U.S. Education System: Center on Education Policy.

236

Cerf, R, Farssi, Z., Burgun, B., Trio, J. M., & Kurtz, D. (2000). Strange attractors in
human electroencephalographic signals. Comptes rendus des séances de
l'Academie des sciences. Série II, Mécanique, physique, chimie, sciences de
l 'univers, sciences de la terre, 91, 12-17.

Chell, J. (1995). Introducing Principals to the Role of Instructional Leadership. SST A
Research in Brief Access ERIC: Full Text (055 Guides--Nonclassroom No. SSTA-
RCR-95-l4). Canada; Saskatchewan: Saskatchewan School Trustees Association,
Regina.

Chrispeels, J. H. (2002). The California Center for Effective Schools: The Oxnard School
District Partnership. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(5), 382-387.

Cleveland State University. (2003). Preparing urban educational leaders: The knowledge
base for the Ph D. in urban education at Cleveland State University, College of

Education, from
httr)://www.csuohio.edu/coehs/college/model/DoctoralProggmj ramework.fl

College of Education at Michigan State University. (2007). Graduate programs.
Retrieved November 2007, from http://www.educ.m_su.edu/

Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great .' why some companies make the leapnand others
don 't (lst ed.). New York, NY: Harper Business.

Cornell, P. S. (2005). Current practitioners' perceptions of the ISLLC standards and
dispositions. Unpublished 3176497, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale,
United States -- Illinois.

Cotton, K. (1991). Educating Urban Minority Youth: Research on Eflective Practices
Topical Synthesis #4. Portlan, Or.: North West Regional Educational Laboratory.

Coutts, J. D. (1997). Why Principals Fail: Are National Professional Standards Valid
Measures of Principal Performance? ERS Spectrum, 20-24.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design : choosing among five
traditions. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Cuban, L. (2001). Urban school leadership - Dijfirent in kind and degree: Institute for
Educational Leadership.

 

Cuban, L. (2004). Meeting Challenges in Urban Schools. Educational Leadership, 61(7),
64-67.

Cubbin, C., Santelli, J ., Brindis, C. D., & Braveman, P. (2005). Neighborhood Context
and Sexual Behaviors Among Adolescents: Findings fi'om the National
Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Perspectives on Sexual and

‘ Reproductive Health, 37(3), 125-134.

237

Cusick, P. A. (1992). The educational system : its nature and logic. New York: McGraw-
Hill.

Dantley, M. E. (1990). The Ineffectiveness of Effective Schools Leadership: An Analysis
of the Effective Schools Movement fi'om a Critical Perspective. Journal of Negro
Education, 59(4), 585-598.

Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). Review of
research school leadership study: Developing successful principals: Stanford
Educational Leadership Institute.

Delpit, L. D. (1995). Other people 's children : cultural conflict in the classroom. New
York: New Press : Distributed by W.W. Norton.

Dentith, A., & F rattura, E. (2004, Nov 2004). Barriers and supports to integrated
services for all students: Examining roles, structures and processes in one urban
district. Paper presented at the UCEA, Kansas City, MO.

Druian, G., & Butler, J. A. (1987). Effective Schooling Practices and At—Risk Youth: What
the Research Shows. School Improvement Research Series Topical Synthesis #1
(070 Information Analyses). Portland, OR.: Northwest Regional Educational Lab.

Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective Schools for the Urban Poor. Educational Leadership,
37(1), 15-18,20-24.

Eikenberry, D. H. (1930). The Professional Training of Secondary-School Principals. The
School Review, 38(7), 498-509.

E-Lead. (2004). First Ring Leadership Academy | Cleveland State University in
Partnership with the First Ring School Superintendents Collaborative. Retrieved

January 16, 2006, from httgflwww.e-lead.org[progr_ams/firstring[summaflasp

Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a New Structure for School Leadership. American
Educator, 23(4), 6-13.

 

Ensminger, M., Larnkin, R., & Jacobson, N. (1996). School leaving: a longitudinal
perspective including neighborhood effects. Child development, 67(5), 2400-2016.

Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships : preparing educators
and improving schools. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.

Evans, A. E. (2004, November 2004). How high schools respond to dramatic
demographic change. Paper presented at the UCEA, Kansas City, Mo.

F arkas, S., Johnson, J ., & Duffett, A. (2003). Rolling up their sleeves: Superintendents

and principals talk about what's needed to fix public schools. New York:Public
agenda.

