Superintendent Perceptions of District Leadership for Improved Student Achievement


Book Description

The purpose of this study is to focus on how North Carolina superintendents perceive the importance and employ the self-assessed practices of the five McREL district-level leadership responsibilities linked to student achievement as they relate to the superintendents' years of experience and the size of the school system. One of the leading studies of the superintendent's professional practice was the Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) comprehensive study of the superintendency, which was released in a 2006 report. Waters and Marzano (2006) generate four major findings. These findings are: (1) District-level leadership matters, (2) Effective superintendents focus their efforts on creating goal-oriented districts, (3) Superintendent tenure is positively correlated with student achievement, and (4) Defined autonomy. Finding 2, effective superintendents focus their efforts on creating goal-oriented districts, generated five district-level leadership responsibilities related to setting and keeping districts focused on teaching and learning goals which have a statistically significant correlation with average student academic achievement. They are: (1) collaborative goal-setting, (2) non-negotiable goals for achievement and instruction, (3) board alignment with and support of district goals, (4) monitoring achievement and instructional goals, (5) use of resources to support the goals for instruction. The five responsibilities from Finding 2 served as the basis for the survey questions. Data gained from superintendent self assessment survey responses included superintendents' ratings of the importance of the leadership responsibilities along with their perceptions of how often they employ these practices. Responses were examined for similarities and differences with respect to length of service and school system size. McREL found that effective superintendents focus their efforts on creating goal oriented districts. This finding was significant enough from their meta-analysis of 27 studies related to effective school leaders that it emerged as one of four overall findings. This study found North Carolina superintendents share McREL's view that creating goal-oriented districts is important. Similarly, superintendents most often perceive that they practice the 5 responsibilities that McREL articulates as the practices relative to this finding. This study suggests McREL designed a potential blueprint for improving district-level achievement and North Carolina superintendents perceive they are employing the responsibilities that the McREL research identified as being important to student achievement.




District Leadership That Works


Book Description

Bridge the great divide between distanced administrative duties and daily classroom impact. This book introduces a top-down power mechanism called defined autonomy, a concept that focuses on district-defined, nonnegotiable, common goals and a system of accountability supported by assessment tools. Defined autonomy creates an effective balance of centralized direction and individualized empowerment that allows building-level staff the stylistic freedom to respond quickly and effectively to student failure.




School Superintendents' Perceptions of the American Association of School Administrators' Professional Standards for the Superintendency, Their Relevancy to the Superintendency and Correlation to Pre-service Preparation of Superintendents


Book Description

"Effective leadership is important at all levels of a school system. This study will focus on the school district superintendent. While the impact of this leadership position on student achievement has been cited in several studies, research on the preparation of individuals for the superintendency is minimal. The media reports shortages in the field by citing the lower number of applicants for these positions. However, the existing research is inconclusive. While the number of applications for a given position may be lower than in the past, school districts are still reporting satisfaction with the search process and the candidates they select. Various standards projects for K-12 educational leadership exist. Many of these were prompted by the perceived need to attract more candidates to the field at every level of educational administration. The researcher selected the American Association of School Administrators' (AASA) Professional Standards for the Superintendency as a proxy for the knowledge and skills needed to be effective in the superintendency. These standards were created to improve educational leadership effectiveness at the superintendent level. They provide a framework for the development of improved leadership preparation programs and assist in individual leadership performance evaluation. For the purposes of this study, the AASA Standards have been correlated to the Four Frames leadership model developed by Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal. This correlation serves as the conceptual framework for this research project. This study examined the perceptions of current New York State school superintendents regarding the applicability of the AASA leadership standards by comparing two groups. The superintendents in the treatment group of this study participated in the SUNY Oswego Superintendent Development Program (SDP) prior to acquiring their first superintendency. The comparison group was comprised of current superintendents who did not participate in this specific pre-service preparation program prior to becoming a school superintendent. The majority of school superintendents responding to the survey indicated that the AASA leadership standards are consistent with the daily work of superintendents. The average percent of respondents selecting the responses extremely or very important was 77% for the 33 indicators surveyed. In addition, superintendents responding to the survey believed they were prepared for the superintendency in their first year. The average percent of responses for the answers extremely or very prepared was 44% for the 33 indicators. When we add the answer prepared, the average increases from 44 to 76%. Only 6% selected not prepared for the 33 indicators surveyed. When survey respondent data was disaggregated, differences among perceptions of preparation were found for some groups. The SDP and earning a doctorate appear to be promising pathways for preparing school superintendents. On average, respondents to the AASA Standards Survey who participated in the SDP and/or earned a doctorate indicated that they were better prepared to perform the tasks described by the indicators than other respondents. Differences in perception of preparedness were the greatest for SDP and non-SDP women. Regardless of their preparation pathway, the results of the survey identified two areas were superintendent preparation might be improved. The indicators to "develop a process for maintaining accurate fiscal reporting" was ranked 30 out of 33 and to "describe procedures for superintendent-school board interpersonal/working relationships" was ranked 32 out of 33 by all respondents. These two indicators were among the five indicators ranked last by mean score by all subgroups of respondents as well. Interestingly, these results confirm the findings of previous studies on the superintendency. The most successful school districts have leadership structures where the superintendent and school board work towards the same goals, keeping students' interests first in their decision-making. These school districts also manage their resources well. Waters and Marzano (2006) found that "board alignment and support of district goals" and "use of resources to support academic achievement and instruction goals" were among the top five areas where superintendents should focus their efforts in order to impact student achievement positively. Given the importance of these skills, organizations preparing future superintendents should review their programs in these two areas: superintendent-school board relations and resource management"--Leaves ix-xi.




