Dissertation Mentoring I Project 3

Dissertation Mentoring I Project 3

Annotated Bibliography

Pammy Darden

Leadership

Jackson, J. (2005). Leadership for urban public schools. The Educational Forum, 69, 192-202.

Retrieved from http://www.kdp.org

This article focuses primarily on the struggles of urban leaders, their schools, and school districts. The author outlines steps that an urban leader should consider when attempting to meet the educational needs of a diverse student population and state mandated accountability requirements. The article emphasizes the need to educate urban principals on how to be problem solvers, while also being good stewards in the community. The author acknowledges the difficulties urban principals face in this age of accountability, but stresses that they must be willing to make courageous decisions and think outside the box. I am interested in how leadership impacts student learning. This article offers insight on the plight of urban school districts and their search for school leaders who can lead, produce results, communicate well with all stakeholders, and meet rigid state accountability requirements. The article seems to support the idea that school level principals are the learning leaders in their building and they are responsible for the quality of education for every student.

Louis, K., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). How does leadership affect student

achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School

Improvement, 21(3), 315-336. doi:10.1080/09243453.2010.486586

Louis, Dretzke, and Walhstrom focus on the types of relationships in schools that

have a direct or indirect impact on student learning. The overall finding was that focused instruction and professional learning communities had the most impact on student achievement, although this was largely influenced by the relationships between teachers and principals. An unexpected finding from their research was the importance of trust between students, teachers, and principals. Trust had a defining impact on the ability of the principal to influence classroom instruction; thereby, connecting leadership indirectly to student achievement. This area of study is especially intriguing for me because I am interested in the level of influence a principal has on the instructional program and student achievement. The data presented in this study will be useful and many of the survey questions are similar to the new teacher and leader evaluation systems being implemented in Georgia for the 2012-2013 school year. The authors stated that more research in this area is needed.

Patton, S., Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership

influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 671-706. doi:

10.1177/0013161X10377347

According to this study, school leaders are capable of having a significant impact on student learning; however, the extent of their impact is based on a number of variables. Different types of studies can either increase or decrease the impact. Large empirical studies tend to decrease the impact, but smaller qualitative studies with a focus on struggling schools tend to increase the effects of the impact of leadership. Keith Leithwood is a leading researcher in the impact of leadership on student learning and has conducted several studies over the last decade in this area. The authors choose four variables, known as paths, to conduct their research: rational, emotions, organizational, and family. The LISREL path analysis program was used to identify the relationship between leadership, Four Paths, and student achievement. The authors suggest that the impact of leadership cannot be solely judged on student achievement, but because of accountability requirements this impact is becoming increasingly critical.

School Improvement

Bifulco, R., Duncombe, W., & Yinger, J. (2005). Does whole-school reform boost student

performance? The case of New York City. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,

24(1), 47-72. doi:10.1002/pam.20069

This article explores the ramifications of whole-school reform models used during the mid-1990s in New York City’s public schools using a quasi-experimental study model. The study sets out to answer the following questions: (1) What is the cumulative impact of a whole-school reform model on student performance from first grade through third grade? (2) What portion of the one-year gain in student performance in the third, fourth, and fifth grades is attributable to one of these models? The two whole school reform models identified were School Development Program and Success for All. After a careful review of the data associated with these two school reform programs, the study was unable to find any significant evidence that these two reform models were effective in improving student performance. In the age of accountability, where school leaders and superintendents are judged based on the achievement levels of students, this area of research is of interest to me.

Forte, E., & edCount, LLC. (2010). Examining the assumptions underlying the NCLB federal

accountability policy on school improvement. Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 76-88.

doi:10.1080/00461521003704738

In this study, the examination of the effectiveness of NCLB was outlined based on the following assumptions: schools are appropriately identified for improvement status, consequences associated with school improvement status, and school improvement efforts lead to increases in student learning. The study outlines all the major flaws of NCLB and explains in detail why the plan was not effectively implemented, monitored, and assessed. The article explains why the assumptions are flawed with charts and data collected from the U.S. Department of Education. The study warns against some of the wide range goals of NCLB and offers suggestions on how states and the federal government could tweak this policy. The study suggests NCLB did successfully meet some goals such as ensuring that all schools used common assessments across states and schools address the achievement of all students. However, due to misguided political agendas and lack of state level support and/or funding, NCLB fell short of its initial goal. As part of my research, I am interested in identifying school improvement models that work, and this study provides me with an outline to understand the outcomes of large-scale improvement policy.