238

 

F eigelman, 8., Howard, D., Li, X., & Cross, S. (2000). Psychosocial and environmental
correlates of violence perpetration among African-American urban youth. The
Journal of adolescent health : ofi‘icial publication of the Society for Adolescent
Medicine Links, 27(3), 202-209.

F enwick, L. T., & Pierce, M. C. (2002). Professional Development of Principals. ERIC
Digest. Access ERIC: F ullText (071 Information Analyses-ERIC IAPs No. EDO-
SP-2002-08). District of Columbia: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and
Teacher Education, Washington, DC.

Forsyth, P. B. (1993). City Schools: Leading the Way (010 Books; 020 Collected Works--
General). California.

Frankenberg, E. C., Lee & Ofield, Gary. (2003). A Multiracial Society with Segregated
Schools: Are We Losing the Dream? : Harvard University, The Civil Rights
Project.

Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed) New York.
Teachers College Press.

Gantner, M. W., Daresh, J. C., Dunlap, K., & Newsom, J. (1999). Effective School
Leadership Attributes: Voices from the Field., 24.

GAO. (2006). Baby Boom Generation: Retirement of Baby Boomers Is Unlikely to
Precipitate Dramatic Decline in Market Returns, but Broader Risks Threaten
Retirement Security (No. GAO-06-718): United States Government
Accountability Office.

Gates, G. S., Kallio, B., & Young., L. (2001, Aug 2001). Measuring the longitudinal
eflects of principal leadership adaptability on elementary school student academic
performance. Paper presented at the AERA, Submitted to: Division A:Sectionl:
Leadership.

Gooden, M. A. (2002). Stewardship and critical leadership - Sufficient for leadership in
urban schools? Education and Urban Society, 35(1), 133-143.

Grantrnakers for Education. (2003, February 26-27, 2003). Fixing urban school systems:
Can philanthropy make a difikrence? Retrieved March 12, 2006, from
http://www.edfunders.com/downloaj_s/GFEReDorts/Urban_Schools Briefin

M

Green, T. F. (1983). Excellence, Equity, and Equality. In L. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds),
Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 318-340). New York: Longrnan.

Greiner, L. E., Bennigson, L. A., & Poulfelt, F. (2005). The Contemporary consultant:

handbook of management consulting : insights from world experts. Mason, Ohio:
Thomson South-Westem.

239

 

Haberman, M. (2000). Urban schools - Day camps or custodial centers? Phi Delta
Kappan, 82(3), 203-208.

Hale, E. L., & Moorman, H. N. (2003). Preparing school principals: a national
perspective on policy and program innovations: Institute for Educational
Leadership, Washington DC and Illinois Education Research Council,
Edwardsville, Illinois.

Hallinger, P. (1992). The Evolving Role of American Principals: From Managerial to
Instructional to Transformational Leaders. Journal of Educational Administration,

30(3).

Hallinger, P., & Leithwood, K. (1994). Introduction: Exploring the impact of principal
leadership. School efiectiveness and school improvement, F ive(Three), 206-218.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1986). Instructional Leadership in Effective Schools (143
Reports--Research; 070 Information Analyses). Tennessee.

Hallinger, P., Snidvongs, Kamontip. (2005). Adding Value to School Leadership and
Management A review of trends in the development of managers in the education
and business sectors: National College for School Leadership.

Heck, R. H. (1992). Principals' instructional leadership and school performance:
Implications for policy development. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
14(1), 21-34.

Hess, F. M., & Kelly, A. P. (2005). Learning to Lead? What Gets Taught in Principal
Preparation Programs: American Enterprise Institute.

Hill, P. T., & Celio, M. B. (1998). Fixing urban schools. Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution Press.

Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (2003). Instructional leadership a learning centered guide.
Boston MA: Pearson Education Company.

Hoyle, J. R., English, F. W., & Steffy, B. E. (1998). Skills for Successfitl 21st Century
School Leaders: Standards for Peak Performers. Access ERIC: Full Text. Virginia:
American Association of School Administrators, Arlington, VA.

Jackson, J. (2005). Leadership for Urban Public Schools. Essays. The Educational
Forum, 69(2), 192-2002.

Kimball, K., & Sirotnik, K. A. (2000). The Urban School Principalship: Take This Job
and...! Education and Urban Society, 32(4), 535-543.

