Leadership practices ofsuccessful middle school

principalsKaren Leigh Sanzo

Department of Educational Foundations and Leadership, College of Education,Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Whitney H. ShermanDepartment of Educational Leadership, Virginia Commonwealth University,

Richmond, Virginia, USA, and

Jennifer ClaytonDepartment of Educational Foundations and Leadership, College of Education,

Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Abstract

Purpose – This study aims to be one in a series examining the leadership best practices of schoolprincipals as they lead in an accountability- and standards-driven school environment. The lack ofresearch and necessity to find successful practices to improve student achievement highlight the needfor this study.

Design/methodology/approach – An inductive exploratory study was designed to provide insightinto how successful middle school principals facilitate high levels of student achievement.

Findings – Common themes of practices enabling the principals to serve effectively in their schoolsemerged from the conversations and were grouped in the following categories: sharing leadership;facilitating professional development; leading with an instructional orientation; and acting openly andhonestly.

Originality/value – This research contributes to the field by providing insights into the practices ofleaders of successful schools in a high-stakes testing environment. The study provides a framework onwhich leaders should model their own practices, as well as informing leadership preparation programsareas around which to focus their instructional content.

Keywords Education, Leadership, Principals, Schools

Paper type Research paper

In the USA, accountability in the public schools has been inextricably linked with TheNo Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 since it was signed into law on January 8,2002. In Virginia, the NCLB legislation rode in on the tail of an accountability system,the Virginia Accountability Initiative (VAI), which, while already vigorous incomparison to most states, failed to recognize and require treatment and prevention ofachievement gaps. The inception of NCLB ushered in a period of intense focus onaccountability and high standards in US schools. Although schools have always beenheld accountable for student performance, whether through fiscal sanctions or publicopinion, this federal mandate has brought attention to achievement gaps, rewards andsanctions for teachers and schools like no other time before, and has caused public

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm

Leadershippractices

31

Received January 2010Revised March 2010Accepted June 2010

Journal of EducationalAdministration

Vol. 49 No. 1, 2011pp. 31-45

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0957-8234

DOI 10.1108/09578231111102045

scrutiny so intense that a day does not go by that a school, a district, a teacher, or aleader’s practice is not brought into question in a highly public manner.

Failure to meet federal accountability standards, also known as Adequate YearlyProgress (AYP) under NCLB, and state standards will result in a number of sanctionsagainst the school and district, including eliminating federal funding and schoolreconstitution. While schools and communities must work together for achievement,the role of the principal in ensuring that schools continually meet AYP and stateaccreditation standards is vital because it is the school leader who sets the tone for allactivities in the school. According to Leithwood et al. (2006, pp. 14-15), “there is not asingle documented case of a school successfully turning around its pupil achievementtrajectory in the absence of talented leadership”.

Elmore (2005) argues that the demands placed upon school leaders in the currentage of accountability have universally and fundamentally changed the face of modernschool leadership. However, there is a lack of empirical research on the practices ofsuccessful principals in a post-NCLB era (Hale and Rollins, 2006). This project is one ina series of studies examining the practices of successful school principals in theCommonwealth of Virginia. The first two explored the practices of elementary andhigh school principals, and this research, therefore, addresses the laments of Leithwood(2005, p. 619) that qualitative studies are often not “revisited in subsequent studies bythe original researchers”. By placing this study in the context of a series of studiesconducted by the authors (see Crum and Sherman, 2008), we seek to addressLeithwood’s concerns. Our current study attempts to provide the field with informationabout how successful middle school leadership can positively impact studentachievement in a climate of educational accountability. We set the context for thisstudy by discussing accountability and the impact of the school leader on studentachievement. The emergent themes from an inductive analysis of the middle schoolprincipal interviews are examined and implications for practice are discussed.Recommendations for educational leadership training, practice, and research are alsoprovided.

AccountabilityAccountability is not a new concept (Normore, 2003). Demands for accountability in thepublic school system however, have dramatically increased in the USA within the past25 years to the point where accountability is a daily, pervasive (and sometimesintrusive) reality of school practice. In the USA, the early 1990s led to a period of publicand political demand for increased transparency in school academic performance.According to Normore (2003, p. 56):

[. . .] in the 1990s, the standards movement, a development of A Nation at Risk’s call for highexpectations and goals for all learners, sought to raise achievement by instituting a system ofstandards for what students should know, curriculum to embody the standards, and theassessments to test how well students meet the standards.

