This report presents selected findings from the school principal data files of the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). It provides the following descriptive information on school principals by school type, student characteristics, and other relevant categories: number, race/ethnicity, age, gender, college degrees, salary, hours worked, focus of work, years experience, and tenure at current school.
Battle, D. (2009). Characteristics of Public, Private, and Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results From the 2007–08 Schools and Staf ng Survey (NCES 2009-323). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
The goal of this paper is to provide policymakers with recommendations for the design and implementation of strong principal development and evaluation systems. States and local school systems that pursue these ideas can use principal evaluation to drive a powerful vision of principal effectiveness and, by consequence, improve outcomes for all students.
(2010). Evaluating Principals: Balancing Accountability with Professional Growth. New Leaders for New Schools.
Overview New Leaders has recently published a new principal evaluation model. It includes seven modules: (1) Overview of the New Leaders Principal Evaluation Model, (2) The Principal Evaluation Rubric, (3) Setting a Principal Practice Goal + Strategic Planning, (4) Identifying Evidence, (5) Direct Observation of Principal Practice, (6) Collecting and Mapping Evidence to the Principal Practice Rubric, and (7) Providing Actionable Feedback.
(2012). Putting Principal Evaluation into Practice. New Leaders
Overview New Leaders has recently published a new principal evaluation model. It includes seven modules: (1) Overview of the New Leaders Principal Evaluation Model, (2) The Principal Evaluation Rubric, (3) Setting a Principal Practice Goal + Strategic Planning, (4) Identifying Evidence, (5) Direct Observation of Principal Practice, (6) Collecting and Mapping Evidence to the Principal Practice Rubric, and (7) Providing Actionable Feedback.
(2012). Putting Principal Evaluation into Practice. New Leaders
This paper examines a number of promising principal preparation programs to identify lessons for improving the impact of principals on student perrmance.
A new approach to principal preparation: Innovative programs share their practices and lessons learned. Rainwater Leadership Alliance, 2010.
This paper discusses the potential and challenges of a “cohesive leadership system” which coordinates leadership standards, training, and conditions at both the State and district levels. Effective coordination of these components, then, has the potential to both speed and make more permanent the benefits to the learning of all students.
Leadership for Learning: Making the Connections among State, District, and School Policies and Practices. (2006). New York: The Wallace Foundation. Retrieved from https://schoolturnaroundsupport.org/resources/leadership-learning-making-connections
This dissertation investigates how relational trust manifests within schools that have recently
enacted the distributed leadership framework, a program implementation by the Penn
Center for Educational Leadership.
Abdul-Jabbar, M. (2013). Distributed leadership and relational trust: Bridging two frameworks to identify effective leadership behaviors and practices. University of Pennsylvania.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of distributed leadership (DL) on school effectiveness (SE) in junior secondary schools in Katsina State, Nigeria. The study also investigates if teachers’ commitment (TC) mediates the relationship between DL and SE.
Ali, H. M., & Yangaiya, S. A. (2015). Investigating the influence of distributed leadership on school effectiveness: A mediating role of teachers’ commitment. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 5(1), 163–174.
The paper is a synthesis of the literature on instructional leadership. From this research the author develops and tests a framework and proposed measures to assess instructional leadership.
Alig-Mielcarek, J. M. (2003). A model of school success: Instructional leadership, academic press, and student achievement (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University).
Intended as a formative assessment tool, this guide provides detailed, individual state profiles and state-to-state comparisons of 8 policy areas and 21 policy criteria that support the development of effective leaders.
Anderson, E., & Reynolds, A. L. (2015). A policymaker’s guide: Research-based policy for principal preparation program approval and licensure. Charlottesville, VA: University Council for Educational Administration.
This is a summary of studies on the issue of standards for Principals
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (2011). Master Template for Empirical Studies - ISLLC Standards Research Panel, 2011.
This paper has three objectives: (1) to create set of policies and initiatives by document the actions taken by Wallace Foundation, (2) to describe how states and districts have worked together to forge more-cohesive policies and initiatives aroung school leadership, (3)to examine the hypothesis that more-cohesive systems do in fact improve school leadership.
Augustine, C. H., Gonzalez, G., Ikemoto, G. S., Russell, J., & Zellman, G. L. (2009). Improving school leadership: The promise of cohesive leadership systems. Rand Corporation.
This study used within-program comparison of follow-up survey responses from two sets of program graduates from a university-based leadership preparation program to determine differences in program features and outcome measures.
Ballenger, J., Alford, B., McCune, S. L., & McCune, E. D. (2010). Obtaining validation from graduates on a restructured principal preparation program. Jsl Vol 19-N5, 19 533.
A hypothesized need to form and maintain strong, stable interpersonal relationships is evaluated in light of the empirical literature.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.
This study examines the detrimental impact of principal turnover, including lower teacher retention and lower student achievement. Particularly hard hit are high poverty schools, which often lose principals at a higher rate as they transition to lower poverty, higher student achievement schools.
Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2012). Stepping stones: Principal career paths and school outcomes. Social Science Research, 41(4), 904-919.
The Characteristics of Public and Private Elementary School Principals in the United States is a subsection of the NCES 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). It provides descriptive statistics on K-12 school principals in areas such as: race, gender, education level, salary, experience, and working conditions.
Bitterman, A., Goldring, R., Gray, L., Broughman, S. (2014).Characteristics of Public and Private Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States:Results From the 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Summary, First Look. IES, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education
This well-written book on assertiveness clearly describes the non assertive, assertive, and aggressive styles of supervision. Each chapter provides numerous examples, practice exercises, and self-tests. The author identifies feelings and beliefs that support aggressiveness, non aggressiveness, or non assertiveness which help the reader "look beyond the words themselves."
Black, M. K. (1991). Assertive Supervision-Building Involved Teamwork. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 22(5), 224-224.
This article outlines how far the community schools movement has come since the AFT made community schools a priority in 2008. It explains why the movement has grown, clarifies what exactly makes a community school different from other schools, lays out how community schools work, and shows the positive results that community schools are attaining.
Blank, M. J., & Villarreal, L. (2015). Where It All Comes Together: How Partnerships Connect Communities and Schools. American Educator, 39(3), 4.
The updated and expanded second edition of this classic text provides new research and insights into how principals can encourage the teacher development that enhances student learning.
Blasé, J., & Blase, J. (2003). Handbook of instructional leadership: How successful principals promote teaching and learning. Corwin Press.
Greater understanding about how variables mediate the relationship between leadership and achievement is essential to the success of reform efforts that hold leaders accountable for student learning. This multi-source, quantitative study tests a model of integrated transformational leadership including three important school mediators.
Boberg, J. E., & Bourgeois, S. J. (2016). The effects of integrated transformational leadership on achievement. Journal of Educational Administration, 54(3), 357–374.
This paper seeks to estimate the effect that Career Leader (CL) program has had on teachers’ career decisions, specifically their decisions to stay in a specific school district or to remain in the teaching field.
Booker, K., & Glazerman, S. (2009). Effects of the Missouri Career Ladder program on teacher mobility. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED507470.pdf
This review of related literature and research prompted the development of a framework for understanding the role of the principal as an instructional manager. A number of links between school-level variables and student learning are proposed. The discussion includes consideration of instructional organization, school climate, influence behavior, and the context of principal management.
Bossert, S. T., Dwyer, D. C., Rowan, B., & Lee, G. V. (1982). The instructional management role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34–64.
Over the past 10 years, the Southern Regional Education Board has helped states and public universities across the region evaluate their state policies for preparing school principals who are leaders of instruction. This benchmark report reviews the past decade and looks at 10 learning-centered leadership indicators to gauge how far states have come and how far they need to go in selecting, preparing and supporting leaders of change.
Bottoms, G., Egelson, P., & Bussey, L. H. (2012). Progress over a decade in preparing more effective school principals. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.
The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive review of 25 years of quantitative instructional leadership research, up through 2013, using a nationally generalizable data set.
Boyce, J., & Bowers, A. J. (2018). Toward an evolving conceptualization of instructional leadership as leadership for learning: Meta-narrative review of 109 quantitative studies across 25 years. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(2), 161–182.
This article explores the relationship between school contextual factors and teacher retention decisions in New York City and finds that school administration by far has the greatest influence on teacher retention.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303-333.
This study provides new evidence on the importance of school leadership by estimating individual principals’ contributions to growth in student achievement.
Branch, G., Hanushek, E., & Rivkin, S. G. (2013). School leaders matter: measuring the impact of effective principals Education Next, 13.
Although the scholarship on race in education is vast, the authors attempt to review some of the most pressing and persistent issues in this chapter. They also suggest that the future of race scholarship in education needs to be centered not on equality but rather on equity and justice.
Brayboy, B. M. J., Castagno, A. E, & Maughan, E. (2007). Equality and justice for all? Examining race in education research. Review of Research in Education, 31(1), 159–194.
The articles in this special issue emerged from papers presented by the authors during a symposium at an annual meeting of the University Council of Educational Administration (UCEA). The authors’ intent then and now is to shed light on the perceptions, preparation, practices, and impact of teacher leaders in schools through presenting reports of research on leadership development conducted in diverse states and for diverse purposes.
Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2016). Developing and empowering leaders for collective school leadership: Introduction to special issue. Journal of Research in Leadership Education, 11(2), 151-157.
The aim of this study was to examine the means by which principals achieve an impact on student achievement.
