Leadership-Development Policy

Background

For more than 35 years researchers and policy analysts have been calling for changes to professional-development programs for preparing school leaders. Since the late 1990s, several key publications have forcefully made the point that fostering conditions for student learning requires broader and improved leadership-development programming – including ensuring that programs are rigorous, well-funded, subjected to assessment and serving those with the desire and intellect to be great leaders. Hale and Moorman (2003), for example, asked how state policies shape the talent pool; evaluated the state of leadership-development programs; and urged specific changes. More recently, Levine (2005) criticized university-based and alternative school-leadership-development programs while suggesting nine criteria for judging the efficacy of these programs.

Many, including Levine; the Broad Foundation and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute (2003); and policy analyst Frederick M. Hess (2003) have concluded that it is qualifications – not certification – that empowers one to lead. “The point is not that nontraditional leaders should be preferred to seasoned educators,” writes Hess. “It is that licensure systems routinely make it prohibitively difficult for schools to garner the benefits of a diverse leadership team and to tap into skills not conventionally prevalent in education.”

Benefits

Policymaking responsibilities for preparing school leaders are ultimately held by the states, which have established licensing, certification and re-certification requirements for school leaders. Systemically the expectation is that educational-leadership and professional-development programs will, in turn, shape their programmatic offerings to ensure their graduates are prepared to meet these state requirements. The task thus falls on state officials to ensure that the educational policies they enact engender a culture of leadership and effective leadership-development processes among and across agencies, programs and sectors.

The challenge faced by policymakers, therefore, is to introduce guidelines and requirements that will facilitate leadership-development programs in producing the greatest possible number of high-quality school leaders. So far policymakers have focused their efforts in three distinct areas:

Standards- and performance-based reforms seek to improve student performance by addressing what school leaders should know. This standards-based approach is best exemplified by the widely promoted Council of Chief State School Officers’ ISLLC standards, which are “based on the premise that the criteria and standards for the professional practice of school leaders must be grounded in the knowledge and understanding of teaching and learning.”

Another approach, championed by AEI's Hess and others, holds that policy changes that increase accountability by introducing more flexibility in both hiring and performance are keys to bettering schools and school leadership.

A third approach, centered on outcomes, focuses on what acts school leaders should be able to carry out to ensure student success. It is worth noting that many educational-leadership programs now blend one or more of these approaches as part of their curriculum.

Thus there are many variables that state officials must consider as they create and revise state school-leadership policies:

•What is being taught in educational-leadership programs?
•What do aspiring, in-service and experienced school leaders need to learn and be able to carry out to have the most impact on student achievement?
•What admissions and hiring policies promote the best crop of school leaders?
•Which standards of practice are appropriate, and how can they influence student success?

Examples

Whether based on standards, accountability or outcomes -- or a mix of the three -- policies that promote leadership-development programming for in-service and aspiring principals institutionalize the need for change and, like the move toward higher standards for America’s young learners, raise the bar of expectations for what a school leader must know and be able to do. This, in turn, serves to fulfill the principal goal of America’s principals: leadership for student success.

By fostering a climate in which quality traditional and alternative principal-preparation opportunities are readily available, education policymakers can ensure that our nation’s schools are steered by qualified, visionary leaders.

Related Links

Click a category to toggle display of related links.

What Is It?

Leadership for Student Learning: Re-inventing the Principalship

Clearly, issues of school leadership are complicated, and no one-size-fits-all approach is likely to work in every school, district or state. This report by IEL’s Task Force on Principal Leadership illuminates why principal leadership matters, how specific problems threaten principal leadership and how leaders can address the principalship crisis. (From Usdan, Michael, et al. (2000). Institute for Educational Leadership.)

Policy Brief: Effective Leaders for Today's Schools: Synthesis of a Policy Forum on Educational Leadership

The Policy Forum on Educational Leadership was convened to answer the question: what needs to be done to improve the quality of leadership of the education system for the next century? The recommendations outlined at the end of this policy brief are the product of 2 days of intense discussion by over 40 leading experts in the field of leadership. These findings and the discussion summarized here should provide a firm base for those interested in improving leadership in education to begin their own deliberations and endeavors. (From The National Institute on Educational Governance, Finance, Policymaking, and Management, U.S. Department of Education, June 1999.)