NCLB established a system of benchmarks which schools are required to meet onspecified timelines. All schools must show AYP of both the student body in its entiretyand for specific student subgroups on achievement tests, as well as in other categoriessuch as attendance and graduation rates. The requirements at the federal level increaseon a yearly basis. While some schools have been able to consistently meet the required

JEA49,1

32

standards, others have struggled and currently face sanctions, including financialpenalties and school reconstitution. In Virginia, for example, 26 percent of schools and59 percent of divisions did not meet AYP in 2008-2009 based on 2007-2008 achievement(Virginia Department of Education, 2008-2009).

The structure of middle schools varies from district to district, and even from schoolto school. In the USA, the current model for most middle schools is one that focuses onacademics, citizenship, and social/emotional development, as opposed to a juniorhigh/miniature high school model for the middle school grades. Efficacy of the currentmiddle school model is being questioned and accountability demands are placing astrain on middle schools’ ability to meet the academic needs of students, whileaddressing the other focal points of the middle grade schools (Brown et al., 2004).Leadership at the middle school level is therefore complex and numerous demands areplaced on principals on a daily basis. Contemporary middle school leaders have a vastarray of responsibilities and “been characterized as one who must be atransformational leader, the primary change agent in the school, an expert inteaching and learning, and one who can engage in collaborative leadership anddecision making” (Petzko et al., 2002, p. 4).

Principal’s impact on achievementAlthough classroom instruction has the greatest school level impact on studentachievement, leadership has the second greatest effect (Leithwood et al., 2004). Gurret al. (2005, p. 548) found that “the principal remains an important and significantfigure in determining the success of a school” in their case study research onAustralian principals. Likewise, Marzano et al. (2005), found that leaders who improveupon their leadership skills and responsibilities can contribute to as much as a 10percentile point increase on student test scores.

Leithwood et al. (2006) explored the literature on successful school leadership andfound four common core practices:

(1) setting directions;

(2) developing people;

(3) redesigning the organization; and

(4) managing the instructional (teaching and learning) program.

(See Successful School Leadership: What It Is and How It Influences Pupil Learning(Leithwood et al., 2006) for a full description of each of the four core practices and 14specific categories.)

“Core practices are not all that people providing leadership in schools do. But theyare especially critical practices known to have significant influence on organizationalgoals” (Leithwood et al., 2006, p. 19). Utilizing these practices enables us to movebeyond a ”cause-and-effect” approach to effective school leadership found in manystudies (Parkes and Thomas, 2006) and explore the multi-faceted nature of theleadership position.

The increased emphasis on high-stakes accountability has amplified the focus onfactors that influence student achievement. School leadership, in particular, has beenscrutinized as to whether a principal’s actions directly or indirectly impact school andstudent success (Leithwood et al., 2006). While there are numerous tasks that compete

Leadershippractices

33

for a leader’s attention, research demonstrates that effective principals positivelyimpact student learning and achievement through their role as instructional leaders,albeit in indirect ways (Boyan, 1988; Dinham, 2005; Gurr et al., 2006; Hallinger andHeck, 1998; Leithwood and Riehl, 2003; Marzano et al., 2005).

In an international study of successful principals in high-poverty schools,researchers found that principals displayed similar leadership attributes and stylesmost closely linked to setting and maintaining a specific direction for their schools(Yilmaki et al., 2007). This requires leaders to have both information of the current stateof the school and the vision to know where the school needs to go (Manasse, 1986). Asprincipals seek to manage both mandated and un-mandated change within theirschools, they must consider the impact on each stakeholder to be successful. Crum andSherman (2008, p. 575) indicated that the educational leader needs to demonstratepersistence and a positive outlook to reach sustained and effective change.

The increased and dichotomous demands for principals have caused many to forgoentrance into the field (Lyons and Algozzine, 2006). Tucker and Codding (2002, p. 1)present a dismal description:

Why would anyone want the job of principal? Many school principals we know have the lookthese days of the proverbial deer caught in the headlights. Almost overnight, it seems, theyhave been caught in the high beams of the burgeoning accountability movement.

Thus, it is important to examine the practices of successful school principals who havechosen to remain in the field and involve them in the development of leadershipknowledge for future leaders to maintain a continuous pipeline of leaders (Lyons andAlgozzine, 2006). Researchers should continue to seek a clear understanding of theexperiences of those in the field to guide future training as well as professionaldevelopment opportunities for existing leaders. This research seeks to provideevidence to further practices of successful leaders.