Bruggencate, G. T., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., & Sleegers, P. (2012). Modeling the influence of school leaders on student achievement: How can school leaders make a difference? Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 699–732. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258132484_Modeling_the_Influence_of_School_Leaders_on_Student_Achievement_How_Can_School_Leaders_Make_a_Difference
The authors of this illuminating book identify a comprehensive set of practices and conditions that were key factors for improvement, including school leadership, the professional capacity of the faculty and staff, and a student-centered learning climate.
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
Using 4 years of panel data constructed from the North Carolina Teacher Working Condition Survey, this study uses value-added modeling approaches to explore the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of four measures of their working conditions and their principal.
Burkhauser, S. (2017). How much do school principals matter when it comes to teacher working conditions?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 126-145.
This study examined principal preparation programs within the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education to ascertain whether their programs were structured in a way that would equip principal candidates with the leadership roles deemed essential for 21st century school leadership.
Burks, Karlin. (2014). An Analysis of Principal Preparation Programs at Pennsylvania State Schools. Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses (ETDs) Paper 1934.
This article revisits the concepts of leadership and management, examines the impact of the ERA on management practice in schools and colleges, and discusses the notion of managerialism.
Bush, T. (2008). Leadership and management development in education. London, UK: SAGE Publications. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1741143207087777
Handbook of Response to Intervention in Early Childhood represents an ambitious undertaking: namely, to gather within a single volume all of the knowledge that exists on a topic that has attracted much attention in recent years.
Buysse, V., & Peisner-Feinberg, E. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of response to intervention in early childhood. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
In this chapter of "Distributed leadership: Different perspectives" the authors take a small step towards addressing such questions by investigating the association between the distribution of leadership to teachers and instructional change in schools.
Camburn, E., & Han, S. W. (2009). Investigating connections between distributed leadership and instructional change. In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 25–45). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
This report tells policymakers what metrics they must track in order to make the best decisions regarding the supply and training of school leaders.
Campbell, C., & Gross, B. (2012). Principal Concerns: Leadership Data and Strategies for States. Center on Reinventing Public Education.
This paper examines how the hiring process is changing as a result of teacher evaluation reforms.
Cannata, M., Rubin, M., Goldring, E., Grissom, J. A., Neumerski, C. M., Drake, T. A., & Schuermann, P. (2017). Using teacher effectiveness data for information-rich hiring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 180-222.
This report provides a practical “management guide,” for an evidence-based key indicator data decision system for school districts and schools.
Celio, M. B., & Harvey, J. (2005). Buried Treasure: Developing A Management Guide From Mountains of School Data. Center on Reinventing Public Education.
A multilevel model of leadership, empowerment, and performance was tested using a sample of 62 teams, 445 individual members, 62 team leaders, and 31 external managers from 31 stores of a Fortune 500 company. Leader-member exchange and leadership climate-related differently to individual and team empowerment and interacted to influence individual empowerment.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R., Allen, D., & Rosen, B. (2007). A multilevel study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 331–346.
This small-scale pilot study investigated the role of school principals in the induction of new teachers in Ontario, Canada.
Cherian, F., & Daniel, Y. (2008). Principal Leadership in New Teacher Induction: Becoming Agents of Change. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 3(2), 1-11.
Through real-life single and multiple case studies, This book addresses how principals and their staffs struggle with the challenge of shared leadership, how they encourage teacher growth and development, and how shared leadership can lead to higher levels of student learning.
Chrispeels, J. H. (Ed.). (2004). Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
The history and the intra-and inter-literature consensus of these two lines of inquiry will be examined in this review. The purpose is to determine whether the findings and generalizations of those bodies of research can be used conjointly in order to understand how schools strive to change to attain more effective instructional outcomes.
Clark, D. L., Lotto, L. S., & Astuto, T. A. (1984). Effective schools and school improvement: A comparative analysis of two lines of inquiry. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(3), 41–68.
In this article, we summarize and review the research on teams and groups in organization settings published from January 1990 to April 1996. The article focuses on studies in which the dependent variables are concerned with various dimensions of effectiveness. A heuristic framework illustrating recent trends in the literature depicts team effectiveness as a function of task, group, and organization design factors, environmental factors, internal processes, external processes, and group psychosocial traits.
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of management, 23(3), 239-290.
The purpose of this quantitative study is to examine the effect of principal leadership on teachers’ perceptions of working conditions.
Cooper, J. B., Saurino, D. R., Johnson, D. N., & Knighton, L. R. The Effect of Principal Leadership on Teachers’ Perceptions of Working Conditions.
This report presents findings from the school teacher data files of the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey that is designed to assist policy makers and educators better understand the role and impact of school principals.
Coopersmith, J. (2009). Characteristics of Public, Private, and Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in the United States: Results From the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey. First Look. NCES 2009-324. National Center for Education Statistics.
The belief that working in teams makes us more creative and productive is so widespread that when faced with a challenging new task, leaders are quick to assume that teams are the best way to get the job done. Getting agreement is the leader’s job, and they must be willing to take great personal and professional risks to set the team’s direction. And if the leader isn’t disciplined about managing who is on the team and how it is set up, the odds are slim that a team will do a good job.
Coutu, D., & Beschloss, M. (2009). Why teams don’t work. Harvard business review, 87(5), 98-105.
This study hypothesizes the following: Trust and leadership dimensions that support empowerment and involvement will predict an educational organization’s ability to minimize a threat–rigid response and flexibly negotiate new demands.
Daly, A. J. (2009). Rigid response in an age of accountability: The potential of leadership and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 168-216.
The authors arguing that the United States needs to move much more decisively than it has in the last quarter-century to establish a purposeful, equitable education system that will prepare all our children for success in a knowledge-based society.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
This report examines practices in teacher and principal development in the United States in 2010. It looks at ineffective approaches as well as those models that show promise for improving educator and student performance.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.
Few studies have examined factors relating to ineffective school leadership. Such knowledge can help principals refine leadership behaviors and enhance job security. This study used experiences and perceptions from 99 California public school superintendents to examine the reasons why some principals lose their jobs.
Davis, S. H. (1998). Superintendents’ perspectives on the involuntary departure of public school principals: The most frequent reasons why principals lose their jobs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(1), 58–90.
This article illustrates how successful leaders combine the too often dichotomized practices of transformational and instructional leadership in different ways across different phases of their schools' development in order to progressively shape and “layer” the improvement culture in improving students' outcomes.
Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221-258.
This book examines the nature of successful school leadership: what it is, what it looks like in practice & what are the consequences for schools & pupils.
Day, C., Sammons, P., Leithwood, K., Harris, A., Hopkins, D., Gu, Q., … Ahtaridou, E. (2011). Successful school leadership: Linking with learning and achievement. London: Open University Press.
This book provides insight into the streams that are driving leadership theory and practice today. The Nature of Leadership, Second Edition provides students with an updated and complete yet concise handbook that solidifies and integrates the vast and disparate leadership literature.
Day, D., Antonakis, J. (2012). The Nature of Leadership. SAGE.
This report describes how Denver Public Schools hired people to coach and evaluate its principals.
DeVita, M., Colvin, R., Darling-Hammond, L., Haycock, K. (2007). Education Leadership: A Bridge to School Reform. The Wallace Foundation.
The purpose of this study was to determine principals' perceptions of how effective mentoring programs and university-based principal preparation programs are in developing the skills necessary to carry out the 13 critical success factors identified by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). A review of the literature addressed what it means to be an effective principal and what an effective mentoring program should look like.
Dodson, R. B. (2006). The Effectiveness of Principal Training and Formal Principal Mentoring Programs.
This review summarizes the evidence for the model’s efficacy in explaining how principals and teachers together influence school practices and effectiveness.
Donley, J., Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, (2020). Distributed Leadership. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/leadership-models-distributed
This review highlights major models that have been influential in the field and discusses evidence for their efficacy in explaining school leaders’ influence.
Donley, J., Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, (2020). Leadership Models. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/quality-leadership-leadership-models
This report highlights the key research literature that addresses the principal competencies important for positive student and school outcomes.
Donley, J., Detrich, R., States, J., & Keyworth, (2020). Principal Competencies. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/principal-competencies-research
This study evaluated the impact of public feedback in RtI team meetings on the quality of implementation. Feedback improved poor implementation and maintained high level implementation.
Duhon, G. J., Mesmer, E. M., Gregerson, L., & Witt, J. C. (2009). Effects of public feedback during RTI team meetings on teacher implementation integrity and student academic performance. Journal of School Psychology, 47(1), 19-37.
A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to enhance the personal and social skills of children and adolescents indicated that, compared to controls, participants demonstrated significant increases in their self-perceptions and bonding to school, positive social behaviors, school grades and levels of academic achievement, and significant reductions in problem behaviors.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta‐analysis of after‐school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American journal of community psychology, 45(3-4), 294-309.
Leadership is what is done, not who is doing it. The leadership work blurs the lines between teachers and administrators. Leading Together introduces a collective approach to progress, process, and programs to help build the conditions in which strong leadership can flourish and student outcomes improve. Explore the Collective Leadership Development Model for School Improvement.
Eckert, J. (2017). Leading together: Teachers and administrators improving student outcomes. Corwin Press.
Applying an analytic model to better understand collective leadership development, this study examines three high schools: one urban, one suburban, and one rural. Each school's unique structure and context tests the model's explanatory power.
Eckert, J. (2019). Collective leadership development: Emerging themes from urban, suburban, and rural high schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(3), 477–509.
Effective Instructional Leadership Teams can be integral to helping underperforming schools strengthen their leadership, professional learning systems and core instruction.