Preparing School Principals: A National Perspective on Policy and Program Innovations

While the jobs of school leaders — superintendents, principals, teacher leaders and school board members — have changed dramatically, it appears that neither organized professional development programs nor formal preparation programs based in higher education institutions have adequately prepared those holding these jobs to meet the priority demands of the 21st century, namely student achievement. (From Hale, Elizabeth L, and Hunter N. Moorman. (2003). “Preparing School Principals: A National Perspective)
Tools & Resources

Education Policy Issue Site: Leadership--Preparation and Professional Development (Selected Research & Readings)

This ECS resource page lists many key recent reports and readings on professional development for school leaders. (From Education Commission of the States (ECS))

Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework (MILF)

This framework will require new principals to have been trained in "eight skills spelled out by the state that are aimed at the improvement of teaching and learning." (Ed Week 08/10/05) (From Maryland Department of Education, Division for Leadership Development, February 2005.)

Principal Professional Development

This page lists dozens of professional-development resources for school leaders. (From MiddleWeb)
Model Programs

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

This Department of Education report includes profiles of three programs listed at the e-Lead website. (From U.S. Department of Education, December 2004.)

National College for School Leadership (NCSL)

The College's Leadership Development Framework (LDF) is centred around the belief that schools should be supported in developing leaders at all levels (distributed leadership). The five stages of school leadership form part of a non-linear model within which the majority of NCSL's leadership development provision can be found. (From NCLS)

State Action for Education Leadership Project [SAELP]

In 2001, The Wallace Foundation announced a three-year, $8.9 million grant to launch the State Action for Education Leadership Project (SAELP), a national consortium led by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and including the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Association of State Boards of Education, and the Education Commission of the States. Working directly with 15 selected states, SAELP will lead a national effort to ensure that laws and policies in all 50 states strengthen the capacity of superintendents and principals to improve student learning. (From The Wallace Foundation)
Selected Research & Articles

When Learning Counts: Rethinking Licenses for School Leaders

This report asks two fundamental questions: do the licenses that states require of school principals encompass the knowledge and skills those principals need to promote student learning? If not, what kind of policy framework would help decisionmakers, educators, and others rethink principal licenses and the school leadership they support? (From Jacob E. Adams, Jr. & Michael A. Copland. Center on Reinventing Public Education. (December 2005))

An Educative Look at "Educating School Leaders"

Critics of Arthur Levine's report "Educating School Leaders" respond to him, calling it "unfortunate that Levine and his research team did not seek a more sophisticated understanding of the field they were examining." The response is co-authored by Michelle D. Young, Executive Director of the University Council for Educational Administration; Gary Crow, Professor of Educational Administration, University of Utah and President of the University Council for Educational Administration; Margaret Terry Orr, Associate Professor, Teachers College-Columbia, Chair of the Teaching in Educational Administration SIG of the American Educational Research Association Rodney Ogawa, Professor of Educational Leadership, University of California-Santa Cruz and Vice President of Division A of the American Educational Research Association; and Ted Creighton, Executive Director, National Council for Professors of Educational Administration. (From Michelle D. Young, et al.)

An Innovative Look, a Recalcitrant Reality: The Politics of Principal Preparation Reform

In the past few years, policy makers, practitioners, philanthropists, and education researchers have exhibited an unprecedented interest in reforming school leadership. New initiatives and programs have focused on recruiting and preparing effective principals and superintendents. Some reformers have proposed radically overhauling the selection or evaluation of school administrators. (From Frederick M. Hess and Andrew P. Kelly, Educational Policy, 19(1), January and March 2005, 155-180.)

Are SREB States Making Progress? Tapping, Preparing and Licensing School Leaders Who Can Influence Student Achievement

School leaders who can change curriculum and instruction are essential to increasing student achievement and ensuring the economic and cultural progress of the South and the nation. States are moving in the right direction, but they need to take aggressive actions to tap, prepare, place and keep an effective leader in every school. (From Andrea Jacobson, Kathy O’Neill, Betty Fry, David Hill and Gene Bottoms, Southern Regional Education Board (SREB))

Better Leaders for America's Schools: A Manifesto

Where can we find the kinds of principals and superintendents who can lead our schools to excellence? As usual with vexing policy dilemmas, the education field has developed a conventional wisdom about how to resolve this question. And as too often happens, the conventional wisdom in this case boils down to: more of the same. (From The Broad Foundation and The Thomas B. Fordham Institute. (2003).)

