A Principal’s Dilemma: Instructional Leader or Manager
By Bettye Grigsby, Gary Schumacher, John Decman, Felix Simieou III
Volume 8 - Issue 3
Jun 1, 2010 - 1:31:23 PM
Introduction
A
quality curriculum and effective instruction are key elements to ensure
successful teaching and learning on a campus.
Due to the current climate of school reform, principals are held more
accountable for student success making school leadership even more critical
(Levine, 2005). The principal is the
individual best positioned within the school to evaluate the curriculum and
evaluation process (Parkay, Hass, & Anctil, 2010). This requires that the principal become deeply
engaged in the school’s instructional program (Hallinger, 2005).Traditionally,
principals were expected to set clear goals, allocate resources to instruction,
manage the curriculum, monitor lesson plans and evaluate teachers (DiPaola
& Hoy, 2008). Today, the principals’
responsibilities include a deeper and broader involvement in the mechanics of
teaching and learning, the use of data to make decisions, and prescribe and
participate in meaningful and innovative professional development (King,
2002). As a result, principals must find
a way for managerial and instructional responsibilities to complement and
support each other instead of being in constant competition (Shellard, 2003).
Purpose of Study
This
study focuses on the emphasis principals’ place on the design and delivery of
curriculum and instruction on individual campuses and the extent federal
regulation has impacted principal behaviors as instructional leaders. The transformation from the principal’s role
of manager to that which is inclusive of instructional leadership is due to the
steady increase of the regulations governing the accountability system
culminating in No Child Left Behind. In
fact, “ … one in three principals says implementation of NCLB is the most
pressing issue he or she is facing” (Sergiovanni, 2009, p. 44).
This
transformation has also prompted more attention to determining common goals in
principal preparation programs through the Interstate School Leaders Licensure
Consortium (ISLLC) Standards (Glatthorn & Jailall, 2009). With the structuring of these standards,
universities must use innovative strategies to ensure aspiring principals are
equipped with the necessary tools for successfully implementing and monitoring
curriculum.
Literature Review
The
emphasis placed on the leadership role of the principal has changed during the
past 30 years (McEwan, 2003). Today’s
leader is expected to be the “chief learning officer,” an individual who is
responsible for developing and supporting a collaborative school culture
focused on teaching and learning (Green, 2010).
Instructional leadership refers to the knowledge and skills principals
possess to effectively support the academic program (Shellard, 2003). In other words, instructional leadership is anything
leaders do to improve teaching and learning by gathering evidence of student
achievement that demonstrates improvement (King, 2002). Instructional leaders must be prepared to
focus time, attention, and effort on changing what students are taught, how
they are taught, and what they are learning (Bottoms & O’Neill, 2001). Ultimate accountability for student
achievement is incumbent upon the instructional leader.
Expected behavior, customary function, and routine
actions are terms used when referring to the role a person plays in an
organization. The role of an instructional
leader is to (a) provide instructional leadership through the establishment,
articulation, and implementation of a vision of learning, (b) create and
sustain a community of learners that makes student and adult learning the
center focus, (c) facilitate the creation of a school culture and climate based
on high expectations for students and faculty, (d) advocate, nurture, and
sustain a school culture that is conducive to student learning and staff
professional growth, (e) lead the school improvement process in a manner that
addresses the needs of all students, (f) engage the community in activities to
solicit support for student success, and (g) utilize multiple sources of data
to assess, identify, and foster instructional improvement (Green, 2010; Jenkins,
2009; Wanzare & Da Costa, 2001).
When
speaking of responsibilities, terms such as particular obligation, duty, charge, and undertaking come to mind. These include having a comprehensive
understanding of school and classroom practices that contribute to student
achievement, knowing how to work with faculty/staff to implement continuous
student improvement, and knowing how to provide the necessary support for
faculty/staff to carry out research-based curriculum and instructional
practices (Bottoms & O’Neill, 2001).
In order to successfully fulfill the roles and responsibilities of
leadership, instructional leaders must have a vision of what they want the
school to become. This vision should be
encapsulated within the ISLLC standards.