MethodologyRecent accountability efforts have placed an inordinate amount of pressure uponprincipals (Mintrop and Trujillo, 2005). As standards continue to increase in the USA,many schools are not able to meet increasing levels of expectations placed upon themby the federal government, state statues, and stakeholders. Because post-NCLBresearch on practices of successful principals is lacking (Hale and Rollins, 2006),questions have been raised in regard to what actions principals take who have beensuccessful order to promote and sustain successful schools. The purpose of thisinductive, exploratory study is to explore how a small group of successful principals inthe Commonwealth of Virginia conceptualize their practices.

This study was the third phase of a larger project that examined successful k-12principals. The first study explored the practices of high school principals, followed bya subsequent study on elementary principals. We designed the study to explore thepractices of middle school principals that enabled them to effectively lead successfulschools. Research questions included:

(1) How do leaders develop a shared understanding of their organizations?

(2) How do leaders support and sustain school performance?

(3) What do leaders do to facilitate change?

JEA49,1

34

For this study, successful school principals were defined as: those whose schools metCommonwealth of Virginia accreditation standards; those whose schools met thefederal NCLB accreditation standards; and principals in at least their third year asprincipal. Schools that meet accreditation requirements have met a series of indicatorsidentified by the state and federal government that reflects student achievement.Achievement indicators include, but are not limited to, end-of-course subject pass rates(i.e. English, math, social studies, and science), attendance rates, and graduation rates.

Participants were purposefully selected (Patton, 1990) from a list of successfulmiddle schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Ten principals were chosen,representing a diverse cross-section of school sizes, locales, and student groupings.One-hour interviews were negotiated with the principals. A standard interview guide(Appendix) was used. Participants were asked to frame their responses around specificinstances of action to better exemplify their leadership practices. All participantidentifiers were removed from materials and analytic notes were taken throughout theinterviews to assist in our process of identifying themes from the data (Maxwell, 1996).Transcriptions from the ten interviews were coded using an open coding, constantcomparison process (Creswell, 2007). Category saturation was obtained after a thoroughreview of the transcripts by the researchers (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). A matrix wasdeveloped to assist in visualizing the various themes (Creswell) which emerged and toidentify any connectedness, and therefore aiding in collapsing/merging themes.

Owing to the potential of specific school characteristics being linked directly toparticipating principals, only general demographic information is reported. Five maleprincipals and five female principals were interviewed for this study. Years ofexperience as a principal ranged from three to 11, with total years of education rangingfrom 13 to 39. Prior assistant principal experience ranged from one year to 11 years andprior years teaching experience ranged from five years to 17 years. The number oflicensed faculty the principals supervised ranged from approximately 20 to 90. Studentpopulations ranged in size from approximately 350 to 1,200, with a diversecross-section of student ethnic backgrounds (schools either had majority White orMajority African-American populations with fewer than 10 percent Hispanic andAsian in all schools) and socio-economic status (from 15 percent disadvantaged to 80percent disadvantaged).

The context-bound nature of qualitative research binds the research findings to thepopulation of the ten principals interviewed. Generalizability to the general middleschool principal population is therefore not possible and results from these findings arelimited to those in the study. However, because of the identified need for furtherexploration into the practices of principals in a post-NCLB era, the findings contributeto the expansion of knowledge. The results of this study provide the field furthercritical insight into the practices of a small number of middle school principals in anaccountability-driven educational atmosphere and builds on identified best practices inprevious studies.

FindingsCommon themes of practices emerged from the conversations with the principals andare grouped in the following categories:

. sharing leadership;

. facilitating professional development;

Leadershippractices

35

. leading with an instructional orientation; and

. acting openly and honestly.

Sharing leadershipIt was evident that a well-organized, shared leadership structure was important tomaintain a successful school. Principals were asked how they promoted a shared visionin their schools and repeatedly referenced their use of “professional learningcommunities” (PLC). Principals discussed the importance of developing and sustaininga community of professionals that share responsibility for the school. One principalstated that he developed a “comfort zone” in his school, “by promoting an atmosphereof shared decision making and the fact that administratively everyone had a seat at thetable.”

Another principal said:

I try to develop leadership within individuals. I try to take some of the most difficult facultymembers who have been most against the changes. Instead of telling them you are going todo this, you get them to be a leader themselves.

Another principal described the collegial and professional teaming atmosphere in hisschool by saying:

I based everything that I’ve done here on team building and team work and that we’re all inthis together. We don’t have core teachers and related arts teachers. We don’t have 6th gradeteachers, 7th grade teachers. We have a school full of caring teachers . . . We’re going to getwhere we want to be and help children learn and model teamwork.

