This paper explores an alternative principal development program that combines the development of shared leadership and individual leaders as schools pursue their learning-improvement agendas.
Bellamy, T. (2015). A Research-Informed Design for Preparing Principals: What We Could Do Differently and Why It Might Work Retrieved from ../../uploads/docs/2015WingSummitTB.pdf.
This report presents selected findings from the school principal data files of the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). It provides the following descriptive information on school principals by school type, student characteristics, and other relevant categories: number, race/ethnicity, age, gender, college degrees, salary, hours worked, focus of work, years experience, and tenure at current school.
Battle, D. (2009). Characteristics of Public, Private, and Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results From the 2007–08 Schools and Staf ng Survey (NCES 2009-323). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
This paper examines a number of promising principal preparation programs to identify lessons for improving the impact of principals on student perrmance.
A new approach to principal preparation: Innovative programs share their practices and lessons learned. Rainwater Leadership Alliance, 2010.
This paper has three objectives: (1) to create set of policies and initiatives by document the actions taken by Wallace Foundation, (2) to describe how states and districts have worked together to forge more-cohesive policies and initiatives aroung school leadership, (3)to examine the hypothesis that more-cohesive systems do in fact improve school leadership.
Augustine, C. H., Gonzalez, G., Ikemoto, G. S., Russell, J., & Zellman, G. L. (2009). Improving school leadership: The promise of cohesive leadership systems. Rand Corporation.
Using a structural perspective from organizational theory, the authors review aspects of schooling associated with dropout. They then briefly review selected reform initiatives that restructure the school environment to improve student achievement and retention.
Baker, J. A., Derrer, R. D., Davis, S. M., Dinklage-Travis, H. E., Linder, D. S., & Nicholson, M. D. (2001). The flip side of the coin: Understanding the school's contribution to dropout and completion. School psychology quarterly, 16(4), 406.
This paper proposes an incentive scheme for educators that links compensation to the ranks of their students within comparison sets.
Barlevy, G., & Neal, D. (2012). Pay for percentile. The American Economic Review, 102(5), 1805-1831.
The Characteristics of Public and Private Elementary School Principals in the United States is a subsection of the NCES 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). It provides descriptive statistics on K-12 school principals in areas such as: race, gender, education level, salary, experience, and working conditions.
Bitterman, A., Goldring, R., Gray, L., Broughman, S. (2014).Characteristics of Public and Private Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States:Results From the 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Summary, First Look. IES, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education
This well-written book on assertiveness clearly describes the non assertive, assertive, and aggressive styles of supervision. Each chapter provides numerous examples, practice exercises, and self-tests. The author identifies feelings and beliefs that support aggressiveness, non aggressiveness, or non assertiveness which help the reader "look beyond the words themselves."
Black, M. K. (1991). Assertive Supervision-Building Involved Teamwork. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 22(5), 224-224.
Over the past 10 years, the Southern Regional Education Board has helped states and public universities across the region evaluate their state policies for preparing school principals who are leaders of instruction. This benchmark report reviews the past decade and looks at 10 learning-centered leadership indicators to gauge how far states have come and how far they need to go in selecting, preparing and supporting leaders of change.
Bottoms, G., Egelson, P., & Bussey, L. H. (2012). Progress over a decade in preparing more effective school principals. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.
This review assesses the effectiveness of school-based curricula, finance, management, and teacher’s decision-making. This report has implications for the impact of charter schools, as the primary intervention in this model is local control. The report finds limited evidence of the effectiveness of these reforms, especially from low-income countries.
Carr-Hill, R., Rolleston, C., Pherali, T., & Schendel, R. (2014). The effects of school-based decision making on educational outcomes in low-and middle-income contexts: A systematic review.
A multilevel model of leadership, empowerment, and performance was tested using a sample of 62 teams, 445 individual members, 62 team leaders, and 31 external managers from 31 stores of a Fortune 500 company. Leader-member exchange and leadership climate-related differently to individual and team empowerment and interacted to influence individual empowerment.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R., Allen, D., & Rosen, B. (2007). A multilevel study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 331–346.
This is the first comprehensive national report to scrutinize the impact of strict Zero Tolerance approach in the America public school. This report illustrate that Zero Tolerance is unfair, is contrary to developmental needs of children, denies children educational opportunities, and often results in the criminalization of children.