Beyond The Pipeline: Getting the Principals We Need, Where They Are Needed Most

The fact that some districts are experiencing difficulty in attracting adequate pools of certified principal candidates is not the same as saying there is a shortage of candidates. There is, however, a dilemma: many credentialed candidates either are not seeking jobs in districts that most need them or are shunning leadership positions altogether. A more balanced set of policies is needed if all districts are to attract leaders with abilities that go above the minimums of certification. (From Lee Mitgang. The Wallace Foundation. June 2003.)

Creating Conditions for Leadership Effectiveness: The District's Role

Policy brief offering recommendations to districts on ways to support principals and other school leaders in positively impacting student achievement. (From Kirsten Miller. (2004). Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.)

Educating School Leaders

This bold and controversial report offers a harsh assessment of leadership-development programs. (From Arthur Levine, President, Teachers College, Columbia University)

Growing Tomorrow’s School Leaders: The Challenge

Schools are facing a potential crisis in the recruitment and retention of staff to middle and senior leadership positions. This situation is likely to worsen over the next 10 years. What can be done? (From National College for School Leadership (2003).)

Leadership: A Message for State Legislatures

In "Trying to Stay Ahead of the Game: Superintendents and Principals Talk About School Leadership", Public Agenda surveyed 853 randomly selected superintendents and 909 principals during the summer of 2001. Nine in 10 superintendents said that "giving administrators far more autonomy to run the schools while holding them accountable for getting results" would be a very effective (45%) or somewhat effective (47%) means of improving schools. (From Kathy Christie, Phi Delta Kappan. January 1, 2002.)

Learning to Lead: In Preparing Principals, Content Matters

Ominously, the evidence suggests that the revolution in school accountability, organization, and management has so far left the nation’s principals behind. In 2003, Public Agenda reported that today’s superintendents want their principals to display prowess in everything from accountability to instructional leadership and teacher quality, but principals themselves say they are not equipped for these duties. Just 30 percent of principals report they are factoring student achievement into their teacher evaluations. Why so few? One cause may lie in their graduate training, which 96 percent of principals report was less useful than the advice provided by colleagues in preparing them for the job. (From Frederick M. Hess and Andrew P. Kelly, Education Week, 24(37), May 18, 2005.)

Learning to Lead; Leading to Learn: Improving School Quality Through Principal Professional Development

In their search for ways to improve school performance, educators and policy makers have addressed a broad array of challenges confronting schools. These approaches to improvement have included raising standards, strengthening teacher professional development, refocusing schools around the primary goal of student achievement, and holding schools accountable for results. But only one area of policy focus - strengthening school leadership - can exert control over all of these challenges simultaneously. Instructional leaders shape the environment in which teachers and students succeed or fail. (From National Staff Development Council)

Learning to Lead? What Gets Taught in Principal Preparation Programs?

Today, school principals are asked to lead in a new world marked by unprecedented responsibilities, challenges, and managerial opportunities. Are principal preparation programs equipping their charges for this new role? We examined the content of instruction at a stratified sample of the nation’s principal preparation programs, including the programs training the most candidates, the programs regarded as the most prestigious, and more typical programs. Watch video from a discussion of the report here: http://www.aei.org/events/type.upcoming,eventID.1052,filter.all/event_detail.asp. (From Frederick M. Hess and Michael P. Kelly, American Enterprise Institute)

Policy Watch: The Canadian Principal

The Canadian principal shares many characteristics of counterparts in other English-speaking countries. School leaders everywhere are experiencing greater demands and increasing expectations due to multiple education reforms in the last decade. Preparation programs are struggling to provide relevant training experiences to adequately prepare leaders for the multitude of roles they are expected to fulfill. Greater numbers are expected to retire in the next few years than ever before and fewer qualified candidates are applying for each vacancy. Within Canada while there are many similarities in the principalship from region to region, there also is diversity related to issues such as requirements for initial appointment, mandatory professional development, and bargaining group affiliation. (From Philips, Susan, Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education, (Spring 2003).)

Preparing a New Breed of School Principals: It’s Time for Action

"What do successful education leaders need to know and be able to do?”

“How do you prepare and develop effective school leaders?”