It was clear the principals valued a collaborative, team atmosphere within theirschools.

The principals spoke about how they promoted shared leadership throughstructured settings and processes in the schools, which enabled them to empower theirstaff members. It was clear there has to be a specific organizational structure withineach school in order for shared decision making to be successful. One principal statedshe did this by “building leadership teams and teams at every grade level; grade levelteams and teams within a grade level.” She would meet with the team leaders, shareinformation and ask them to share with their own designated groups and then developquestions based upon that information. This echoed the other principals’ structures.According to one principal, “I do not believe that a principal alone can have an effectiveschool.”

The principals described themselves as “hands on” and “collaborative” leaders.One principal spoke to his first-hand experience as to why decisions must be made

in a collaborative manner. He stated “my first year as a principal I told them ‘you willdo this’ and it was a mistake! As a process, they have to buy-in.” He went on to say,“they [teachers] know if it isn’t what they want and what they feel is going to be in thebest interest of the school and students.” Another principal discussed the need to allowstaff to be a part of the decision making and leadership process by saying:

We get caught up in the day-to-day and being the problem solver. I try to be very deliberateabout asking questions and leading people to their own solutions. Without a doubt,empowering others to make people feel they can make decisions on their own and shareddecision making is huge.

JEA49,1

36

Facilitating professional developmentAll of the principals spoke about the importance of providing meaningful professionaldevelopment to their faculty. Most were concerned about providing instructionallyfocused development, activities that enabled teachers to effectively use data, and teambuilding processes. Creating a culture where professional development is valued andeffectively implemented is a complicated process. One principal’s professionaldevelopment experiences within a school are described as follows:

The last three years we’ve been focusing heavily on meaningful staff development. In year 1, Iencouraged people to go to it. Year 2 and 3 I built professional learning communities. Theyhave to share in groups and share what they learned. It was difficult at first because theculture was not to share. I said everybody will present at a faculty meeting this year and nextyear . . . what I’m doing is to try to get my teachers to see how much knowledge they have,where to get it from, and how to share it with other people.

The importance of faculty sharing as a part of the professional development processwas echoed in the conversations with other principals as well. Some principals talkedabout how they have changed the focus of their faculty meetings from general schoolinformation-oriented sessions to devoted periods of time where faculty can contributeto the professional knowledge of their colleagues. In fact, one principal shared how shewent against the division directed faculty meeting process of two after-school facultymeetings per month. Rather than meeting in a “traditional faculty meeting” settingtwice a month, she revised her meetings so that once a month meetings were “saved forinservice” and the “second one is vertical team meetings”.

Others talked about the reorganization of grade level and content level planning tofocus on professional development and instruction. According to one principal, it iscritical that teachers share their expertise with others because:

For you to have this ability and knowledge base and not share it with others is a shame.We’re all going to work together. You’re going to have a piece of the academic puzzle at themiddle school just as everybody would.

Examples of staff contributing to professional growth activities include:

Each instructional leader is required to do two professional development presentations eachquarter. Each one has to revolve around the school learning plan . . . It has to all go back tomaking education better for children in a safe and friendly environment. [The staff] is taskedwith presenting some type of strategy at every faculty meeting. Quick, down and dirty and nolong winded presentation that’s going to lose people. It is usually something you can use inthe classroom tomorrow.

All of the professional development activities had a purpose within the schools. Forexample, one principal spoke to how the professional development committeeconducted staff needs assessments to inform growth activities. Other principals talkedabout how their classroom observations directly informed the types of developmentand training provided to staff. Another discussed how every staff member had todevelop two professional goals for the year directly oriented around the school learningplan. It was important for faculty members to “embrace their own professionalgrowth”.

Leadershippractices

37

Leading with an instructional orientationEvery principal spoke extensively about his or her instructional leadership role withinthe school. It was clear that every principal kept a close pulse on the instructionalenvironment. Principals spoke with a sense of pride at how they had improved theacademic atmosphere in the school, from raising student achievement scores onstandardized assessments, to increasing the school attendance rate to keep morestudents on task and learning, to restructuring the school day to enable at-risk studentsto receive much needed intervention and remediation. For example, one principalshared his success at his school by saying:

For some of our AYP subgroups – (a) 40-50 percentage point increase in three years. Twoyears ago we made AYP using safe harbor. Last year, we made it outright without safeharbor. All our benchmarks look like we are going to make it again no problem. So in a threeyear period we’ve gone from underperforming . . . (to) the second highest math grade in thecounty.

