Session Information
26 SES 14 A, Principal Preparation Pathway for Preformance
Paper Session
Contribution
Research Proposal Topic
The topic of this research proposal is to examine the current state of school leader retention in high performing countries in Europe and in Asia based on the countries identified by the National Conference of State Licensure (NCSL) as top performing educational jurisdictions around the world. Combined with the question of retention of school leaders, the second area of interest is to explore the models of professional development that exist and are available to school leaders in the select countries.
Research Questions
The research questions that drive the interest in this study focus on retention and professional development/learning for school leaders in the United States and select countries in Europe and Asia.
- What is the retention rate of school leaders in the United States in comparison to select countries in Europe and in Asia?
- What models of professional development are available to school leaders in the United States and select countries in Europe and in Asia?
- What are the expenditures for professional development for school leaders and how do the expenditures compare to costs to replace a school leader?
- Are there connections between school leader retention and the type of professional learning experienced while in their role as a school leader?
Theoretical Framework
Changing demands of school leadership and a lack of qualified leader candidates to fill the role of the principal has impacted school performance in the United States (Leithwood, et al., 2011; Spillane et al., 2010). Compounding the problem of quality leaders is the recent findings that indicate 25 percent of the principals leave their school each year in the United States. Furthermore, 50 percent of new principals quit their jobs during their third year (School Leaders Network, 2014). The problem of turnover is not just isolated to public schools. The National Center for Education Statistics 2014 report found that 79.8 percent of public school principals, 72% of charter principals, and 79.8 percent of private school principal stayed in 2013. The impact of principal turnover on a school as well as a school district is significant. In addition, the estimated cost to hire, develop and onboard each principal is $75,000. In the United States the 500 largest districts (2.8% of the nation’s districts) could save nearly $100 million annually.
The bulk of research on principal effectiveness stems from principal preparation programs not just in the United States but in other countries as well. Through the International Study of the Preparation of Principals (ISPP), studies have been conducted in England, Scotland, Mexico, Canada, and Australia. Hess and Kelly (2007) have concluded that principal preparation programs in the United States have not kept pace with the changes in the education sector producing underprepared principals faced with accountability, political pressures, and complexity demanding higher levels of performance. Further concern is that the rise of demands placed on the principals may far exceed the reasonable expectations of one leader (Darling-Hammond, 2010, Levine, 2005).
With increasing evidence that principal turnover has a negative impact on student performance (Mascall & Leithwood, 2010); the need to support practicing principals becomes critical. Given that most principals in their current role were products of leadership preparation programs that were viewed as insufficient to prepare them for the role, it appears that professional development is one avenue of support. However, the research on professional development for practicing principals is somewhat limited (J. Spillane, Healey & Parise, 2009).
Examining models for effective professional learning for practicing principals as a way to deter principal turnover and improve retention through the lens of adult learning theory may be a solution to our current problem.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Preparing principals for a changing world : lessons from effective school leadership programs (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., Lapointe, M., Meyerson, D., & Orr, M. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing world. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Standford Educational Leadership Institute. Hess, F., & Kelly, A. (2007). Learning to lead? What gets taught in principal preparation programs. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 244-274. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier. Leithwood, K. A., Louis, K. S., Anderson, J. D., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. New York: The Wallace Foundation. Leithwood, K. A., Louis, K. S., & Anderson, S. E. (2011). Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. Education Schools Project. Washington D.C.: Education Schools Project. Mascall, B., & Leithwood, K. (2010). Investing in leadership: The district's role in managing principal turnover. Leadership & Policy in Schools, 9(4), 367-383. School Leaders Network (2014). http://connectleadsucceed.org/sites/default/files/principal_turnover_cost.pdf Spillane, J., Healey, K., & Parise, L. M. (2009). School leaders' opportunities to learn: a descriptive analysis from a distributed perspective. Educational Review, 61(4), 25.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.