Edwards, B., & Gammell, J. (2016). Building strong school leadership teams to sustain reform. Leadership, 45(3), 20-22. https://www.shastacoe.org/uploaded/Haylie_Blalock/Building-Strong-School-Leadership-Teams-to-Sustain-Reform.pdf
When schools form partnerships with families and the community, the children benefit. These guidelines for building partnerships can make it happen.
Epstein, J. L. (2010). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(3), 81-96.
This review of research in public management, political science and public policy, sociology, institutional economics, and organizational management identifies how governance and knowledge impact each other in education systems.
Fazekas, M., & Burns, T. (2012). Exploring the complex interaction between governance and knowledge in education.
In this report, the Southern Regional Education Board evaluates some 60 internship programs within its states and finds them lacking in a number of ways, including failing to provide real experiences in leadership. It urges policymakers, universities and school districts to create apprenticeships that better prepare aspiring principals for the demands they will face.
Fry, B., Bottoms, G., & O’neill, K. (2005). The principal internship: How can we get it right. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.
This study examined elementary school principal preparation programs to identify which program characteristics produced principals who were able to build well-qualified teams of teachers and improve student performance.
Fuller, E., Young, M., & Baker, B. D. (2010). Do principal preparation programs influence student achievement through the building of teacher-team qualifications by the principal? An exploratory analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 0011000010378613.
This article describes an innovative approach, developed by North Carolina State University,
to prepare leaders specifically for work in rural schools in high poverty districts.
Fusarelli, B. C., & Militello, M. (2012). Racing to the Top with Leaders in Rural High Poverty Schools. Planning and Changing, 43, 46-56.
This article reviews the research and best practices on succession planning in education as well as in other sectors. The authors illustrate how forward-thinking superintendents can partner with universities and other organizations to address the leadership challenges they face by creating strategic, long-term, leadership growth plans that build leadership capacity and potentially yield significant returns in improved student outcomes.
Fusarelli, B. C., Fusarelli, L. D., & Riddick, F. (2018). Planning for the future: Leadership development and succession planning in education. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13(3), 286–313.
The purpose of this study is to reveal the extent to which different leadership models in education are studied, including the change in the trends of research on each model over time, the most prominent scholars working on each model, and the countries in which the articles are based.
Gümüş, S., Bellibaş, M. S., Esen, M., & Gümüş, E. (2018). A systematic review of studies of leadership models in educational research from 1980 to 2014. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 46(1), 25–48.
In this article, the authors put forth a new set of standards with equity at the core. They seek to advance the conversation about why standards centered on equity are needed—particularly in light of a proposed standards refresh—and what implications would follow from equity-focused standards.
Galloway, M. K., & Ishimaru, A. M. (2015). Radical recentering: Equity in educational leadership standards. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(3), 372–408.
This study examined general education teachers’ implementation of a peer tutoring intervention for five elementary students referred for consultation and intervention due to academic concerns. Treatment integrity was assessed via permanent products produced by the intervention.
Gilbertson, D., Witt, J. C., Singletary, L. L., & VanDerHeyden, A. (2007). Supporting teacher use of interventions: Effects of response dependent performance feedback on teacher implementation of a math intervention. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16(4), 311-326.
The article presents an overview of these tenets drawn from opinion positions, practical experiences, and empirical research studies. There is clear evidence that additional empirical research would be beneficial.
Gillard, S. (2009). Soft skills and technical expertise of effective project managers. Issues in informing science & information technology, 6.
This study present results of a comprehensive review of principal leadership assessment practices in the United States. Using the learning-centered leadership framework, it focused on identifying the congruence (or lack thereof) between documented assessment practices and the research-based criteria for effective leadership that are associated with improved school performance.
Goldring, E., Cravens, X. C., Murphy, J., Porter, A. C., Elliott, S. N., & Carson, B. (2009). The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban districts assess leadership?. The Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 19-39
With support from The Wallace Foundation, a Vanderbilt University team is developing a tool to monitor and assess the performance of school leaders. The Vanderbilt assessment will differ from existing tools by focusing 100 percent on instructional leadership and examining both principals and leadership teams. The paper, with two companion reports, presents the research behind and conceptual framework for the tool.
Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., & Cravens, X. (2009). Assessing learning-centered leadership: Connections to research, professional standards, and current practices. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 1-36.
This study investigate the association between principal effectiveness and principal turnover using longitudinal data from Tennessee, a state that has invested in multiple measures of principal performance through its educator evaluation system.
Grissom, J. A., & Bartanen, B. (2019a). Principal effectiveness and principal turnover. Education Finance and Policy, 14(3), 355–382. Retrieved from https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/full/10.1162/edfp_a_00256
This study draws on data combining survey responses from principals, assistant principals, teachers and parents with administrative data to identify which principal skills matter most for school outcomes.
Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating Principal Effectiveness How Perspectives of Parents, Teachers, and Assistant Principals Identify the Central Importance of Managerial Skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1091-1123.
The author provides a new framework for understanding leadership practice. The work of leaders will increasingly be shaped by three overriding but contradictory themes: design; distribution; and disengagement. These are the `architecture' of school and educational leadership.
Gronn, P. (2003). The new work of educational leaders: Changing leadership practices in an era of school reform. London: Paul Chapman.
Teams have more talent and experience, more diverse resources, and greater operating flexibility than individual performers. J. Richard Hackman, one of the world's leading experts on group and organizational behavior, argues that the answer to this puzzle is rooted in flawed thinking about team leadership.
Hackman, J. R., & Hackman, R. J. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Harvard Business Press.
Examines trends in the evolution of the principalship in the United States from the 1960s to the present.
Hallinger, P. (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional to transformational leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(3).
This paper ties together evidence drawn from several extensive reviews of the educational leadership literature that included instructional leadership as a key construct.
Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221–239. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228633330_Instructional_Leadership_and_the_School_Principal_A_Passing_Fancy_that_Refuses_to_Fade_Away
This paper explores several types of school contexts (institutional, community, socio-cultural, political, economic, school improvement) and what we have learned about how they shape school leadership practice.
Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 5-24.
This article reviews the empirical literature on the relationship between the principal's role
and school effectiveness during the period from 1980 to 1995
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–44.
This article reviews research from 1980‐1995 exploring the relationship between principal leadership and student achievement. The focuses is on the substantive findings that emerged from the review.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness: 1980–1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157–191.
In this chapter, the authors synthesize the results of a series of analyses of empirical data on distributed leadership and school improvement. The studies centered on the impact of new state policies that sought to create broader and deeper leadership capacity in schools as a vehicle for stimulating and sustaining school improvement.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2009). Distributed leadership in schools: Does system policy make a difference? In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Studies in educational leadership (pp. 101–117). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
This longitudinal study examines the effects of collaborative leadership on school improvement and student reading achievement in 192 elementary schools in one state in the USA over a 4-year period
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010). Leadership for learning: Does collaborative leadership make a difference in school improvement?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(6), 654-678.
This chapter describes findings from a series of related quantitative studies in which we sought to understand how leadership contributes to school capacity for improvement and student learning.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010b). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership and Management, 30(2), 95–110. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Philip_Hallinger/publication/280887669_Collaborative_Leadership_and_School_Improvement_Understanding_the_Impact_on_School_Capacity_and_Student_Learning/links/55caa71408aeca747d69f0cd/Collaborative-Leadership-and-School
This article presents results from a study that examined the instructional management behavior of 10 elementary school principals in a single school district. The primary goal of the research was to describe the instructional management behavior of these principals in terms of specific job behaviors.
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. F. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–247.
This article reviews the evolution of instructional leadership as a model for principal practice, examines barriers to its successful enactment, and proposes strategies
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. F. (2013). Running on empty? Finding the time and capacity to lead learning. NASSP Bulletin, 97(1), 5-21.
The authors used a variety of quantitative bibliometric analyses to examine 1206 Scopus-indexed journal articles on instructional leadership published between 1940 and 2018. The results affirm that the knowledge base on instructional leadership has not only increased in size, but also geographic scope.
Hallinger, P., Gümüş, S. & Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2020). Are principals instructional leaders yet? A science map of the knowledge base on instructional leadership, 1940–2018. Scientometrics 122(3), 1629–1650. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338923620_%27Are_principals_instructional_leaders_yet%27_A_science_map_of_the_knowledge_base_on_instructional_leadership_1940-2018
The RAND Corporation served as the evaluator of PPIP and examined implementation and outcomes from school years 2007–2008 through 2010–2011. Although the district is likely to continue implementing much of what constitutes PPIP, this report focuses only on the period during which PPIP was being funded by the TIF grant.
Hamilton, L. S., Engberg, J., Steiner, E. D., Nelson, C. A., & Yuan, K. (2012). Improving school leadership through support, evaluation, and incentives: The Pittsburgh Principal Incentive Program. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2012/RAND_MG1223.pdf
This chapter of Handbook of The Economics of Education reviews research on teacher labor markets, the importance of teacher quality in the determination of student achievement, and the extent to which specific observable characteristics often related to hiring decisions and salary explain the variation in the quality of instruction.
Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2006). Teacher quality. In E. A. Hanushek & F. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education, vol. 2 (pp. 1051–1078). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North Holland.
The article underlines how, within this conception, distributed leadership operates as a network
of strong cells organized through cohesive diversity and emergent development rather than mechanical
alignment and predictable delivery.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2009). Distributed leadership: Democracy or delivery? In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 181–193). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dean_Fink/publication/226816252_Distributed_Leadership_Democracy_or_Delivery/links/5bfdb1b9299bf1c2329e7742/Distributed-Leadership-Democracy-or-Delivery
This article aims to address and explain the conceptual ambiguity surrounding distributed leadership.
Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: conceptual confusion and empirical reticence. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(3), 315-325. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alma_Harris/publication/233209809_Distributed_leadership_Conceptual_confusion_and_empirical_reticence/links/56667a7a08ae4931cd62729c.pdf
This book anchors distributed leadership in the core work of instruction and argues that to be most effective, leadership distribution has to be first and foremost focus upon improving learners outcomes
Harris, A. (2013). Distributed leadership matters: Perspectives, practicalities, and potential. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
what is distributed leadership? What does the evidence say? And, can it work for your school? Teacher Magazine asked Professor Alma Harris.
Harris, A. (2014, September 29). Distributed leadership. Teacher. https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/articles/distributed-leadership?lang=en
This article takes a contemporary look at distributed leadership in practice by drawing upon empirical evidence from a large-scale project in the USA. Initially, it considers the existing knowledge base on distributed leadership and questions some of the assertions and assumptions in recent accounts of the literature.
Harris, A., & DeFlaminis, J. (2016). Distributed leadership in practice: Evidence, misconceptions and possibilities. Management in Education, 30(4), 141–146.
This study draws on a range of existing quantitative data resources, including Chicago Public Schools' personnel and test score data, and a biannual survey of teachers and principals to
Hart, H. M., Sporte, S. E., Ponisciak, S. M., Stevens, W., & Cambronne, A. (2008). Teacher and Principal Leadership in Chicago: Ongoing Analyses of Preparation Programs. Research Report. Consortium on Chicago School Research.
This Wallace paper summarizes a decade of the foundation’s research in school leadership to identify five critical roles for school principals to be effective.
Harvey, J., et al. (2013). The School Principal As Leader: Guiding Schools To Better Teaching And Learning. The Wallace Foundation.
The Visible Learning research synthesizes findings from 1,400 meta-analyses of 80,000 studies involving 300 million students, into what works best in education.
Hattie, J. (2017). Visible learning: 250+ influences on student achievement. https://visible-learning.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/VLPLUS-252-Influences-Hattie-ranking-DEC-2017.pdf
This paper provides a conceptual analysis of feedback and reviews the evidence related to its impact on learning and achievement.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
Using findings generated from a large-scale survey of 1,400 Ontario principals, this paper reports on the influence of opportunities for school–community involvement on the work principals do on a daily basis and details how involvement in such activities influences and impacts their workloads.
Hauseman, D. C., Pollock, K., & Wang, F. (2017). Inconvenient, but Essential: Impact and Influence of School-Community Involvement on Principals' Work and Workload. School Community Journal, 27(1), 83-105.
This book reveal the anatomy of ideas that stick and explain ways to make ideas stickier, such as applying the human scale principle, using the Velcro Theory of Memory, and creating curiosity gaps. Along the way, we discover that sticky messages of all kinds draw their power from the same six traits.
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. Random House.
This longitudinal study examines the effects of distributed leadership on school improvement and growth in student math achievement in 195 elementary schools in one state over a 4-year period.
Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2009). Assessing the contribution of distributed leadership to school improvement and growth in math achievement. American educational research journal, 46(3), 659-689.
A central premise in the literature on leadership highlights its central role in organizational change. In light of the strength of this conceptual association, it is striking to note the paucity of large-scale empirical studies that have investigated how leadership impacts performance improvement in organizations over time. Indeed evidence-based conclusions concerning the impact of leadership on organizational change are drawn largely from case studies and cross-sectional surveys.
Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2010). Testing a longitudinal model of distributed leadership effects on school improvement. The leadership quarterly, 21(5), 867-885.
Companies today face adaptive challenges. Changes in societies, markets, customers, competition, and technology around the globe are forcing organizations to clarify their values, develop new strategies, and learn new ways of operating.
Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (1997). The work of leadership. Harvard business review, 75, 124-134.
Noting that the evidence of families' influence on their children's school achievement is consistent, positive, and convincing, this report examines research on parent and community involvement and its impact on student achievement.
Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A New Wave of Evidence: The Impact of School, Family, and Community Connections on Student Achievement. Annual Synthesis, 2002.
This updated and substantially expanded edition reveals how to build strong collaborative relationships and offers practical advice for improving interactions between parents and teachers, from insuring that PTA groups are constructive and inclusive to navigating the complex issues surrounding diversity in the classroom.
Henderson, A. T., Mapp, K. L., & Johnson, V. R. (2007). Beyond the bake sale: The essential guide to family-school partnerships. The New Press.
This guide identifies practices that can improve the performance of chronically low-performing schools--a process commonly referred to as creating "turnaround schools." The four recommendations in this guide work together to help failing schools make adequate yearly progress.
Herman, R., Dawson, P., Dee, T., Greene, J., Maynard, R., Redding, S., & Darwin, M. (2008). Turning Around Chronically Low-Performing Schools. IES Practice Guide. NCEE 2008-4020. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
This report describes the opportunities for supporting school leadership under ESSA, discusses the standards of evidence under ESSA, and synthesizes the research base with respect to those standards.
Herman, R., Gates, S. M., Arifkhanova, A., Barrett, M., Bega, A., Chavez-Herrerias, E. R., … Wrabel, S. L. (2017). School leadership interventions under the Every Student Succeeds Act: Evidence review. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1500/RR1550-3/RAND_RR1550-3.pdf
This report provides descriptive information on traditional public, charter, and private school principals over the period of 1987-88 through 2011-12. It includes comparative data on number of principals, gender, race/ethnicity, age, advance degrees, principal experience, teaching experience, salaries, hours worked, focus of work, experience and tenure at current schools, etc.
Hill, J., Ottem, R., & DeRoche, J. (2016). Trends in Public and Private School Principal Demographics and Qualifications: 1987-88 to 2011-12. Stats in Brief. NCES 2016-189. National Center for Education Statistics.
The authors outline some of the mechanisms through which parental school involvement affects achievement and identify how patterns and amounts of involvement vary across cultural, economic, and community contexts and across developmental levels. Then propose the next steps for research.
Hill, N. E., & Taylor, L. C. (2004). Parental school involvement and children's academic achievement: Pragmatics and issues. Current directions in psychological science, 13(4), 161-164.
The specific purposes of this article are to identify and synthesize the empirical research on how leadership influences student achievement and to provide evidence on how school leaders should direct their efforts.
Hitt, D. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2016). Systematic review of key leader practices found to influence student achievement: A unified framework. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 531-569.
The authors conducted correlational analyses to examine the strength of the relationship between each of the seven competencies and found that the model appears to reflect the internal states of principals who orchestrate school turnaround.
Hitt, D. H., Meyers, C. V., Woodruff, D., & Zhu, G. (2019). Investigating the Relationship Between Turnaround Principal Competencies and Student Achievement. NASSP Bulletin, 103(3), 189-208.
During the 1980s, our systems experienced team teaching and open classrooms. Educators began to talk about teachers' workplace and its effects on teachers' morale, knowledge and skills, and other characteristics.
Hord, S. M. (2008). Evolution of the professional learning community. The Learning Professional, 29(3), 10.
This article examines the relationship between the time principals spent on different types of activities and school outcomes, including student achievement, teacher and parent assessments of the school, and teacher satisfaction
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal’s time use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491–523. https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Principal%27s%20Time%20Use%20AJE.pdf
This paper examines the relationship between the time principals spent on different types of activities and school outcomes including student achievement, teacher and parent assessments of the school, and teacher satisfaction.
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal's time use and school effectiveness. American journal of education, 116(4), 491-523.
This brief examines the mean (average) percentage of time that principals reported spending on these activities in the 2011–12 school year, both overall and by selected school, staffing, and principal characteristics.
Hoyer, K. M., & Sparks, D. (2017). How Principals in Public and Private Schools Use Their Time: 2011-12. Stats in Brief. NCES 2018-054. National Center for Education Statistics.
The present study explores the relationship between distributed leadership and teachers' organizational commitment. Semi-structured interviews with teachers and school leaders of secondary schools were conducted
Hulpia, H., & Devos, G. (2010). How distributed leadership can make a difference in teachers’ organizational commitment? A qualitative study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 565–575. https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/955117/file/6828753
In this study the relationship between school leadership and teachers'
organizational commitment is examined by taking into account a distributed leadership
Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Van Keer, H. (2011). The relation between school leadership from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment: Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 728–771. https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/1938871/file/6762325.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to estimate the relationship between principal effectiveness (which we capture with a principal quality measure) and turnover. Specifically, we assess whether higher quality principals are more or less likely to leave their schools in New York City (NYC) as well as at the national level.
Husain, A. N., Miller, L. C., & Player, D. W. (2019). You can only lead if someone follows: The role of teachers’ assessment of principal quality in principal turnover. Working Paper 69. Charlottesville, VA: EdPolicyWorks, University of Virginia. Retrieved from https://curry.virginia.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/epw/69_Teacher_Assessed_Principal_Quality_and_Turnover.pdf
This report is a comprehensive and research-based framework outlining the conditions necessary for transformational school leaders to succeed. It offers a framework of conditions that can help districts enable great school leadership.
Ikemoto, G., Taliaferro, L., Fenton, B., Davis, J. (2014)Great Principals at Scale: Creating Districts That Enable All Principals to be Effective. New Leaders
This paper examines competencies of effective turnaround leaders.