School and District Leadership in an Era of Accountability


Book Description

Our fourth book in the International Research on School Leadership series focuses on school leadership in an era of high stakes accountability. Fueled by sweeping federal education accountability reforms, such as the United States’ No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Race to the Top (R2T) and Australia’s Performance Measurement and Reporting Taskforce, school systems around the world are being forced to increase academic standards, participate in high-stakes testing, and raise evaluation standards for teachers and principals. These results-driven reforms are intended to hold educators “accountable for student learning and accountable to the public” (Anderson, 2005, p. 2, emphasis in original). While policymakers and the public debate the merits of student achievement accountability measures, P-12 educational leaders do not have the luxury to wait for clear guidance and resources to improve their schools and operating systems. Instead, successful leaders must balance the need to create learning communities, manage the organizational climate, and encourage community involvement with the consequences testing has on teacher morale and public scrutiny. The chapters in this volume clearly indicate that as school leaders attend to these potentially competing forces, this affects their problem-solving strategies, ability to facilitate change, and encourage community involvement. We were delighted with the responses from colleagues around the world who were eager to share their research dealing with how leaders are functioning effectively within a high-accountability environment. The nine chapters in this volume provide empirical evidence of the strategies school leaders use to cope with problems and negotiate external demands while improving student performance. In particular, the voices and actions of principals, superintendents, and school board members are captured in a blend of quantitative and qualitative studies. The breadth of studies is impressive, ranging from case studies of individual principals to cross-district comparisons to national data from the National Center for Education Statistics. To highlight important findings, we have organized the book into five sections. The first section (Chapters 2, 3, and 4) highlights the problem-solving strategies used by principals and superintendents when pressured to turn around low-performing schools. In the second section (Chapters 5 and 6), attention is devoted to ways in which school leaders act as “buffers” by reducing the impact of external demands within their local school contexts. Next, Chapters 7 and 8 explore creative ways in which financial analyses can be used to assess the cost effectiveness of programs and services. Chapters 9 and 10 examine how principals enact their instructional leadership roles in managing curriculum reforms and evaluating teachers. Finally, in the last section (Chapter 11), Kenneth Leithwood synthesizes the major themes and ideas emerging across these chapters, paying particular attention to practical issues influencing school leaders in this era of school reform and accountability as well as promising areas for future research.




Understanding Superintendents' Self-efficacy Influences on Instructional Leadership and Student Achievement


Book Description

This dissertation explores public school superintendent self-efficacy influences on instructional and student achievement within three Texas public school districts. The purpose of this research study was to investigate superintendent self-efficacy and its perceived influence on instructional leadership in districts with persistent student achievement inequities for economically disadvantaged and students of color. This study specifically focused on three White male public school superintendents with varying numbers of student populations that have large percentages of economically disadvantaged students and students of color. Two research questions guided the inquiry process: 1. How do superintendents in school districts in which children of color and children from low-income homes persistently under-perform perceive their effectiveness in the area of instructional leadership? 2. What are superintendents' perceptions about how their instructional leadership beliefs are influenced by the context of federal and state accountability in which they work? This study employed a qualitative method of investigation utilizing a case-study approach to examine the perceptions, beliefs, and views of participating superintendents. Two in-depth interviews with each school superintendent served as primary data collection sources, while field notes, personal observations, email, and phone conversations served as secondary and clarifying sources. Data were interpreted using a critical interpretivist lens. This inquiry contributes to the body of superintendent practice and limited research scholarship by assisting in the understanding of perceived superintendent selfefficacy influences on instructional leadership and student achievement. These understandings have additional implications for the intersection of power, privilege, and emancipatory critical constructs for superintendents with populations of economically disadvantaged students and students of color. Findings from this study serve to highlight needed calls to action and reforms in superintendent preparatory programs, research scholarship, professional organizations, and regional educational service centers.