Civil Rights Project. (2000). Opportunities suspended: The devastating consequences of zero tolerance and school discipline policies.
This study examines the associations between leadership behaviors and student achievement gains using a unique data source: in-person, full-day observations of principals collected over three school years. The study finds that principals’ time spent broadly on instructional functions does not predict student achievement growth. Time spent on informal classroom walkthroughs negatively predicts student growth, particularly in high schools.
Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective instructional time use for school leaders longitudinal evidence from observations of principals. Educational Researcher, 0013189X13510020.
This report provides descriptive information on traditional public, charter, and private school principals over the period of 1987-88 through 2011-12. It includes comparative data on number of principals, gender, race/ethnicity, age, advance degrees, principal experience, teaching experience, salaries, hours worked, focus of work, experience and tenure at current schools, etc.
Hill, J., Ottem, R., & DeRoche, J. (2016). Trends in Public and Private School Principal Demographics and Qualifications: 1987-88 to 2011-12. Stats in Brief. NCES 2016-189. National Center for Education Statistics.
This report is a comprehensive and research-based framework outlining the conditions necessary for transformational school leaders to succeed. It offers a framework of conditions that can help districts enable great school leadership.
Ikemoto, G., Taliaferro, L., Fenton, B., Davis, J. (2014)Great Principals at Scale: Creating Districts That Enable All Principals to be Effective. New Leaders
This study analyzed three urban districts' efforts to improve the instructional quality and performance of their schools. The study also assessed the efforts made in four: (1) promoting the instructional leadership of principals; (2) supporting the professional learning of teachers, in particular through school-based coaching models; (3) specifying curriculum; (4) and promoting data-based decision making for planning and instructional improvement.
Marsh, J. A., Kerr, K. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., Suttorp, M., Zimmer, R. W., & Barney, H. (2005). The Role of Districts in Fostering Instructional Improvement Lessons from Three Urban Districts Partnered with the Institute for Learning. RAND Corporation.
This report provides an overview of NYCLA’s flagship principal preparation program. Intended to help others involved in principal preparation think through important elements of principal preparation, including candidate selection, developing experiential learning opportunities, and funding, staffing and sustaining the program, the guide shares NYCLA’s successes and lessons learned during the 11 years we have delivered the Aspiring Principals Program in New York City, as well as through our work with various state and district partners nationally to adapt the program.
NYC Leadership Academy (2014). Taking Charge of Principal Preparation-A Guide to NYC Leadership Academy's Aspiring Principals Program. Retrieved from http://www.nycleadershipacademy.org/news-and-resources/tools-and-publications/pdfs/app-guide-full-guide.
In this report, the Southern Regional Education Board outlines critical actions that states, districts, universities and principals themselves should take as part of a systematic plan to address principal succession. The report makes the case for principal succession planning and describes six steps for succession planning that states and districts can implement to ensure they have the right principals for the job.
Schmidt-Davis, J., & Bottoms, G. (2011). Who's Next? Let's Stop Gambling on School Performance and Plan for Principal Succession. Southern Regional Education Board (SREB).
The National Teacher and Principal Survey is completed every four years soliciting descriptive information from principals and teachers across the 50 states. A few highlights include: Sixty percent of school principals have been at their schools for three years or less.
Taie, S., and Goldring, R. (2017). Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results From the 2015–16 National Teacher and Principal Survey First Look (NCES 2017-070). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved [date] from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2017070.
This report represents the first systematic comparison of student outcomes in schools led by the Aspiring Principals Program (APP) graduates after three years to those in comparable schools led by other new principals.
Weinstein, M., Schwartz, A. E., & Corcoran, S. P. (2009). The New York City Aspiring Principals Program: A School-Level Evaluation. NYU Wagner Research Paper, (2011-07).
The Council’s mission is to promote the cause of urban schools and to advocate for inner-city students through legislation, research and media relations.
UChicago Consortium was created in 1990 after the passage of the Chicago School Reform Act that decentralized governance of the city's public schools. Researchers at the University of Chicago joined with researchers from the school district and other organizations to form UChicago Consortium with the imperative to study this landmark restructuring and its long-term effects