Impact, P. (2008). School turnaround leaders: Competencies for success. Chapel Hill, NC: Author. Retrieved August, 30, 2009.
This review critically examines 15 empirical studies, conducted since the mid1980s, on the effects of support, guidance, and orientation programs—collectively known as induction—for beginning teachers.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of educational research, 81(2), 201-233.
The authors propose a conceptual framework of equitable leadership practice, describing three drivers to catalyze organizational growth in 10 high-leverage equitable practices designed to mitigate disparities for non-dominant students.
Ishimaru, A. M., & Galloway, M. K. (2014). Beyond individual effectiveness: Conceptualizing organizational leadership for equity. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13(1), 93–146. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262057301_Beyond_Individual_Effectiveness_Conceptualizing_Organizational_Leadership_for_Equity
This paper describes “how” to effectively implement lasting school improvement initiatives that maximize leadership, develop talent, amplify instructional transformation, and shift the culture.
Jackson, K., R., Fixsen, D., and Ward, C. (2018). Four Domains for Rapid School Improvement: An Implementation Framework. The Center on School Turnaround.
This report analyses whether and how highperforming systems have supported the subject expertise of their elementary school teachers.
Jensen, B., Roberts-Hull, K., Magee, J., & Ginnivan, L. (2016). Not so elementary: Primary school teacher quality in high-performing systems. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy. http://ncee.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/169726_Not_So_Elementary_Report_FINAL.pdf
the authors build on this body of work by further examining how working conditions predict both teachers‘ job satisfaction and their career plans.
Johnson, S. M., Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114(10), 1-39.
This article concerns the real-world importance of leadership for the success or failure of organizations and social institutions. The authors propose conceptualizing leadership and evaluating leaders in terms of the performance of the team or organization for which they are responsible.
Kaiser, R. B., Hogan, R., & Craig, S. B. (2008). Leadership and the fate of organizations. American Psychologist, 63(2), 96.
This meta-analysis examines leadership approaches and the relationship between educational leadership and student achievement. In the literature review identified 151 articles/dissertations, for inclusion in this study. The results revealed educational leadership has a medium-level effect on students’ achievement.
Karadag, E. (2020). The effect of educational leadership on students’ achievement: a cross-cultural meta-analysis research on studies between 2008 and 2018. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(1), 49-64.
This report examines the issue of school principal candidate standards as evidenced by below-average verbal, quantitative, and analytic scores, as measured by standardized tests.
Keedy, J. L., & Grandy, J. (1999). Trends in GRE Scores in Education Administration: Implications for Principal Preparation Programs. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED436828.pdf
This comprehensive review provides a framework for the expanding body of literature that seeks to make not only teaching, but rather the entire school environment, responsive to the schooling needs of minoritized students
Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally responsive school leadership: A synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272-1311.
School based leadership is an increasingly complex task that requires leaders to find ways to spread responsibility throughout organizations to achieve goals. This dissertation research is an exploratory study in the field of sustainability of distributed leadership at Capital High School, a large urban high school.
Klink, M. (2019). The Sustainability of Distributed Leadership (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh).
The study explored the following overarching question: What does it take for leaders to promote and support powerful, equitable learning in a school and in the district and state system that serves the school? The study pursued this question through a set of coordinated investigations,
Knapp, M. S., Copland, M. A., Honig, M. I., Plecki, M. L., & Portin, B. S. (2010). Learning-focused leadership and leadership support: Meaning and practice in urban systems. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy–University of Washington.
In this report, the development of altering concepts of school leadership over a period of about 4 decades is sketched.
Krüger, M., & Scheerens, J. (2012). Conceptual Perspectives on School Leadership. In J. Scheerens (Ed.), School leadership effects revisited: Review and meta-analysis of empirical studies (pp. 1–30). New York, NY: Springer.
This study is among the first to address the empirical limitations of prior studies on organizational contexts by leveraging one of the largest survey administration efforts ever conducted in the United States outside of the decennial population census.
Kraft, M. A., Marinell, W. H., & Shen-Wei Yee, D. (2016). School organizational contexts, teacher turnover, and student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Educational Research Journal, 53(5), 1411-1449.
This quantitative study examines the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions and their intended and actual departures from schools.
Ladd, H. F. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(2), 235-261.
Instead of looking at the principal alone for instructional leadership, we need to develop leadership capacity among all members of the school communities.
Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Beyond Instructional Leadership, 59(8), 37–40. Retrieved from http://johnwgardnertestsite.pbworks.com/f/S4%20Readings%20-%20Lambert%20Article.doc
This study addressed teachers' and parents' perceptions of the meanings and functions of parent involvement.
Lawson, M. A. (2003). School-family relations in context: Parent and teacher perceptions of parent involvement. Urban education, 38(1), 77-133.
New Leaders has recently published a new principal evaluation model. It includes seven modules: (1) Overview of the New Leaders Principal Evaluation Model, (2) The Principal Evaluation Rubric, (3) Setting a Principal Practice Goal + Strategic Planning, (4) Identifying Evidence, (5) Direct Observation of Principal Practice, (6) Collecting and Mapping Evidence to the Principal Practice Rubric, and (7) Providing Actionable Feedback.
Leaders, N. (2012). New leaders principal evaluation handbook. New York: Author.
This study examines the relationship between two dominant measures of teacher quality, teacher qualification and teacher effectiveness (measured by value-added modeling), in terms of their influence on students’ short-term academic growth and long-term educational success (measured by bachelor’s degree attainment).
Lee, S. W. (2018). Pulling back the curtain: Revealing the cumulative importance of high-performing, highly qualified teachers on students’ educational outcome. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(3), 359–381.
This article describes a 4-year program of research about transformational forms of leadership in schools
responding to a variety of restructuring initiatives.
Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational administration quarterly, 30(4), 498-518.
For purposes of the Ontario Leadership Framework (OLF), leadership is defined as the exercise of influence on organizational members and diverse stakeholders toward the identification and achievement of the organization’s vision and goals. For aspiring leaders, this framework provides important insights about what they will need to learn to be successful. Those already exercising leadership will find the framework a useful tool for self-reflection and self-assessment.
Leithwood, K. (2012). Ontario Leadership Framework 2012 with a discussion of the research foundations. Ottawa, Canada: Institute for Education Leadership. https://www.education-leadership-ontario.ca/application/files/2514/9452/5287/The_Ontario_Leadership_Framework_2012_-_with_a_Discussion_of_the_Research_Foundations.pdf
For aspiring leaders, this framework provides important insights about what they will need to learn to be successful.
Leithwood, K. (2012). Ontario Leadership Framework with a discussion of the leadership foundations. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Institute for Education Leadership, OISE. Retrieved from https://www.education-leadership-ontario.ca/application/files/2514/9452/5287/The_Ontario_Leadership_Framework_2012_-_with_a_Discussion_of_the_Research_Foundations.pdf
This study aimed to improve our understanding of the nature, causes, and consequences of school leader efficacy, including indirect influences on student learning.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational administration quarterly, 44(4), 496-528. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013161X08321501
The purpose of this paper is to provide one perspective on this question, focusing in particular on findings that may be applicable in the Nordic context.
Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (2012). Linking leadership to learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
This study aimed to estimate the impact of collective, or shared, leadership on key teacher variables and on student achievement. As well, it inquired about the relative contribution of different sources of such leadership and whether differences among patterns of collective leadership were related to differences in student achievement
Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529–561. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3d8/34602d17a14f306f6961863aef9c7ab9e901.pdf?_ga=2.12843442.469798984.1593548135-1379934943.1547574243
This study aimed to estimate the impact of collective, or shared, leadership on key teacher variables and on student achievement.
Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational administration quarterly, 44(4), 529-561.
This chapter of "A New Agenda for Research in Educational Leadership" book presents a broad agenda to help strengthen the extent, quality, and clarity of the latter source of knowledge -- empirical research on leadership.
Leithwood, K., & Riehl, C. (2005). What do we already know about educational leadership? In W. A. Firestone & C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda for research in educational leadership (pp. 12–27). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Using meta-analytic review techniques, this study synthesized the results of 79
unpublished studies about the nature of transformational school leadership (TSL) and its
impact on the school organization, teachers, and students.
Leithwood, K., & Sun, J. (2012). The nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A meta-analytic review of unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(3), 387-423.
In 2008 the authors published an article in this journal entitled Seven Strong Claims about Successful School Leadership (Leithwood, Harris, and Hopkins 2008). This article revisits each of the seven claims, summarising what was said about each in the original publications, weighing each of the claims considering recent empirical evidence, and proposing revisions or refinements as warranted.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2019). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 1-18.
The authors begin with eight basic understandings, assumptions, or starting points for our subsequent account of how to lead the successful turnaround of underperforming school.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Strauss, T. (2010). Leading school turnaround: How successful leaders transform low-performing schools. John Wiley & Sons.
This study inquired about patterns of leadership distribution, as well as which leadership functions were performed by whom, the characteristics of nonadministrative leaders, and the factors promoting and inhibiting the distribution of leadership functions.
Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, R., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 37–67.
This report examines the evidence on: How leadership matters and how important those effects are in promoting the learning of all children.
Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning.
This report by researchers from the Universities of Minnesota and Toronto examines the available evidence and offers educators, policymakers and all citizens interested in promoting successfulschools, some answers to these vitally important questions
Leithwood, K., Seashore, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning.