While there was a sense of pride from the principals regarding their schools’ success,principals attributed that success to the hard work of the students, staff, andthemselves. In fact, most of the principals spoke to their own personal qualifications toserve as the school’s instructional leader. One principal said the rationale behind thedistrict’s choice to place her as principal at her middle school was specifically becauseof her instructional leadership skills.

It is important to get a sense of the various activities, processes, and actions thatencapsulated the principals’ conceptualizations of what it meant to serve as stronginstructional leaders in successful schools. While a general summation of actions canprovide a sense of what the leaders do on a daily basis, it is critical that we understand,from their own stories, what they actually practice. The following comments highlightwhat the principals shared:

I spend, and all of my assistants spend, a lot of time in the classroom. Three years ago wedeveloped or own very tailored three-minute walkthrough observations.

I do observations and walkthroughs. Our [district] evaluation form is very poor and I attachmy own evaluation form. I break it into Bloom’s Taxonomy, what level of Bloom’s, and dothey have posted what they are doing. I want the students to know what they are doing thatday. I look at how they start the lesson – accommodations, modifications, how theyindividuals, and use of instructional technology – it’s a strong feedback form.

My teachers come to me and I review where they are at in the pacing guides, I review theirbenchmark results, I review student report cards, and pull in students and ask how is thisgoing and get them to tell me about learning. I model myself and I bring in coordinators tomodel.

I ask this question: “Would I want my kids to have this teacher?”

I feel my role is to be an active lifelong learner myself. First and foremost I think it’simportant for the teachers and students to see that I am constantly in learning mode. That’sreal important. I think it’s important that I’m - the principal is visible in the building (school)–but not just supervising students in the cafeteria during lunch or supervising in the hallway.They see the principal is an active and engaging role in the classroom.

JEA49,1

38

I have my instructional leaders to give me monthly reports to what is going on in thedepartments and develop it around the school learning plans.

I am in classrooms. You can’t lead if you are not in classrooms with teachers and kids. Anygood principal looks back and says I was not in classrooms enough. My first year I spentmore time on managerial tasks, but by year four I feel I was a stronger presence in theclassroom than anywhere else.

Being an instructional leader is what drives our program here. It is always constantly andconsistently going and looking at what is happening in the classroom. I read every lessonplan that is sent to me. It is a very detailed format. Every minute we use in this building[school] must be treasured for instruction. Every focus question that they use to open a lessonand every closing question must be sent to me prior to the week.

Principals advocated for the importance of having instructionally sound teachers in theclassroom and what is necessary to achieve a high level of teaching quality andproficiency. Also important in terms of guiding teaching and learning was anunderstanding of data and how to use it to make instructional decisions. The use ofdata provided several principals a catalyst for change. One put it this way, “You reallycan’t argue with data and that’s the best and clearest way.”

Some principals expressed surprise at the lack of teachers’ abilities to effectively usedata prior to their arrival at the current school. According to one principal:

They never realized that, they never looked in the past. Showing them their breakdown ofgrade distribution, they never looked at that and it blew my mind.

Several of the principals discussed their use of data forms to report on specific studentdata and instructional interventions and remediation practices put in place to addressstudent achievement issues:

We look at the SOL [Standards of Learning] and the benchmark data from every angle. I willanalyze the data. The APs in charge of the departments will analyze the data. The contentleaders will analyze the data. The ILs [instructional leaders] will hold meetings with theteachers on the benchmarks and the SOLs over the summer. The teachers will analyze thedata. Together they will formulate a plan for the good of that grade level.

Acting openly and honestlyAs we spoke with the principals, it was apparent they valued an atmosphere ofopenness and honesty. They were firm in their assertions about the need to be up frontwith their faculty about decisions, as well as their expectations for studentperformance and teacher quality. It seemed that this atmosphere of candor promotedteacher buy-in and innovation. One principal shared that he is “straightforward.Research-based where I have a reason for what I’m doing”, while stating that “There isnot a week that goes by that I don’t have one or more teachers sit in my office and say[name] I was thinking about this. Could we try it?”