Teaching and learning should be the main focus. This vision should be communicated to each
stakeholder in a way that they will share the same vision. Based on this vision, a plan should be
developed in order to fulfill the goal of meeting the needs of all
students. Once the vision has been
established, developed, and implemented, sustaining the vision is necessary by
supporting teachers’ professional growth in the form of professional
development.
Effective professional development consists of activities directly
focused on teachers helping students achieve learning goals and supporting student
learning (ASCD, 2002). Instructional
leaders become teachers of teachers by facilitating lifelong learning when
promoting professional development (DiPaola & Hoy, 2003). According to
Lewis (2000), learner-centered or research-based professional development contributes
to effectiveness. Professional
development should be extended beyond the one-shot workshop by promoting ongoing
learning opportunities for teachers to learn in the same ways they are expected
to teach.
The purpose of effective professional development is to improve a
teacher’s ability to teach (DiPaola & Hoy, 2008). Collaboration with the teacher is key to
developing and implementing effective professional development for increased
student learning. NCLB requires that
federal funds only support professional development activities grounded in
scientifically-based research (Yell & Drasgow, 2005). Activities listed
under NCLB should:
improve
teachers' knowledge of the academic subjects they teach;
be
a part of the school wide educational improvement plans;
help
teachers teach students to meet challenging standards;
improve
classroom management skills;
be
connected to effective instructional practices based on scientifically
based research;
substantially
increase the knowledge and teaching skills of teachers;
be
aligned with state standards;
provide
instruction in methods of teaching children with special needs;
include
instruction in the use of data and assessments (US Department of
Education, 2010).
In order for professional development to be effective, data from a
variety of sources should be used to determine activities; data should be
presented in various formats; be ongoing and continuous; and include an
evaluation process to assess effectiveness.
One way instructional leaders can be trained in providing effective
professional development that leads to increased student achievement is through
principal preparation programs.
Principal preparation programs should provide the necessary tools
for instructional leaders to succeed as leaders in today’s high-pressure,
achievement-based accountability environment (Bottoms, O’Neill, Fry, & Hill,
2003). The Interstate School Leaders Licensure
Consortium (ISLLC) states in Standard 2 that a school administrator 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 (CCSSO, 2008).
Methodology
A qualitative research design was used to gain better insight into
the principals’ involvement with the design, delivery and monitoring of
curriculum and instruction, support provided for teachers through classroom
visits, and quality of professional development. Two questions guided this study:
1.
What do principals perceive is their level of involvement in
curriculum and instruction on their campus?
2.
What do principals perceive is the extent of their responsibility
of curriculum and instruction on their campus?
Participants
A sample of 35 principals from various school districts in the
Houston metropolitan area participated in the study. The participants consisted of 15 elementary,
10 middle, and 10 high school building principals. Data was collected through 30 minute
individual interviews on their respective campuses. Years of experience ranged from 12 to 26
years in education, at least 4 years as an assistant principal, and 1 to 12
years as the building principal.
Data Analysis
This study was completed using a content
analysis approach to identify emerging themes from the principals’
perception regarding their roles in instructional leadership. Transcribed texts of interviews were uploaded
to Crawdad software. This program
provides key word scores, concept mapping, comparison, clusters, and theme
analysis. Once key phrases were
determined, a conceptual analysis was performed. The phrases most relevant to curriculum and
instruction were further analyzed. The
frequency of the phrases as well as subtle differences in the wording was used
to determine relevance. Categories were created. This process was applied to elementary,
middle, and high school principal interviews.
Based on the conceptual analysis three themes emerged for each level.
Results
Findings are reported according to the thematic units which
emerged during the analysis of the principals’ interviews for each level
.
Elementary Principals
The role of the instructional leader, responsibility of the
instructional leader, and effective professional development were the themes
that developed from the elementary principals’ interviews.
Role of the instructional
leader
Elementary principals discussed having a
shared vision of success through site-based decision making
meetings, providing adequate planning time for teachers, and creating a school
mission centered on continued professional learning and reflection.