Instructional Leadership


Book Description

Discusses four key qualities of instructional leaders: resource provider, instructional resource, communicator, and visible presence.




The Superintendent as Instructional Leader Exploring Teachers' Values and Perceptions of the Role


Book Description

Superintendents play an important role in the achievement of students. Specific instructional leadership behaviors of superintendents and how they are perceived by teachers have received little attention through research on the topic until recently. The focus of this study was to explore teachers' perceptions of the instructional leadership role of the superintendent, and how their beliefs and values about instructional leadership behaviors of the superintendent affect those perceptions. This study also sought to find how teachers' perceptions of the instructional leadership practices of their superintendent may be affected by their own particular experiential factors, such as experience level teaching discipline and school level. Data for this quantitative study was gathered using a three-part survey, which was completed by teachers from seven component school districts of an upstate Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) regional district. Instructional leadership behaviors of the superintendent were based on Smith and Andrews' (1989) model, within which four constructs of instructional leadership were used to define the superintendent as an instructional resource, resource provider, communicator, and visible presence. Findings showed a positive correlation between teachers' belief that instructional leadership is an important role of the superintendent and their willingness to work constructively with a superintendent who demonstrates instructional leadership practices. Teachers' level of experience and school level may also have a relationship with the combined variables of teachers' belief in the importance of instructional leadership and their willingness to work constructively with their superintendent in that role, although no statistical significance could be demonstrated.




District Leadership's Influence on Student Achievement


Book Description

The Every Student Succeeds Act requires state education agencies to develop accountability measures that identify no less than five percent of school districts for improvement (Every Student Succeeds Act, 2015). Per its federally approved ESSA Plan, New York State developed accountability measures to identify each school district as either a district in good standing or a Target District based on the achievement of its students (NYSE D,2017).In 2019,17% of New York State school districts were identified as Target Districts (NYSED, 201e). The purpose of this comparative case study was to explore how district leaders applied political reasoning to goal setting, problem definition, and solution implementation in an effort to improve student achievement. To evaluate district leadership's influence on student achievement, this study focused on three school districts designated as Target Districts by the New York State Education Department prior to the2016-2017 school year and who earned a Made Progress or Good Standing designation in 2017 -201 8, 20 1 8-20 1 9, or 2019-2020. Using Stone's (2012) framework for political reasoning, three research questions were used to explore perceptions of district leadership's political reasoning and its impact on student achievement. Data were gathered through interviews with four-to-five participants from each district, including superintendents, assistant superintendents, building principals, and teachers. Key findings showed that participants perceived that district leaders from all three districts focused goals on the needs of all students which aligned with Stone's (2012) description of equity. Additionally, key findings showed that participants perceived that district leaders clearly aligned district goals with building level actions which aligned with Stone's (2012) description of efficiency. Finally, key findings showed that participants perceived that district leadership implemented targeted professional development, intentional collaboration, and systems for data collection that all aligned with district goals. The strategic alignment between district goals and implemented practices reflected Stone's (2012) description of interests. Six conclusions were developed based on findings from this study. District leadership focused on identifying and setting clear targets for defined groups or subgroups of students when developing goals. District leadership expected that buildings would address district priorities through progress monitoring for targeted groups or through focused feedback between teachers and administrators. District leaders aligned district goals with building level actions. Building level problem-solving solutions reflected the priorities of their districts. District leadership set clear and measurable building targets and the influence of those targets on building progress monitoring. District goals mobilized building stakeholders to improve achievement for defined groups or subgroups of students. Based on these conclusions, it is recommended that district leadership explicitly identify groups or subgroups of students on which goals will focus, that district leadership consider how to efficiently align district goals and building level actions, and that district leadership consider how best to mobilize building stakeholders to achieve district goals.




Central Office Inquiry


Book Description

Drawing on a three-year study, this book helps central office leadership and staff examine their current school improvement efforts and consider how to provide more cohesive, effective support to their schools.




School Leadership That Works


Book Description

This guide to the 21 leadership responsibilities that influence student achievement will help school leaders focus on changes that really make a difference.