240

Kottkamp, R., & Orr, M. T. (2005, January 3, 2005). T askforce on Evaluating
Educational Leadership Preparation: A joint endeavor of the UCEA executive
committee and the T EA-SIG of AERA. Retrieved Jan, 2006, fi'om
http://www.aer2_1.net/Printefle.a_spx?id=45 1

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge : how to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities : children in America 's schools (1 st ed.). New York:
Crown Pub.

Kozol, J. (1996). Amazing grace : The lives of children and the conscience of a nation
(lst Harper Perennial ed.). New York: Harper Perennial.

Ladd, H. F ., & Yinger, J. (1989). America's ailing cities : fiscal health and the design of
urban policy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice
field like education. Qualitative Studies in education, 11(1), 7-24.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2004). Landing on the wrong note the price we paid for Brown.
American Educational Researcher, 33(7), 3-13.

Lam, C. I. (1999). School eflectiveness: The Background To School Effectiveness
Research: University of Leicester, Leicestershire Training and Enterprise Council.
See h_ttp://www.le.ac.uk/education/ESI/doc1f.html Last updated: October 25,1999.

Lambert, L. (2005). What does leadership capacity really mean? JSD NATIONAL STAFF
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 26(2), 38-40.
Lashway, L. (1998). Standards for Administrators. Research Roundup, 15(1).

Lashway, L. (2001). The state of standards: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational
Management, Eugene, OR.

Lashway, L. (2002). Rethinking the Principalship. Research Roundup, 18(3), 6.

Lashway, L. (2003a). Distributed Leadership. Research Roundup, 19(4), 6.

Lashway, L. (2003b). Transforming Principal Preparation. (071 Information Analyses-
ERIC IAPs No. EDO—EA-03-02). Oregon: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational
Management, Eugene, OR. ED473360 See
h_ttD://eric.uoregon.edu/nublications/digests/digest1 65 .html.

Lee, C. (2004). Is resegregation real? : The Civil Rights Project- Harvard University.

241

 

Leithwood, K. (1993). Contributions of Transformational Leadership to School
Restructuring. Access ERIC: Full Text (150 Speeches/Meeting Papers; 070
Information Analyses). Canada; Ontario.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1998). Distributed Leadership and Student Engagement in
School. (110 Numerical/Quantitative Data; 143 Reports--Research; 150
Speeches/Meeting Papers). Canada; Ontario.

Leithwood, K. A., & Riehl, C. (2003). What Do We Already Know About Successfitl
School Leadership? Paper presented at the AERA conference March 2003,
Chicago, Illinois.

Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. New York: The Education Schools Project.

Lipman, P. (1998). Race, class, and power in school restructuring. Albany: State
University of New York Press.

Lytle, J. H. (1992). Prospects for Reforming Urban Schools. Urban Education, 27(2),
109-131.

Macpherson, R. J. S. (1998). Accountability in city schools: theory and practice in urban
educational administration. Education and Urban Society, 30(4), 443-458.

Macpherson, R. J. S. (1998). Accountability in city schools: Theory and practice in urban
educational administration. Education and Urban Society, 30(4), 443-458.

Maxey, S. J. (1999). Leadership reform in a post modern world: Louisiana State
University.

McAdoo, H. P. (1997). Black families (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Memphis City Schools. (2005). New leaders for new schools program, from
http://wwwmemphis-schoolsirl2.tn.us/NLNS info.html

Mitchell, D. (1990). Principal Leadership: A Theoretical Framework for Research.
Project Report (120 Opinion Papers). Illinois: National Center for School
Leadership, Urbana, IL.

Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif:
Sage.

Murphy, J. (1991). The effects of the educational reform movement on departments of
educational leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(1), 49-65.

Murphy, J. (1998). Preparation for the School Principalship: The United States' Story.
School Leadership & Management, 18(3), 359-372.

242

Murphy, J. (2002). The educational leadership challenge : redefining leadership for the
21 st century. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education: Distributed
by University of Chicago Press.

Murphy, J. (2002). How the ISLLC Standards Are Reshaping the Principalship.
Principal, 82(1), 22-26.

Murphy, J. (2003). Reculturing Educational Leadership: The ISLLC Standards Ten Years
Out (Information Analyses General (070)). U.S.; Virginia: National Policy Board
for Educational Administration, Fairfax, VA. See
http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdeliverv/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED48 l 61 9.

Murphy, J ., & Schwarz, P. (2000). Leadership for Student Learning: Reinventing the
Principalship. : (A Report of the Task Force on the Principalship). U.S.; District-
of-Columbia: Institute for Educational Leadership, Washington, DC.