Responsibility of the
instructional leader
Analyzing data with the faculty to
determine strengths and areas of concern.
Searching for best research-based
strategies and instruction to improve student achievement.
Conducting multiple walk-throughs
and providing constructive feedback.
Staying informed by attending
national conferences, networking with other principals, and reading
journals.
Knowing where to find answers about
curriculum and instruction, and
Making informed decisions based on
the campus needs.
Effective Professional
Development
Should always be purposeful and
meaningful to the teachers in attendance.
Teachers should be properly trained
to increase teaching success.
Principals should attend many of
the workshops with teachers to stay informed.
Middle School Principals
The emerging themes from the interviews with middle school
principals were: Creating a vision, role of the instructional leader, and
responsibility of the instructional leader.
Create a vision of success
for teachers and students
Keep teachers focused on student
achievement and learning.
Create an atmosphere that will
allow teachers to be successful in the classroom.
Make curriculum and instruction an
absolute priority.
Become the “Lead Learner” – Set the
example.
Encourage risk-taking.
Develop a long range plan
encompassing support and training for all teachers.
Role of the instructional
leader
Receive minutes from meetings
between literacy coaches and teachers.
Provide resources and necessary
technology.
Make sure teachers receive the
curriculum.
Pass on information obtained from
the district office.
Responsibility of the
instructional leader
Provide relevant professional
development that is data driven and related to teacher needs to improve
instruction.
Conduct walk-throughs to ensure the
curriculum is taught and effective instructional strategies are being
utilized.
Stay informed of changes in
curriculum and instruction by attending national conferences.
Read curriculum-based published
literature.
Model lessons for individual
teachers.
High School Principals
The following themes emerged from the interviews with high school
principals: State accountability, role
of the instructional leader, and responsibility of the instructional leader.
State accountability
The school’s performance on AYP and the state ratings are a
reflection on the principal’s performance.
One principal stated, “If we are acceptable and meet AYP, then I have
been successful in doing my job.”
Role of the instructional
leader
Attend meetings chaired by
leadership team.
Oversee leadership team assigned to
monitor specific departments.
Hold leadership team accountable
for monitoring classroom instruction.
Conduct leadership meetings to
maintain focus.
Communicate to teachers that the
district curriculum is available on-line.
Determine professional development
based on teaching experience.
Responsibility of the
instructional leader
Make sure state curriculum is
implemented.
Stay informed of curriculum changes
by attending district level meetings and subscribing to a distribution
list.
Discussion
The elementary school principals in this study appear to be more attuned
to curricular issues. These administrators
consistently spoke about improving their own professional growth to help
teachers. Research shows that effective instructional leaders recognize their
own need to develop a broad knowledge base in curriculum and instruction and
therefore seek professional development activities to achieve that goal (King,
2002). These principals spent 60% - 80% of their time in classrooms and
concentrated on areas that directly impacted instruction. Conversely, research shows that most
principals spend one-third or less of the average work week of 62 hours participating
in curriculum and instruction (Schiff, 2002).
The instructional leadership style was more collaborative. This group of principals has moved more
toward the instructional model of leadership.
The middle school principals in this study placed more emphasis on
instructional strategies and provided support/training for teachers to become
successful. Also, principals did not
conduct meetings with the entire department to discuss data and strategies. This group is also moving more toward the
instructional leadership model.
The high school principals in this study delegated the majority of
their curriculum and instructional responsibilities to leadership teams on the
campus. Effective instructional leaders
recognize the talents and expertise of others, provide opportunities for
leadership development, and create a broad base of leadership in their schools
(DiPaola & Hoy, 2003). However,
these principals must remain cognizant of the fact that they are ultimately
responsible for student achievement. Professional
development was not designed based on classroom observations, but instead it was
determined according to the teacher’s years of experience. These high school principals are still in the
managerial mode of thinking when it comes to curriculum and instruction.
One commonality that was missing at every grade level was the lack
of community involvement with sharing and soliciting support from the
community. The instructional leader may
have a vision but it must be communicated so community members understand the
common goal and be knowledgeable of the desired results (Green, 2010).