Guided by a synthesis of theory on human motivation and evidence about teachers’motivation to implement school reform, this study aimed to better understand the responses of teachers and school administrators to government accountability initiatives and to assess the extent to which leadership practices had a bearing on those responses
Leithwood, K., Steinbach, R., & Jantzi, D. (2002). School leadership and teachers’ motivation to implement accountability policies. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 94-119.
This meta-analysis finds a positive relationship between school principals spending time on five commonly assigned roles and student achievement.
Liebowitz, D. D., & Porter, L. (2019). The Effect of Principal Behaviors on Student, Teacher, and School Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 785-827.
This meta-analysis finds a positive relationship between school principals spending time on five commonly assigned roles and student achievement.
Liebowitz, D. D., & Porter, L. (2019). The Effect of Principal Behaviors on Student, Teacher, and School Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 785-827.
In this study, the six aforementioned variables are added to one model focusing on both the direct effects instructional and distributed leadership have on teacher job satisfaction and self-efficacy, and the indirect effects through the mediation variables of supportive school culture and teacher collaboration.
Liu, T., Bellibaş, M. S., & Gümüş, S. (2020). The effect of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Mediating roles of supportive school culture and teacher collaboration. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220910438
Recent studies concerned with goal choice and the factors that influence it, the function of learning goals, the effect of goal framing, goals and affect (well-being), group goal setting, goals and traits, macrolevel goal setting, and conscious versus subconscious goals are described.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current directions in psychological science, 15(5), 265-268.
The authors use longitudinal data from one large school district to investigate the distribution of principals across schools. They find that schools serving many low-income, non-White, and low-achieving students have principals who have less experience and less education and who attended less selective colleges. This distribution of principals is partially driven by the initial match of first-time principals to schools, and it is exacerbated by systematic attrition and transfer away from these schools.
Loeb, S., Kalogrides, D., & Horng, E. L. (2010). Principal preferences and the uneven distribution of principals across schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(2), 205-229.
The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the relationships among principal transformational leadership, school leadership-team transformational leadership, and school culture.
Lucas, S., & Valentine, J. (2002). Transformational leadership: Principals, leadership teams, and school culture.American Educational Research Association annual convention, New Orleans. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED468519.pd
In about a decade the theory of distributed leadership has moved from a tool to better understand the ecology of leadership to a widely prescribed practice. This article considers how to account for its spread and dominance and what purpose it serves.
Lumby, J. (2013). Distributed leadership: The uses and abuses of power. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 41(5), 581–597. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258135611_Distributed_Leadership_The_Uses_and_Abuses_of_Power
The purpose of this paper is to provide a model for more effective data-driven decision making in classrooms, schools, and districts.
Mandinach, E. B., Honey, M., & Light, D. (2006, April). A theoretical framework for data-driven decision making. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
this report identifies three crucial areas leaders across all states can usefully consider as they seek answers to some key questions. The report emphasizes that every state faces a unique blend of educational, political and financial circumstances and that, therefore, each state's approach should fit its needs and particularities.
Manna, P. (2015). Developing Excellent School Principals to Advance Teaching and Learning: Considerations for State Policy. Wallace Foundation.
This study investigates teacher empowerment in schools that have at least four years of experience with some form of decentralized or school-based management.
Marks, H. M., & Louis, K. S. (1997). Does teacher empowerment affect the classroom? The implications of teacher empowerment for instructional practice and student academic performance. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 19(3), 245-275.
Focusing on school leadership relations between principals and teachers, this study examines the potential of their active collaboration around instructional matters to enhance the quality of teaching and student performance
Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational administration quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
The authors show school and district-level administrators how to set the priorities and support the practices that will help all teachers become expert teachers. Their five-part framework is based on what research tells us about how expertise develops.
Marzano, R. J., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2011). Effective supervision: Supporting the art and science of teaching. Ascd.
Building on the analysis that was first reported in School Leadership That Works, the authors of Balanced Leadership identify the 21 responsibilities associated with effective leadership and show how they relate to three overarching responsibilities
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Building on the analysis that was first reported in School Leadership That Works, the authors of Balanced Leadership identify the 21 responsibilities associated with effective leadership and show how they relate to three overarching responsibilities:
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2001). School leadership that works: From research to results. ASCD.
The goal of this study was to examine the relationship between four patterns of distributed leadership and a modified version of a variable Hoy et al. have labeled “teachers’ academic optimism.” The paper finds that high levels of academic optimism were positively and significantly associated with planned approaches to leadership distribution, and conversely, low levels of academic optimism were negatively and significantly associated with unplanned and unaligned approaches to leadership distribution.
Mascall, B., Leithwood, K., Strauss, T. and Sacks, R. (2008). The relationship between distributed leadership and teachers’ academic optimism. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 214–228. https://www.hsredesign.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/09578230810863271.pdf
The present paper is an attempt to formulate a positive theory of motivation which will satisfy these theoretical demands and at the same time conform to the known facts, clinical and observational as well as experimental. It derives most directly, however, from clinical experience.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological review, 50(4), 370.
In this article Middle school principal Mike McCarthy shares 30 years of wisdom on how to run a school well.
McCarthy, M. and Baron, K. (2010). 10 Big Ideas Of School Leadership. Edutopia.
This study uses twelve years of administrative data from North Carolina to examine the impact of school principals on school quality. The study finds that principal departures are followed by a decrease in a school’s performance.
Miller, A. (2009). Principal turnover, student achievement and teacher retention. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.
This report examines the evidence about the emerging approach, Integrated student supports (ISS), from multiple perspectives.
Moore, K. (2014). Making the grade: Assessing the evidence for integrated student supports. Bethesda, MD: Child Trends. Retrieved from http://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2014-07ISSPaper2.pdf
This study evaluated the effects of performance feedback on the implementation of a classroom intervention.
Mortenson, B. P., & Witt, J. C. (1998). The use of weekly performance feedback to increase teacher implementation of a prereferral academic intervention. School Psychology Review, 613-627.
This book is designed to help the reader fully comprehend teacher leadership as a pathway to school improvement.
Murphy, J. (2005). Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
This book introduces the foundations of the recently revised professional educational leadership standards and provides an in-depth explanation and application of each one.
Murphy, J. F. (2016). Professional standards for educational leaders: The empirical, moral, and experiential foundations. Corwin Press.
This paper presents the research base and conceptual framework for a new principal leadership assessment tool: the Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education (VAL-ED™).
Murphy, J. F., Goldring, E. B., Cravens, X. C., Elliott, S. N., & Porter, A. C. (2007). The Vanderbilt assessment of leadership in education: Measuring learning-centered leadership. Journal of East China Normal University, 29(1), 1-10.
This article presents findings from the authors' exploratory study of 12 instructionally effective
school districts (IESD) in California.
Murphy, J., & Hallinger, P. (1988). Characteristics of instructionally effective school districts. The Journal of educational research, 81(3), 175-181.
The purpose of this analysis is to describe the research base that undergirds the emerging concept of learning-centered leadership.
Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A. C. (2006). Learning-Centered Leadership: A Conceptual Foundation. Learning Sciences Institute, Vanderbilt University (NJ1).
In this article, the authors examine leadership for effective learning employing research on highly productive schools and districts and high-performing principals and superintendents.
Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A. C. (2007). Leadership for learning: a research-based model and taxonomy of behaviors 1. School Leadership and Management, 27(2), 179-201.
This book introduces the foundations of the recently revised professional educational leadership standards and provides an in-depth explanation and application of each one.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for educational leaders. Reston, VA: Author. https://www.npbea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Professional-Standards-for-Educational-Leaders_2015.pdf
In a high school in Greece, teachers assume all administrative roles, freeing up the principal to take school governance to the next level.
Natsiopoulou, E., & Giouroukakis, V. (2010). When teachers run the school. Educational Leadership, 67(7), 2–5. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/apr10/vol67/num07/When-Teachers-Run-the-School.aspx
In the school setting, teams are abundant, often serving multiple purposes, having various titles, and consisting of diverse members. Teams are considered an essential component of Response to Intervention (RtI) and are the vehicle through which data‐based decision making occurs at the school, grade, small‐group, and individual student level.
Nellis, L. M. (2012). Maximizing the effectiveness of building teams in response to intervention implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 245-256.
Founded in 2000 by a team of social entrepreneurs, New Leaders is a national nonprofit that develops transformational school leaders and designs effective leadership policies and practices for school systems across the country.
New Leaders. (2014). Prioritizing Leadership: New Leaders' Federal Policy Platform. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED559351.pdf
There are a number of vehicles federal policymakers can use to create or encourage effective leadership policies. Throughout this series we will describe an ideal policy and then suggest potential vehicles policymakers could use to pursue that policy.
New Leaders. (2014). Pre-Service Preparation: Building a Strong Supply of Effective Future Leaders. Retrieved from http://www.nysed.gov/common/nysed/files/file-8-pre-service-prep-2016.pdf
This research brief examines the results from the North Carolina working conditions survey of 2,100 principals who were asked questions both about the working conditions as school leaders.
New Teacher Center (2010). North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey: Principal Working Conditions. New Teacher Center.https://2020results.asqnc.com/
Using the collective leadership framework, this study examines (a) how principals perceive their own influence and that of other key stakeholders in various school decisions and (b) how principals’ perceived influences of other stakeholders are associated with their own influence.