Loyalty and buy-in, earned from forthrightness, is not something that happens overnight. It takes time, for example, according to one principal, it happens “Slowly, over athree-year period of time, when issues have come up, I’ve been very open about themand met with the person that it seems to come from.” This investment in personalcapital is earned through hard work and one-to-one conversations with teachers ontheir own terms. Sometimes it surprises teachers and takes them off-guard:

Leadershippractices

39

By the second year I was able to be honest and direct with some people who had verynegative attitudes and I don’t think anyone had said to them, you know, your name justcontinuously pops up as a person griping and complaining. Is that the image you want? Andit shocked them. Honestly. Without judgment. But also saying, go and do this no more,because I know what you’re doing. I don’t pretend. I’m an open-book and I have tried to dothat. I have been very authentic.

Another principal stated her approach with faculty this way:

My mantra is if you grab them by their hearts, their minds will follow. I taught that in theclassroom. That works with adults. That’s the way human beings are. They need to be valuedand thought of as important.

As evidenced in the above statements from principals, it is important to take deliberatesteps to be open and honest with faculty. One principal, who came from a “high schoolworld based on isolationism” stated he made a conscious effort in his middle school tobuild an atmosphere of collegiality and positive rapport. Another principal shared hismethod for embracing and working with staff in a truthful and upfront manner,respectful of their individual capabilities and contributions:

I’m wide open with people. If I get something that needs to be done, I share it and I solicitinput. Some people, everyone is used to that now. But some are more forthcoming than others.What I don’t want is someone to work here and to be told what to do. Basically being wideopen with people and having opportunities to sit down . . . I don’t know anything better thanyou guys know. It’s my responsibility to run this school. I need your help. I value, I value, Iappreciate, I value your input.

One principal, brought to tears reflecting on his honest and open relationship with thestakeholders of his school, encapsulated the sentiments of other principals, in sayingthat leadership is “wide open, hands on. I love the kids. I love this school. I put my heartand soul in this school.”

Implications and conclusionsAccording to Normore (2003, p. 71):

For school administrators, the main problem is not the absence of innovations in schools butthe presence of too many disconnected, episodic, piecemeal, superficially adorned projects.

Successful leaders have vision and are able to connect the disparate pieces and developa cohesive view of their schools which is an alignment of goals that can lead theirorganizations to success (Manasse, 1986). In spite of the demands placed on effectiveprincipals in a rigorous accountability system, the leadership practices of theinterviewed principals enabled them to promote and sustain a successful academicenvironment. The analysis of the transcripts revealed four overarching themes whichsurfaced from the conversations with the ten middle school principals: sharingleadership, facilitating professional development, leading with an instructionalorientation, and acting openly and honestly. While suggestions are put forth forprincipal practice and leadership preparation programs, we acknowledge that thefindings, due to the context-bound nature of the research, are limited specifically to theten principals in the study population.

Evidence from the conversations with the ten principals revealed that they wereengaged in a variety of activities that enabled them to provide an organizational

JEA49,1

40

purpose, set a direction for their schools, and ultimately to redesign their organizations.This was made possible, in part, through a shared vision involving a variety of facultyin leadership teams and collaborative activities. The current accountability climate canno longer allow faculty to work in isolated silos, teaching independently from oneanother. Principals, as demonstrated by the ten successful leaders in this study, shouldseek to provide a common unifying purpose and vision to the school. Leaders’ use oforganizational vision allows them to take into account the system as a whole and theimpact of decisions on unique components of the school (Manasse, 1986). As oneprincipal shared:

I based everything that I’ve done here on team building and team work and that we’re all inthis together.

Principals cannot lead schools without staff collaboration. They need to be able toempower staff members to make their own decisions and to work with them in acooperative, collegial manner.

The principals discussed the importance of facilitating professional development withtheir staff members and developing the people within their organizations. Theyemphasized that all staff members need to be a part of the development activities withthe purpose of “making education better for children in a safe and friendly environment.”As Leithwood et al. (2006) points out, it is important for successful leaders to provideindividualized support and appropriate models for their staff. Principals should ensurethe development activities are system focused, rather than individual and discreteactivities without linkages to other school components. Additionally, there needs to be adirect connection with the future direction of the school and any needs to redesign theorganization, as well as the actionable strategies to move the school in a positivedirection. This allows leaders to deftly manage the instructional program, in part,through focused and on-going meaningful professional development activities.

Principals who lead with an instructional orientation and seek to manage theinstructional program take into account the unique needs of every student in theirschools. As reflected in the literature, leadership has the second greatest impact onstudent achievement (Leithwood et al., 2004). This work to improve studentachievement by principals is done in part through an understanding of the currentstatus of students within the school and the organizational context, developing thedirection and focus of the school, and redesigning the organization to improveinstruction to increase student achievement. All of the principals spoke of the need tobe strong instructional leaders and set the direction and tone for quality teaching.Rather than work in a directive and prescriptive manner, the principals workedside-by-side with teachers to create a warm and caring learning environment. Theseten principals’ work highlight the need to be instructionally minded and strive to spendportions of their time during the instructional day focused on student learning andworking directly with staff to support their instructional needs and efforts.