Even though there has been an increase in the accountability for
principals, only elementary school principals in this study provide evidence about
more contemporary philosophies of leadership in curriculum and
instruction. Based on the interview
data, these principals exhibit a better balance of managerial and instructional
leadership at this level. Middle school
principals are slowing moving in that direction, while high school principals
have not fully transitioned into the mode of instructional leadership.
Recommendations and
Conclusions
Recommendations for Building Principals
Meet with every department after
each benchmark test to discuss results and determine strategies that would
improve the areas of concern.
Have teachers note any suggestions
for improvement to the curriculum after each grading period. Compile and send to the person in charge
of curriculum writing.
Visit curriculum writers during the
summer months to become more aware of the curriculum. Your presence speaks volumes.
Provide meaningful professional
development based on analyzed data and teacher need.
Conduct walk-throughs and provide
meaningful feedback to all teachers.
Model lessons for teachers.
Share the vision of curriculum and
instruction with the community. Involve
parents/grandparents and businesses in helping the vision come to
fruition.
Implications for Principal Preparation Programs
Principal preparation programs may not be providing the practical
experience that principals need to be successful instructional leaders to meet
the accountability demands of school programs. Levine (2005) suggests that
preparation program pedagogy needs to focus on the demands of practicing
leaders – combining both on-the-job training and classroom instruction.
Hess and Kelly (2007) ask:
The
vital question is whether the lack of attention to certain schools of thought
regarding management may leave aspiring principals prepared for the traditional
world of educational leadership but not for the challenges they will face in
the 21st century. Principal
preparation programs that pay little attention to data, productivity,
accountability, or working with parents may leave their graduates unprepared
for new responsibilities. (p. 268)
Bottoms et al. (2003) suggest recalibrating preparation programs
to emphasize the core functions of the high-achieving school: curriculum,
instruction, and student achievement.
Implications for principal preparation programs include:
Create an urgency that curriculum
and instruction is a key component to student success on a campus. This
should become an overarching theme in principal preparation courses such
as
Curriculum & Instruction
and the
Principalship.
Field-based projects could connect course instruction content with
practical applications.
Provide principals with the tools
needed to help teachers be successful in the classroom: data
analysis/disaggregation/understanding, research-based instructional
strategies and effective professional development. Principal preparation
programs should provide multiple opportunities for aspiring administrators
to analyze student performance data and use this information to plan
instructional methods that will lead to performance improvement.
Train in ways to manage time so
that there is a healthy balance between managerial and instructional
leadership. For example, in the
Principalship
course, students could engage in a literature review and/or reading of
current literature examining strategies that principals utilize to ensure
the proper balance in their performance responsibilities.
Partner with school districts to
provide real world training for aspiring administrators. Professors of principal preparation
programs should work with school leaders to solve specific problems within
curriculum and instruction. This
should be continuous throughout the program (Bottoms et al, 2003).
This
article was modified from a presentation at the National Conference of
Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) annual conference in San
Antonio, TX, August 2009.
References
Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development (ASCD). (2002).
Design
your
DiPaola, M. F., & Hoy, W. K. (2008).
Principals improving instruction: Supervision,
evaluation
and professional development. Boston, MA: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Glatthorn, A. A., & Jailall, J. M.
(2009).
The principal as curriculum leader:
Shaping what is
taught and tested. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Green, R. L. (2010).
The four dimensions of principal leadership:
A framework for leading 21st
century schools. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Hallinger,
P. (2005). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of
instructional and transformational leadership.
Cambridge Journal of Education.33(3),
329-352. doi: 10.1080/0305764032000122005
Hess,
F. M., & Kelly, A. P. (2007). Learning to lead: What gets taught in
principal-preparation programs.
Teachers
College Record, 109(1), 244-274.
Jenkins, B. (2009). What it takes to be
an instructional leader.
Principal. 88(3),
34-37.
King, D. (2002). The changing shape of leadership.
Educational
Leadership. 59(8)
, 61-63.
Levine, A. (2005).
Educating school leaders. Education Schools Project. Teacher’s
College,