These are important questions today because accountability has changed nearly everything. State legislation has established an urgency for improved student achievement in an educational system where too many students are not succeeding against the new standards. This era of higher standards and greater accountability requires a “new breed” of school leaders. (From Gene Bottoms & Kathy O'Neill, Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). April 2001.)

Preparing Leaders for Rural Schools: Practice and Policy Considerations

This report provides field-based insights collected from people working in, and familiar with, leadership-development programs for school leaders in urban, suburban, and rural districts across the country. (From Institute for Educational Leadership (2005))

Principals of Change: What Principals Need to Lead Schools to Excellence

Good principals are more important than ever. In a time of fast-paced and widesweeping change in schools, principals directly impact both the implementation and sustainability of reforms focused on improving student achievement. Good principals lead change, inspire students and staff, leverage resources to make improvement happen, and bring community members into the process of change. Studies consistently rank principals and teachers at the top of school variables that can impact student learning. The NASBE Study Group on School Leadership believes that policymakers must recognize school leaders as gatekeepers of change. To be specific, the Study Group believes that without well-qualified, motivated leaders in every school, reform will succeed sporadically and the goal of having all students in every school and district able to meet high standards will be threatened. (From National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE), October 1999)

Professional Development of Principals

Societal changes have stimulated new pressures on schools and those who lead them. Technology, demographic shifts, redefinitions of "family," testing and accountability, decentralization and site-based management, violence, changes in the economy, new court mandates related to desegregation, various legislative initiatives such as school vouchers, and the press to privatize have created a web of conflicting demands and expectations for school principals. These changes have resulted in "a turning of the role of principal 90 degrees from everywhere" (Prestine, 1994, p. 150). (From Fenwick, Leslie T. and Pierce, Mildred C. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education Washington DC. December 2000.)

Strategies for School System Leaders on District-Level Change

A growing number of school districts, foundations and national organizations are zeroing in, perhaps as never before, on this key question: What implications do recent developments in public education—such as the standards-and-accountability movement; site-based, shared decision making; and many others—have for school leadership? The simple answer seems to be that the job of principals in particular, and school leadership in general, has become far more complex than at any time in our history. Building principals' capacity to meet new challenges has enormous implications for district-level leaders. We devote this issue to three school systems that are aggressively addressing the array of challenges involved. These systems are in Chicago, IL; Hamilton County, TN; and Plainfield, NJ. (From Gerald S. Cohen, The Panasonic Foundation in cooperation with the American Association of School Administrators, 8(1), February 2001.)

The Accidental Principal

If school leadership is the key to school improvement, then school principals are the people who know where the key ring hangs. In an era of accountability, of charter schooling and merit pay, of data-driven standards and skill management, school principals are the front-line managers, the shop stewards, the brigade commanders—the ones who will lead a team to new levels of effectiveness. Or not. (From Frederick M. Hess and Andrew P. Kelly, Education Next, Summer 2005.)

The Leadership We Need: Using Research To Strengthen the Administrator Preparation and Licensure Programs

In response to chief state school officers and other policy leaders requesting research-based guidance to develop or refine principal licensure policies, this report examines the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards in light of findings from McREL’s recent study of principal leadership. (From Tim Waters, EdD and Sally Grubb, PhD. Mid-continent Center for Education and Learning (MCREL), 2004.)

The Training Task: Broadening the Base

"Why... do I and many others feel so passionately that existing preparation programs commonly are too narrowly gauged to meet both the pre- and in-service needs of educational leaders?" Mike Usdan, current senior fellow and former president with IEL, wrote these words close to thirty years ago. Sadly, the question raised by Usdan then is just as relevant today. In a new introduction to the 1976 piece, Usdan writes about finding himself "stunned...[by] how little had actually changed in three decades. The same criticisms of educational-administration preparatory programs I and others made so long ago are being rearticulated today." (From Michael Usdan, in Training Educational Leaders: A Search for Alternatives. Washington, DC (1976).)

Transforming Principal Preparation

As standards-based school reform nears its twentieth anniversary, policymakers continue to assert the need for strong principal leadership, and with good reason. Virtually every state, as well as the federal government, puts accountability for results directly at the school level. New principals who took over a school this year faced a dramatically different environment than principals just five years ago. (From Larry Lashway, ERIC Digest 165, February 2003.)