Murphy, J. E., & Louis, K. S. E. (1999). Handbook of Research on Educational
Administration. A Project of the American Educational Research Association.
Second Edition (Guides Non classroom (055)). U.S.; California.

Nadel, H., Spellmann', M., Alvarez-Canino, T., Lausell-Bryant, L., & Landsberg, G.
(1996). The cycle of violence and victimization: a study of the school-based
intervention of a multidisciplinary youth violence-prevention program. American
journal of preventive medicine, 12(5 suppl), 109-119.

National Center for Education Information. (2003). Certification of principals and
superintendents in the United States. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Information.

National College for School Leadership. (2004a). Growing Tomorrow ’s School Leaders:
The challenge: Summary report: NCSL.

National College for School Leadership. (2004b). A Model of School Leadership in
Challenging Urban Environments. London, England: London Challenge and
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Department of Education. See
http://www.ncsl.org.uk/mediajflB/93/rgndd-ch_allenging—model-school.pdf.

National Commission for the Principalship. (1990). Principals for Our Changing
Schools: Preparation and Certification. Fairfax, Virginia: National Commission
for the Principalship.

National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (1989). Improving the
Preparation of School Administrators: An Agenda for Reform. Charlottesville,
Virginia: NPBEA.

New Leaders for New Schools. (2005). Program overview. Retrieved January 16,2006,
from http://www.nlns.orglNLWeb/Residencyjsp

243

New Leaders for New Schools. (2006). New Leaders for New Schools personal, school,
and operational leadership competencies aligned with required competencies of
Chicago Public Schools, from www.nlns.org

Norton, J. (2002). Preparing School Leaders: It ’s Time to Face the Facts. Atlanta,
Georgia: Southern Regional Education Board Leadership Initiative Network. See
httr)://www.sreb.orglmain/Leadership/pubs/Leadershin newsletter F 2002.pdf.

Nunley, K. F. (2003). Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due. Principal Leadership, 3(9), 26-
29.

Orfield, G., Frankenberg, E. D., & Lee, C. (2003). The resurgence of school segregation.
Educational Leadership, 16-20.

Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J ., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing Our Future: How
Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis. Cambridge,
MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.

Osterman, K. F., & et al. (1993). New Principals: Problems, Priorities, and Preparation.
Access ERIC: Full Text (150 Speeches/Meeting Papers; 143 Reports—-Research).
New York.

Osterman, K. F., & Sullivan, S. (1994). Principals in an Urban Bureaucracy: The First
Years. Access ERIC: Full Text (143 Reports--Research; 150 Speeches/Meeting
Papers). New York.

Parra, M. A., & Daresh, J. C. (1997). Developing Educational Leadership in Urban
Diverse School Systems.

Paschal], M., & Hubbard, M. (1998). Effects of neighborhood and family stressors on
Afiican American male adolescents' self-worth and propensity for violent
behavior. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 66(5), 825-831.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Payne, R. K. (2005). A fiamework for understanding poverty (4th rev. ed.). Highlands,
Tex.: Aha! Process.

Portin, B. (2004). The Roles That Principals Play. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 14-18.

Portin, B. S. (2000). The Changing Urban Principalship. Education and Urban Society,
32(4), 492-505.

Price, A. (2008). Special Education Disability Categories. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from
lLttp://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art35 1 59.a_sp

244

 

Reves, A. H. (2004, November 11, 2004). Instructional leadership in a post Brown era: A
story of high school principals in high poverty and one race schools. Paper
presented at the AERA, Kansas City, MO.

Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective school leadership: the contributions of school eflectiveness
research: National College for School Leadership, University of Exeter, School of
Education, See http://www.ncsl.org_._ufimedia/F7B/52/l_<pool-evidence-
reynoldspdf.

Rossman, S. B., & Morley, E. (1996). Introduction: Safe schools: Policies and practices.
Education and Urban Society, 28(4), 395-411.

Sammons , P. (2006, January 4, 2006). School Ejfectiveness and Equity: Making
Connections. Paper presented at the International Congress for School
Effectiveness and Improvement, Embracing Diversity: New challenges for School
Improvement in a Global Learning Society, Fort Lauderdale Florida.

Schlechty, P. C. (2002). Working on the work: An action plan for teachers, principals,
and superintendents (1 st ed.). San Francisco: J ossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). Principalship, The: A Reflective Practice Perspective: Allyn &
Bacon.