Ni, Y., Yan, R., & Pounder, D. (2018). Collective leadership: Principals’ decision influence and the supportive or inhibiting decision influence of other stakeholders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(2), 216–248. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318790312_Collective_Leadership_Principals%27_Decision_Influence_and_the_Supportive_or_Inhibiting_Decision_Influence_of_Other_Stakeholders
This report provides an overview of NYCLA’s flagship principal preparation program. Intended to help others involved in principal preparation think through important elements of principal preparation, including candidate selection, developing experiential learning opportunities, and funding, staffing and sustaining the program, the guide shares NYCLA’s successes and lessons learned during the 11 years we have delivered the Aspiring Principals Program in New York City, as well as through our work with various state and district partners nationally to adapt the program.
NYC Leadership Academy (2014). Taking Charge of Principal Preparation-A Guide to NYC Leadership Academy's Aspiring Principals Program. Retrieved from http://www.nycleadershipacademy.org/news-and-resources/tools-and-publications/pdfs/app-guide-full-guide.
This book offers a comprehensive and strategic approach to address what has become labeled as "talent and human capital."
Odden, A. R. (2011). Strategic management of human capital in education: Improving instructional practice and student learning in schools. Routledge.
This paper examines the issues involved and impact of effective management of human capital: the acquisition, development, performance management and retention of top talent in in school systems.
Odden, A. R., Kelly, J. R., & CO-DIRECTORS, S. M. H. C. (2008). Strategic management of human capital in public education. Madison, WI: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved January, 5, 2010.
The purpose of this chapter was to trace the place of “social justice” in the field's discourse since the early 1960s, the decade in which the first academic journals of the field appeared. More specifically, the chapter aims at (1) presenting the emergence of “social justice” as an area of study in the field's journals from a historical perspective and (2) analyzing the major topics related to this area of study and its types of publication.
Oplatka, I. (2014). The place of “social justice” in the field of educational administration: A journal-based historical overview of emergent area of study. In I. Bogotch & C. M. Shields (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and social (in)justice (pp. 15–35). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
US President Obama has launched one of the world’s most ambitious education reform agendas. Under the heading “Race to the Top”, this agenda encourages US states to adopt internationally benchmarked standards and assessments that prepare students for success in college and the workplace: recruit, develop, reward, and retain effective teachers and principals.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2011). Lessons from PISA for the United States–Strong performers and successful reformers in education. OECD Publishing. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264096660-en
This report reviews studies that have investigated the relationships between principal characteristics (including precursors, behaviors, and leadership styles) and student achievement.
Osborne-Lampkin, L. T., Sidler Folsom, J., & Herrington, C. D. (2015). A systematic review of the relationships between principal characteristics and student achievement.
This book provides essential information to better understand and improve the nature and quality of school and family partnerships for the benefit of all children
Patrikakou, E. N., & Anderson, A. R. (Eds.). (2005). School-family partnerships for children's success. Teachers College Press.
This book aim is to advance understanding along many dimensions of the shared leadership phenomenon: its dynamics, moderators, appropriate settings, facilitating factors, contingencies, measurement, practice implications, and directions for the future.
Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
This study attempts to investigate the differential effectiveness of provocation, brainstorming, and emotional mastery at fostering the emotional intelligence of adolescents.
Pedersen, J., Yager, S. & Yager, R. (2010). Distributed leadership influence on professional development initiatives: Conversations with eight teachers. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 8(3).
This article examines the salary trajectory of teachers as they move up the career ladder into leadership positions.
Pijanowski, J. C., & Brady, K. P. (2009). The influence of salary in attracting and retaining school leaders. Education and Urban Society, 42(1), 25–41.
The purpose of this paper is to identify common roles played by principals, how these roles differ across types of schools, and finally, how effectively are preparation programs training principals in these roles.
Portin, B., Schneider, P., DeArmond, M., & Gundlach, L. (2003). Making sense of leading schools. A National Study of the Principalship. Center of Reinventing Public Education. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington. Seattle, WA.
A review of school effectiveness literature is presented in this paper. Research studies and other literature on this topic are examined, including case studies, surveys and evaluations, studies of program:implementations, and organizational theories of schools and other institutions.
Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. Elementary School Journal, 83(4), 427–452. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED221534.pdf
This paper describes Auburn University's story of developing an innovative field-based master's level principal preparation program. The program’s goal was to align the program's curriculum and internship experiences with state and other accrediting agency standards, current leadership preparation research, and local educational agency (LEA) partner input and support. 0
Reames, E. (2010). Shifting Paradigms: Redesigning a Principal Preparation Program's Curriculum. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 5, 436-459.
Administrator support has been identified as a key factor in deterring teacher turnover. Yet, the specific ways school principals directly or indirectly influence teacher retention remain underexamined. The paper aims to discuss this issue.
Redding, C., Booker, L. N., Smith, T. M., & Desimone, L. M. (2019). School administrators’ direct and indirect influences on middle school math teachers’ turnover. Journal of Educational Administration.
This booklet focuses on parents—the child’s first and most powerful teachers.
Redding, S. (2000). Parents and learning (Vol. 2). International Academy of Education.
This study examined the school-level effects on tested student achievement in 129 high poverty elementary schools that implemented a common set of comprehensive parent engagement strategies over a 2-year period.
Redding, S., Langdon, J., Meyer, J., & Sheley, P. (2004). The effects of comprehensive parent engagement on student learning outcomes. American Educational.
This book presents information and tools necessary to successfully evaluate all types of educational leaders and improve both individual and organizational performance.
Reeves, D. B. (Ed.). (2008). Assessing educational leaders: Evaluating performance for improved individual and organizational results. SAGE.
Drawing from video analysis of Distributed Leadership team meetings, this paper explores the work of the teams themselves, focusing on team priorities, organization, roles and authority dynamics, and decision making. The analysis focuses on the four Distributed Leadership schools that were in their second year of implementation in 2007-08.
Riggan, M. (2009). An analysis of team behavior in the distributed leadership project. In American Educational Research Association annual meeting, San Diego, CA.
This brief is intended to inform state leaders and others in the field about the participating states’ efforts to strengthen the recruitment, preparation, support, and supervision of school leaders.
Riley, D. L., & Meredith, J. (2017). State Efforts to Strengthen School Leadership: Insights from CCSSO Action Groups. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
This paper is a synthesis of the evidence-base on school leadership and its impact on student performance.
Robinson, V. M. (2007). School leadership and student outcomes: Identifying what works and why (Vol. 41). Winmalee, Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Leaders.
Given the burgeoning interest in distributed leadership in education, it is timely to consider how research on this topic could make stronger and more rapid connections with student outcomes than has been evident in the history of the parent field of educational leadership (Harris, 2008). The purpose of this chapter, therefore, is to develop an account of distributed leadership that is appropriate for research on this relationship.
Robinson, V. M. J. (2009). Fit for purpose: An educationally relevant account of distributed leadership. In A. Harris (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 219–240). New York, NY: Springer.
The purpose of this study was to examine the relative impact of different types of leadership on students' academic and nonacademic outcomes.
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on school outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674.
The purpose of this study is to examine the relative impact of different types of leadership on students’ academic and nonacademic outcomes.
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational administration quarterly.
Using evidence-based medicine as an exemplar, identifies the prevailing “research-practice gap”–the failure of organizations and managers to base practices on best available evidence.
Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as “evidence-based management”?. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 256-269.
This article sketches out a framework for inclusive leadership. As one of the constellation approaches to leadership and social justice, inclusive leadership is concerned first and foremost with inclusion, both in its processes and the ends for which it strives.
Ryan, J. (2006). Inclusive leadership and social justice for schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5(1), 3–17. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/32335/1/RyanFinal.Inclusive%20Leadership%20and%20Social%20Justice%20for%20schools.pdf
This is a literature review of the effect of performance feedback on teacher’s use of practices.
Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 27(4), 396-407.
The bulk of the study is dedicated to an analysis of the empirical research literature on leadership effects. This includes the presentation of results from an earlier meta-analysis carried out by the authors, a summary of other meta-analyses, and a new meta-analysis based upon 25 studies carried out between 2005 and 2010.
Scheerens, J. (Ed.). (2012). School leadership effects revisited: Review and meta-analysis of empirical studies. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
In this report, the Southern Regional Education Board outlines critical actions that states, districts, universities and principals themselves should take as part of a systematic plan to address principal succession. The report makes the case for principal succession planning and describes six steps for succession planning that states and districts can implement to ensure they have the right principals for the job.
Schmidt-Davis, J., & Bottoms, G. (2011). Who's Next? Let's Stop Gambling on School Performance and Plan for Principal Succession. Southern Regional Education Board (SREB).
This report examines the evidence and analyses to substantiate the claim that leadership and principals in particular have a significant impact on students and schools.
Seashore, K., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K., & Anderson, S. (2010). Investigating the links to improved student learning: Final report of research findings.
This study examines the influence of principal leadership in high schools on classroom instruction and student achievement through key organizational factors, including professional capacity, parent–community ties, and the school’s learning climate.
Sebastian, J., & Allensworth, E. (2012). The Influence of Principal Leadership on Classroom Instruction and.
The authors use principals’ self-ratings to construct typologies of effectiveness in both domains and compare their relationship to student achievement. Results show that principals view themselves as either strong or weak on instructional leadership and organizational management skills simultaneously. They also find that learning gains vary significantly across the principal profiles.
Sebastian, J., Allensworth, E., Wiedermann, W., Hochbein, C., & Cunningham, M. (2019). Principal leadership and school performance: An examination of instructional leadership and organizational management. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18(4), 591–613. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15700763.2018.1513151?needAccess=true
This report sets forth a framework of essential supports and contextual resources for school improvement, examines empirical evidence on its key elements and how they link to improvements in student learning, and investigates how a school's essential supports interact with community context to affect student learning.
Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2006). The Essential Supports for School Improvement. Research Report. Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Using examples from states throughout the country, this guidebook from the National Conference of State Legislatures describes six key areas in which state legislators can take action to improve the quality of leadership in public schools
Shelton, S. V. (2012). Preparing a pipeline of effective principals: A legislative approach. National Conference of State Legislatures.
This study focuses on the experiences of ten novice principals involved in a principal mentoring program in a large urban school district to examine the connections of theory and practice from training received in their administrative preparation program. It sought to understand the impact of receiving support and mentoring in retaining principals. Three themes emerged from the data: (1) the importance of networking with other principals, (2) individualized support with mentors, and (3) continuous development and professional growth. The research presented will contribute to the agenda of retaining quality administrators in the field.
Simieou, F., Decman, J., Grigsby, B., & Schumacher, G. (2010). Lean on me: Peer mentoring for novice principals. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 5(1), 1-9.
This paper reviews evidence from six recent studies, which collectively suggest that teachers who leave high-poverty schools are not fleeing their students, but rather the poor working conditions that make it difficult for them to teach and their students to learn. They include school leadership, collegial relationships, and elements of school culture.
Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2013). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117, 1-36
This paper examines research on what we know about the causes and impact of principal turnover.
Snodgrass Rangel, V. (2018). A review of the literature on principal turnover. Review of Educational Research, 88(1), 87-124.
Stories of leadership successes follow a familiar structure: A charismatic leader, often the CEO or school principal, takes over a struggling school, establishing new goals and expectations and challenging business as usual within the organization.
Spillane, J. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 143-150. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00131720508984678
This 4-year longitudinal study, funded by the National Science Foundation and the Spencer Foundation, is designed to make the “black box” of leadership practice more transparent through an in-depth analysis of leadership practice. This research identifies the tasks, actors, actions, and interactions of school leadership as they unfold together in the daily life of schools.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28. http://dm.education.wisc.edu/rrhalverson/intellcont/SpillaneHalversonDiamond%20ER-1.pdf
Building on activity theory and theories of distributed cognition, this paper develops a distributed perspective on school leadership as a frame for studying leadership practice, arguing that leadership practice is constituted in the interaction of school leaders, followers, and the situation.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233013775_Towards_a_theory_of_leadership_practice_A_distributed_perspective
Traditional organizational theory mandates that organizations predict and stay in control in order to avoid chaos. This book proposes that members of organizations work at developing a new frame of reference for understanding organizational life
Stacey, R. D. (1996). Complexity and creativity in organizations. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
This paper provides evidence on how school leaders used their new autonomy and its impact on school performance.
Steinberg, M. P. (2014). Does greater autonomy improve school performance? Evidence from a regression discontinuity analysis In Chicago. Education Finance and Policy, 9(1), 1-35.
The report examines the internal and external conditions that matter for students’ and teachers’ feelings of safety.
Steinberg, M. P., Allensworth, E., & Johnson, D. W. (2011). Student and Teacher Safety in Chicago Public Schools: The Roles of Community Context and School Social Organization. Consortium on Chicago School Research. 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637.
This book helps to define human performance technology: a systematic approach to improving individual and organizational performance.
Stolovitch, H. D., & Keeps, E. J. (2006). Handbook of human performance technology: Principles, practices, and potential. J. Pershing (Ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Based on a synthesis of unpublished transformational school leadership (TSL) research completed during the last 14 years, this study inquired into the nature of TSL and its effects on student achievement using review methods including standard meta-analysis and vote-counting techniques.
Sun, J., & Leithwood, K. (2012). Transformational school leadership effects on student achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 11(4), 418-451.
This study reviews evidence about the overall influence of direction-setting leadership practices (DSLPs), 1 of 4 major categories of practices included in a widely known conception of effective leadership (e.g., Leithwood & Louis, 2011) and a focus of many other such conceptions, as well.
Sun, J., & Leithwood, K. (2015). Direction-setting school leadership practices: A meta-analytical review of evidence about their influence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(4), 499-523.
The Wallace Foundation, which invested tens of millions of dollars into strengthening the ranks of school leaders in those districts, is trying to answer that question. Over the next several months, the foundation will take the knowledge and lessons learned in its “principal pipeline” districts to 90 more school systems in 31 states.
Superville, D. R. (2020). 6 districts invested in principals and saw dramatic gains. Dozens more will try to do the same. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/02/10/6-districts-invested-in-principals-and-saw.html?cmp=eml-enl-eu-news2&M=59040207&U=553060&UUID=9bc4fda5086bf85fdf82fb5f1a2a674c
This report describes the Consortium for Policy Research in Education’s mixed-method evaluation of the Distributed Leadership (DL) project. The evaluation featured a cluster randomized control trial, where schools first agreed to participate in the study and then were chosen by lottery to participate in the DL project or serve in the comparison group. Overall there were 16 DL schools and 21 comparison sites in the evaluation.
Supovitz, J., & Riggan, M. (2012). Building a foundation for school leadership: An evaluation of the Annenberg Distributed Leadership Project, 2006–2010. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=cpre_researchreports
This paper examines the effects of principal leadership and peer teacher influence on teachers' instructional practice and student learning.
Supovitz, J., Sirinides, P., & May, H. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 31-56.
The National Teacher and Principal Survey is completed every four years soliciting descriptive information from principals and teachers across the 50 states. A few highlights include: Sixty percent of school principals have been at their schools for three years or less.
Taie, S., and Goldring, R. (2017). Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Principals in the United States: Results From the 2015–16 National Teacher and Principal Survey First Look (NCES 2017-070). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved [date] from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2017070.
A subgroup of principals—leaders for social justice—guide their schools to transform the culture, curriculum, pedagogical practices, atmosphere, and schoolwide priorities to benefit marginalized students. The purpose of the article is to develop a theory of this social justice educational leadership.
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1033.662&rep=rep1&type=pdf
The purpose of this paper is to examine the development of educational leadership, administration and management (EdLAM) research by identifying thematic strands that hallmark key publications and synthesise major research findings and limitations.
Tian, M., & Huber, S. G. (2019). Mapping educational leadership, administration and management research 2007–2016. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(2), 129–150.
This article provides a meta-analysis of research conducted on distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013. It continues the review of distributed leadership commissioned by the English National College for School Leadership (NCSL) which identified two gaps in the research during the 1996–2002 period.
Tian, M., Risku, M., & Collin, K. (2016). A meta-analysis of distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013: Theory development, empirical evidence and future research focus. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 44(1), 146–164.
This empirical study of the practice of five elementary school principals whose student achievement gains were three times the expected rate of progress redefines some capabilities identified in the literature as central to leadership for learning.
Timperley, H. (2011). Knowledge and the leadership of learning. Leadership and policy in schools, 10(2), 145-170.
The hypothesis that guided this study was that the degree of teacher professionalism in a school would be related to (a) the professional orientation of principals in their exercise of administrative authority—especially, the extending of adaptive discretion to teachers in the conduct of their work—and (b) the trust evident among various actors in the school community.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools: The role of leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217-247.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationships among faculty trust in the principal, principal leadership behaviors, school climate, and student achievement.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1), 66-92.
Intended for state officials involved in the assessment and approval of university and other programs to train future school principals, this report describes five design principles for effective program evaluation.
UCEA and New Leaders (2016). Improving state evaluation of principal preparation programs. Retrieved from: www.sepkit.org
Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify different types of principals across the U.S. The authors analyzed the 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey as it presents a unique opportunity to study the different types of U.S. principals since it contains leadership measures not found in other national surveys or administrations. A final sample of 7,650 public schools and principals were included in the analysis.
Urick, A., & Bowers, A. J. (2014). What are the different types of principals across the United States? A latent class analysis of principal perception of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(1), 96–134. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1031.4904&rep=rep1&type=pdf
The purpose of this study was to examine various factors that are often present in principal–teacher interactions and teacher–teacher relationships to see how those may have an impact on teachers’ classroom instructional practices.
Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational administration quarterly, 44(4), 458-495.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss findings from Learning from Leadership. This study was designed to identify and describe successful educational leadership and to explain how such leadership can yield improvements in student learning.
Wahlstrom, K. L., Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., & Anderson, S. E. (2010). Learning from Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning. The Informed Educator Series. Educational Research Service.
The purpose of this Handbook on Restructuring and Substantial School Improvement is to provide principles for restructuring and substantially improving schools.
Walberg, H. J. (2007). Handbook on restructuring and substantial school improvement. IAP.
This is a synthesis of research on instructional leadership. The information is developed into a working model of instructional leadership for practitioners-principals, assistant principals, and teachers.
Weber, J. R. (1987). Instructional leadership: A composite working model. ERIC/CEM.
This report represents the first systematic comparison of student outcomes in schools led by the Aspiring Principals Program (APP) graduates after three years to those in comparable schools led by other new principals.
Weinstein, M., Schwartz, A. E., & Corcoran, S. P. (2009). The New York City Aspiring Principals Program: A School-Level Evaluation. NYU Wagner Research Paper, (2011-07).
This is a look at effective leadership skills based upon the career of Coach John Wooden.
Williams, P. (2014). Coach Wooden's greatest secret : the power of a lot of little things done well. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Revell, a division of Baker Publishing Group.
This quantitative meta-analysis examines impact of the principal's leadership on student achievement.
Witziers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Kr�ger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational administration quarterly, 39(3), 398-425.