Hanushek, E.A., & Raymond, M.E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved

student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 297-327. doi:

10.1002/pam.20091

This study discusses the impact of NCLB on student achievement. According to the study, NCLB has had a significant impact on overall student achievement, and most states have seen some improvement. However, the study stops short of saying that NCLB was a success. Based on the data collected, the authors ascertained that while overall student achievement has increased with accountability reform, the achievement gaps between white, black, and Hispanic students continue to persist. Their analysis is that while NCLB improved student achievement, it had minimal impact on closing the achievement gap among historically low achieving students (low income, blacks, and Hispanics). One surprising finding during this study was that while the achievement gap continued to widen, Hispanic students actually benefitted the most from school reform. They achieved at a higher rate than their black counterparts and the achievement gap between them and their white counterparts decreased. Overall, the study found that because states implement portions of NCLB differently it is difficult to attribute success or lack thereof to one variable.

Leadership and School Improvement

Bush, T. (2009). Leadership development and school improvement: Contemporary issues in

leadership development. Educational Review, 61(4), 375-389. doi:

10.1080/00131910903403956

Tony Bush is a professor in the United Kingdom at the University of Warkick in the Institute of Education. In this study, he explores the implications of a leadership development program and how this impacts school leadership. This study offers an international perspective on how future principals should be developed and trained. He acknowledges that the widespread belief across nations is that leadership is linked to student achievement; however, there is no such consensus on how to appropriately develop leaders for their new role. He suggests that the way to better prepare school leaders for their roles, particularly in the age of accountability, starts in the college preparation programs. Bush suggests that colleges be deliberate in crafting the curriculum for leadership programs by including mentoring and coaching to meet the needs of 21st century schools. Although my area of interest is school leadership and its impact on student achievement, college educational leadership programs play a key role in preparing future school leaders.

Nettles, S., & Herrington, C. (2007) Revisiting the importance of the direct effects of school

leadership on student achievement: The implications for school improvement policy.

Peabody Journal of Education, 82(4), 724-736. doi:10.1080/016195560701603239

Stephen Nettles and Carolyn Herrington explore the direct impact of school leadership on student achievement. The authors admit that many studies have been conducted that identify the leadership qualities of an effective school principal, but few have looked at the direct effect of leadership on student achievement. They outlined the following qualities that have been identified in previous studies as important leadership factors that impact student achievement: providing a safe and orderly environment, mission and vision, stakeholder involvement, monitoring school progress, instructional focus, high expectations, and professional development. They conducted a three-level hierarchical linear modeling (HIM) growth curve model as part of their research using principals in Florida whose schools participated in the Reading First grant program. Their research found that these principals did have an impact on subgroups such as students with disabilities and English Learners, but not on the general population. They suggest that more research is needed in the area of school leadership and its impact on student achievement, which lends itself to my area of interest.

Gardiner, M., Canfield-Davis, K., & Anderson, K. (2008). Urban school principals and the No

Child Left Behind Act, Urban Review, 41, 141-160. doi:10.1007/s11256-008-0102-1

This study uses six urban school principals (four elementary and two secondary) and their response to NCLB and its requirements. This qualitative study also focuses on impact of multiculturalism on an urban principal’s leadership approach. The authors of this study believe that more emphasis should be placed on multiculturalism as a way to prepare urban school principals for their roles as school leaders. The study reveals that three of the principals successfully managed the stringent requirements of NCLB as well as met the needs of their students. The remaining three principals focused mainly on the NCLB mandates. The study concludes that in order for an urban principal to be successful, more emphasis should be placed on the individual and collective needs of their student body. As an administrator in a large urban school district, this study is intriguing because much of my focus is shaped by accountability requirements. While there is intense focus on the test scores of subgroups (i.e. free/reduced lunch, special education, racial groups, etc.), there is little emphasis placed on the uniqueness of these groups and how this may impact their ability to learn.

Provost, J., Boscardin, M.L., & Wells, C. (2010). Perceptions of principal leadership behaviors

in Massachusetts in the era of education reform. Journal of School Leadership, 20(5),

532-560. Retrieved from http://www.rowman.com/Page/JSL

This is a qualitative and quantitative study. The study focuses on 30 principals, assistant principals, and district level administrators to identify how their perceptions pertain to their roles and educational reform mandates. Participants ranked 21 principal leadership behavior descriptors in the order of importance to them, completed a survey, and were interviewed. The authors included many of their responses in the article, which gave more insight on the perceptions of the participants. The results of this study found that at least half of the participants evaluated sorted the items similarly. This study also reveals differences between male and female participants. Overall, the study concludes that the participants share common beliefs on leadership behaviors that work such as holding high expectations for staff performance, communicating instructional goals, developing school goals, and systemically observing teachers’ instructional methods. The study also shows that the role of the principal is ever changing in the era of accountability.

8