Shen, J ., Rodriguez-Campos, L., & Rincones-Gomez, R. (2000). Characteristics of Urban
Principalship: A National Trend Study. Education and Urban Society, 32(4), 481-
491.

Southern Regional Education Board. (2005). SREB ’s Leadership Curriculum Modules
Engage Leaders in Solving Real School Problems: Southern Regional Education
Board.

States, E. C. o. t. (2005). A 5 0-state scan of innovative statewide leadership practices.
Retrieved March 2006, from
http://mb2.ecs.org/reports/Report.aspx?id=878&m§tf-0

Tate, W. F. (1997). Critical Race Theory and Education: History, Theory, and
Implications. Review of Research in Education, 22, 195-247.

Taylor, B. (2002). The effective schools process: Alive and well. Phi Delta Kappan,
83(5), 5.

Thomson, S. D. (1993). Principals for Our Changing Schools: The Knowledge and Skill

Base. Access ERIC: Full Text (055 Guides--Nonclassroom; 120 Opinion Papers).
Virginia: National Policy Board for Educational Administration, Fairfax, VA.

245

Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1995). T inkering toward utopia : a century of public school
reform. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to
School Leadership, . Washington, DC: Office of Innovation and Improvement.

UCEA, AERA, & NCPEA. (2005, January 24, 2006). The Joint Research T asldorce on
Educational Leadership Preparation. Retrieved January, 2006, from
http://ucea.org[

University of Wisconsin Madison. (1999). URBAN-I3 PROVOST S VISIT U WM
(University of Wisconsin Madison - Milwaukee), from
http://www.uwm.edu/News//report/old/oct99/2LAcAffairshtml

Upchurch, D., Levy-Storrns, L., Sucoff, C., & Aneshensel, C. (1998). Gender and ethnic
differences in the timing of first sexual intercourse. Family planning perspectives,
30(3), 121-127.

Urban-13. (2006). 21 major urban universities oflering doctorate degrees, from
http://www2 .gsu.edu/~wwwire/peer/urbanl 3 .htrn

US Office of Management and Budget. (2005). OMB bulletin number 06-01: Update of

statistical area definitions and guidance on their uses: US Office of Management
and Budget.

Wanzare, Z., & Da Costa, J. L. (2001). Rethinking Instructional Leadership Roles of the
School Principle: Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Educational
Thought/Revue de la Pensee Educative, 35(3), 269-295.

Waters, T., Marzano, R. J ., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years
of research tells us about the efl'ect of leadership on student achievement: MREL
- Mid-continent research for education and learning.

Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19.

Winslow, E., & Shaw, D. (2007). Impact of neighborhood disadvantage on overt behavior
problems during early childhood. Aggressive behavior, 33(3), 207-219.

Wolcott, H. F. (1973). The man in the principal 's oflice; an ethnography. New York,:
Holt.

Wright, R., & Steinbach, S. (2001). Violence: an unrecognized environmental exposure

that may contribute to greater asthma morbidity in high risk inner-city
populations. Environmental health perspectives, 1 09(10), 1085-1089.

246

 

Xue, Y., Leventhal, T., Brooks-Gunn, J ., & Earls, F. (2005). Neighborhood residence and
mental health problems of 5- to ll-year-olds. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 62(5), 554-
563.

Young, M. D., & Creighton, T. (2002). Who is Framing the National Understanding of
Educational Leadership Preparation and Practice? Leadership and Policy in
Schools, 1(3), 222-241.

Young, M. D., Crow, G., Orr, M. T., Ogawa, R., & Creighton, T. (2005, January 24,
2006). An Educative Look at Educating School Leaders: UCEA, AERA & NCPEA
Leaders Respond to Arthur Levine 's Report Educating School Leaders. Retrieved
November, 2005, from hgpzl/uceaorgz

Young, M. D., Mountford, M., & Crow, G. M. (2005). Preparing Educational Leaders: A
Roadmap to Success. Educational Considerations, Special Issue: Preparing
Educational Leaders, (0001(2), 49.

Yukl, G. (1982). Managerial Leadership and the Eflective Principal (150

Speeches/Meeting Papers; 070 Information Analyses; 120 Opinion Papers). New
York.

247

 

               

MICHI

trinity Ittflflfllmnmmarlin

”TIA ERSITY LIBRA
93 56 9914