Principals continually spoke to the need to be open and honest with their staffmembers. As one principal stated, “My mantra is if you grab them by their hearts, theirminds will follow.” This can only be done with a keen understanding of theorganization as a whole and being able to respect each individual’s place within thelarger system. Additionally, this is fostered through strategic, thoughtful, anddeliberate practices by leaders to facilitate a sincere and genuine work environment

Leadershippractices

41

where staff feels free to take risks. This is not accomplished overnight. Leaders whoare new to a school need to be patient if trying to develop an open and honestatmosphere where one did not exist. Several principals talked about this process takingseveral years.

Implications for both practice and further research can be made considering theresults of this current research study, as well as from the larger series of studieslooking at best practices of successful leaders. Leadership preparation programscontinue to evolve and reform in recognition of the changing needs of principals in thisage of educational accountability. It is critical that leadership preparation programs,whether university based or an alternative preparation program, look at contemporaryliterature focusing on successful leadership practices. A comparative study isrecommended between program preparation practices and current leadership literatureto identify any “theory to practice” gaps in leadership preparation programs. Failure torecognize needed changes within programs can lead to a repetition of the status quoand little to no substantive changes in general leadership practices. The samerecommendation is made for school districts to craft a comparative study betweencurrent district paradigms of successful school leadership practices and contemporaryresearch. We must be able to take a critical look at our own practices and evolve inorder to meet the changing needs of our diverse learner populations. Failure to do sowill result in a disservice to our students.

While the focus on leadership at the school level is important, the involvement ofexternal leaders to the building at the central office level cannot be discounted. It isrecommended that a new study focusing on the various roles and impacts of centraloffice personnel be conducted. Similar research protocol can be used to engage in thisproposed research study. It is suggested that superintendents of high achievingdistricts be the first in the series of central office personnel to be engaged in this nextlevel of research. As we seek to meet the rising accountability standards set forth froma variety of external and internal stakeholders, it is crucial that school leadersrecognize the practices that contribute to high student achievement and engage inthose to meet their own student needs.

References

Boyan, N. (1988), “Describing and explaining administrative behavior”, in Boyan, N. (Ed.),Handbook of Research in Educational Administration, Longman, New York, NY, pp. 77-98.

Brown, K.M., Anfara, V.A. Jr and Roney, K. (2004), “Student achievement in high performing,suburban middle schools and low performing urban middle schools”, Education andUrban Society, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 428-56.

Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches,Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Crum, K. and Sherman, W. (2008), “Facilitating high achievement: high school principals’reflections on their successful leadership practices”, Journal of EducationalAdministration, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 562-80.

Dinham, S. (2005), “Principal leadership for outstanding educational outcomes”, Journal ofEducational Administration, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 338-56.

Elmore, R. (2005), “Accountable leadership”, The Educational Forum, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 134-42.

Gurr, D., Drysdale, L. and Mulford, B. (2006), “Models of successful principal leadership”, SchoolLeadership and Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 371-95.

JEA49,1

42

Hale, E. and Rollins, K. (2006), “Leading the way to increased student learning”, PrincipalLeadership, Vol. 6 No. 10, pp. 6-9.

Hallinger, P. and Heck, R.H. (1998), “Exploring the principal’s contribution to schooleffectiveness: 1980-1995”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 9 No. 2,pp. 157-91.

Leithwood, K. (2005), “Understanding successful principal leadership: progress on a brokenfront”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 619-29.

Leithwood, K. and Riehl, C. (2003), “What do we already know about successful schoolleadership?”, AERA Division “A” Task Force on Developing Research in EducationalLeadership.

Leithwood, K., Louis, K., Anderson, S. and Wahlstrom, K. (2004), How Leadership InfluencesStudent Learning, Wallace Foundation, New York, NY.

Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Hopkins, D. and Harris, A. (2006), Successful SchoolLeadership: What It Is and How It Influences Pupil Learning, Department for Educationand Skills, London.

Lyons, J.E. and Algozzine, B. (2006), “Perceptions of the impact of accountability on the role ofprincipals”, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 14 No. 16, available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n16/ (accessed February 17, 2009).

Manasse, A.L. (1986), “Vision and leadership: paying attention to inattention”, Peabody Journal ofEducation, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 150-73.

Marzano, R.J., Waters, T. and McNulty, B.A. (2005), School Leadership that Works: FromResearch to Results, Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, Aurora, CO.

Maxwell, J.A. (1996), Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, Sage, ThousandOaks, CA.

Mintrop, H. and Trujillo, T.M. (2005), “Corrective action in low performing schools: lessons forNCLB implementation from first-generation accountability systems”, Education PolicyAnalysis Archives, Vol. 13 No. 48, available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n48/ (accessedSeptember 2, 2008).

Normore, A.H. (2003), “The edge of chaos: school administrators and accountability”, Journal ofEducational Administration, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 55-77.

Parkes, S.E. and Thomas, R.A. (2006), “Values in action: observations of effective principals atwork”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 204-28.

Patton, M.Q. (1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Method, 2nd ed., Sage Publications,Newbury, Park, CA.

Petzko, V.N., Clark, D.C., Valentine, J.W., Hackman, D.G., Norn, J.R. and Lucas, S.E. (2002),“Leaders and leadership in middle level schools”, NASSP Bulletin, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 3-15.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (2007), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures forDeveloping Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Tucker, M.S. and Codding, J.B. (Eds) (2002), The Principal Challenge: Leading and ManagingSchools in an Era of Accountability, Jossey-Bass/Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

Virginia Department of Education (2008-2009), “School report cards”, available at: www.doe.virginia.gov/VDOE/src/ayp.shtml (accessed February 17, 2009).

Yilmaki, R., Jacobson, S. and Drysdale, L. (2007), “Making a difference in challenging,high-poverty schools: successful principals in the USA, England, and Australia”, SchoolEffectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 361-81.

Leadershippractices

43

Further reading

Guskey, T. (2007), “Leadership in the age of accountability”, Educational Horizons, Vol. 86 No. 1,pp. 29-34.

Hallinger, P. (1983), Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale, Stanford University, PaloAlto, CA.

Jacobson, S., Brooks, S., Giles, C., Johnson, L. and Yilmaki, R. (2007), “Successful leadership inthree high-poverty urban elementary schools”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 6No. 4, pp. 291-317.

McEwan, E. (2003), Ten Traits of Highly Effective Principals: From Good to Great Performance,Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Starratt, R. (2005), “Responsible leadership”, The Educational Forum, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 124-33.

Appendix. Interview guide

(1) How do you develop a shared understanding of your organization?

(2) What do you do to develop the individuals within your organization?

(3) How do you design your organization to support and sustain the performance ofadministrators? Of teachers? Of students?

(4) How do you ensure that you have the attention and understanding of your staffregarding the need for a change initiative?

(5) How do you develop the capacity for a change initiative within your staff?

(6) Do you work with your staff to understand the implications of state policies, both in theschool and individual classrooms? How?

(7) What do you do to create and sustain a competitive school?

(8) How do you empower others to make decisions?

(9) How do you lead instruction within your building (school)?

(10) Do you have strategic and school improvement plans? How are these plans developed?

(11) How do you meet the needs of a diverse student population?

(12) How do you ensure your practices to meet the needs of a diverse student population areeffected in an equitable manner?

(13) How would you characterize the leadership practices within your school?

About the authorsKaren Leigh Sanzo, EdD is an Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership at Old DominionUniversity in Norfolk, Virginia. She spent eight years working in the PK-12 public schools, bothas a middle school mathematics teacher and as an elementary school administrator. Her areas ofresearch focus on leadership for school improvement, leadership development, and womenleaders in education. Karen Leigh Sanzo is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:kcrum@odu.edu

Whitney H. Sherman is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of EducationalLeadership at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Her researchinterests include: leadership preparation and mentoring; women’s issues in leadership; socialjustice in leadership; and ethical leadership. Her work has been featured in journals including:Educational Administration Quarterly, the Journal of School Leadership, the Journal of

JEA49,1

44

Educational Administration, Educational Policy, and the International Journal for QualitativeStudies in Education.

Jennifer Clayton, PhD is a Visiting Assistant Professor in Educational Foundations andLeadership at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia. She has served as an adjunct in therole of supervisor of student teachers, coordinator of administrative interns, and instructor. HerK-12 experiences include work as a secondary Social Studies teacher, testing coordinator, andcurriculum specialist. She is a graduate of James Madison University, Rutgers University, andOld Dominion University.

Leadershippractices

45

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints