This article provides an overview of principal and superintendent preparation in the past and offers suggestions for the future development of such leaders. Implications for principal and superintendent preparation are that many essential skills and much important knowledge cannot be delivered by a traditional university-based program. Although the authors continue to support the preparation of principals and superintendents in university-based programs for these harsh and demanding times, they recommend that the programs (a) attend to belief, attitude, and philosophy; (b) deal with problems in practice; and (c) foster institutional arrangements to allow for coordination of efforts with schools. Preparation must be redesigned to reflect the findings of research on the advancement of professional practice. Preparation programs must be reorganized to reflect what we have learned from large-scale school improvement efforts. There must be closer association between higher education, the professional organizations, and districts themselves to provide preparation outside conventional classroom settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, G. C. , & Keller, L. (1994). Principals’ observations of a state level project: Leadership to transform schools. Journal of School Leadership, 4, 254-271.
2.
Amatea, E. S. , Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Sherrard, P.A.D. (1996). Creating school change: Discovering a choice of lenses for the school administrator. Journal of Educational Administration, 34(3), 49-64.
3.
Andrews, R. L. (1974). Lethal assumptions of competency-based programs. University Council for Educational Administration Review, 16(1), 16-19.
4.
Andrews, R. L. (1986). Principals must be held accountable. The Principal, 13(6), 10-12.
5.
Andrews, R. L. (1994). New directions for preparing school leaders. In T. Mulkeen, N. Cambron-McCabe, & B. Anderson (Eds.), Democratic leadership: The changing context of administrative preparation. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6.
Andrews, R. , Berube, B., & Basom, M. P. (1993). Not “Rambo,” not hero: The principal as designer, teacher and steward. Educational Considerations, 20(2), 26-28.
7.
Andrews, R., Kaiser, L., Crockett, K., & VanDover, T. (2002). Inquiry into schools community and society II. Retrieved from http://courses.missouri.edu
8.
Andrews, R. L. , Mohn, C., Hatley, R., & Goettel, H. (1991). Truman’s home town: Interagency cooperation in a school district’s paradigm shift. Symposium at the October 29, l994Annual University Council on Educational Administration Conference, Philadelphia.
9.
Andrews, R. , & Morefield, J. (1991). Effective leadership for effective urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 23, 270-278.
10.
Andrews, R. L. , Ostrander, K., & Muller, K. (1989). Planning a program for the training of principals: The agony and the ecstasy. Journal of CAPEA, 1(1), 66-74.
11.
Andrews, R. , & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement. Educational Leadership, 44, 9-11.
12.
Beck, L. J. , & Murphy, J. (1993). Understanding the principalship: Metaphorical themes, 1920s-1990s. New York: Teachers College Press.
13.
Björk, L. (1993). Effective schools—Effective superintendents: The emerging instructional leadership role. Journal of School Leadership, 3, 246-259.
14.
Blase, J. , & Blase, J. (1999). Principals’ instructional leadership and teacher development: Teachers’ perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 349-378.
15.
Bloom, R. (1998). Summary of research on effective school characteristics. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
16.
Boyer, E. (1995). The basic school: Acommunity of learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17.
Bratlein, M. , & Walters, D. (1999). The superintendency: Preparing for multi-dimensional roles in complex and changing environments. In F. Kochan, B. Jackson, & D. Duke (Eds.), A thousand voices from the firing line (pp. 87-102). Columbia, MO: University Council for Educational Administration.
18.
Bredeson, P. (2000). Foreword. In P. Short & J. Scribner (Eds.), Case studies of the superintendency (pp. v-vi). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
19.
Brookover, W. , & Lezotte, L. (1979). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing: Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University.
20.
Brunner, C. (2001, April). Supporting social justice: Power and authentic participatory decision making in the superintendency. Paper presented atthe annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
21.
Brunner, C. , Grogan, M., & Björk, L. (2002). Shifts in the discourse defining the superintendency: Historical and current foundations of the position. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21 century (pp. 211-238). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
22.
Carter, G. , & Cunningham, W. (1997). The American school superintendent. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
Cooper, B. , Fusarelli, L., & Carella, V. (2000). Career crisis in the superintendency?Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
24.
Creemers, B. , Peters, T., & Reynolds, D. (Eds.). (1989). School effectiveness and school improvement. Amsterdam: Wets and Zeitlinger.
25.
Crow, G. M. , & Glascock, C. (1995). Socialization to a new conception of the principalship. Journal of Educational Administration, 33(1), 22-43.
26.
Cunningham, W. , & Sperry, J. (2001, April). The underpaid educator. American School Board Journal, pp. 38-42.
27.
Daresh, J. C. , Gantner, M. W., Dunlap, K., & Hvizdak, M. (2000). Words from “the trenches”: Principals’ perspectives on effective school leadership characteristics. Journal of School Leadership, 10, 69-83.
28.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 66-73.
29.
Donaldson, J. , Wedman, J., & Andrews, R. (1996, April). Transforming schools and universities through deliberative curriculum inquiry. Paper presented atthe annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
30.
Duignan, P. , & Bhindi, N. (1997). Authenticity in leadership: An emerging perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 35, 195-209.
31.
Duke, D. L. (1987). School leadership and instructional improvement. New York: Random House.
32.
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 22, 22-23.
33.
Edmonds, R. (1982a, February). Effective schools research. Speech presented atthe annual conference of the Washington State Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development, Seattle, WA.
34.
Edmonds, R. (1982b). Programs for school improvement: An overview. Educational Leadership, 40(3), 4-11.
35.
Elmore, R. (1999). Leadership of large-scale improvement in American education. Cambridge, MA: Graduate School of Education, Harvard University.
36.
Ferrandino, V. (2001). Challenges for 21st-century elementary school principals. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 440-442.
37.
Gilles, C. , Cramer, M., & Hwang, S. (2001). Beginning teacher perception: A longitudinal look at teacher development. Action in Teacher Education, 13(3), 89-96.
38.
Glass, T. (1997). The superintendency, yesterday, today and tomorrow. In C. Chapman (Ed.), Becoming a superintendent: Challenges of school district leadership (pp. 19-39). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
39.
Glass, T. , Björk, L., & Brunner, C. C. (2000). The 2000 study of the American school superintendency. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
40.
Good, T. (1991). Using classroom and school research to professionalize learning. In B. Creemers, T. Peters, & D. Reynolds (Eds.), School effectiveness and school improvement (pp. 3-22). Amsterdam: Wets and Zeitlinger.
41.
Goodman, R. , & Zimmerman, W. (2000). Thinking differently: Recommendations for 21st century school board/superintendent leadership, governance and teamwork for high student achievement. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service and New England School Development Council. Retrieved from http://www.nesdec.org/Thinking_Differently.htm
42.
Gregory, R. (1992). Reflectivity in decision-making of principals prepared in a traditional course driven program when compared to those prepared in an integrated, cohort driven program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wyoming.
43.
Grogan, M. (2000). Laying the groundwork for a reconception of the superintendency from feminist postmodern perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36, 117-142.
44.
Hallinger, P. (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional to transformational leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(3), 35-48.
45.
Hallinger, P. , & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 157-191.
46.
Harris, I. (1993). New expectations for professional competence. In L. Curry, J. Wergin, & Associates (Eds)., Educating professionals: Responding to new expectations for competence and accountability (pp. 17-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47.
Haycock, K. (2001). Closing the achievement gap. Eduational Leadership, 58(6), 6-11.
48.
Heck, R. H. , Marcoulides, G., & Larsen, T. (1990). Principal instructional leadership and school achievement: Empirical validation of casual model. Paper presented to American Educational Research Association, Boston.
49.
Henkin, A. B. , Wanat, C. L., & Davis, J. H. (1996). Social skills of principals: A profile in context. Journal of School Leadership, 6, 399-423.
50.
Hodgkinson, H. , & Montenegro, X. (1999). The U.S. school superintendent: The invisible CEO. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
51.
Houston, P. (2001). Superintendents for the 21st century: It’s not just a job, it’s a calling. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 428-433.
52.
Johnson, S. M. (1996). Leading to change: The challenge of the new superintendency. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
53.
Jones, B. A. (2001). Supply and demand for school principals: Anationwide study. Columbia, MO: Consortium for the Study of Educational Policy.
54.
Kochan, F. (1999). A collage of voice and form: A summary of the findings. In F. Kochan, B. Jackson, & D. Duke (Eds.), Athousand voices from the firing line (pp. 104-110). Columbia, MO: University Council for Educational Administration.
55.
Kowalski, T. (1999). The school superintendent: Theory, practice and cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
56.
Larson, C. , & Ovando, C. (2001). The color of bureaucracy: The politics of equity in multicultural school communities. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
57.
Leithwood, K. (1996). Preparing school leaders: What works?Journal of School Leadership, 6, 316-342.
58.
Leithwood, K. (2001). School leadership and educational accountability: Towards a distributed perspective. In T. Kowalski (Ed.), 21st century challenges for school administrators (pp. 11-25). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
59.
Lipham, J. (1981). Effective principal, effective school. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
60.
Lucas, S. (2001). The effect of transformational principal and teacher leadership on school culture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri–Columbia.
61.
Marshall, C. , Patterson, J. A., Rogers, D. L., & Steele, J. R. (1996). Caring as career: An alternative perspective for educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32, 271-294.
62.
Marzano, R. J. (1992). Adifferent kind of classroom: Teaching with dimensions of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
63.
Mathews, J. (2001, June). Nontraditional thinking in the central office. In The School Administrator Web Edition. Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/publications/sa/2001_06/feature_ mathews1.htm
64.
Milstein, M. M. (1993). Changing the way we prepare educational leaders: The Danforth experience. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
65.
Morris, J. R. (1979). Job(s) of the superintendent. Educational Research Quarterly, 4(4), 11-24.
66.
Murphy, J. (1995). Rethinking the foundations of leadership preparation: Insights from school improvement efforts. DESIGN for Leadership: The Bulletin of the National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 6(1).
67.
Murphy, J. (1999). The quest for a center: Notes on the state of the profession of educational leadership. Columbia, MO: University Council for Educational Administration.
68.
National Commission of Excellence in Education . (1983). Anation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
69.
National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration . (1985). Report of the National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration (D. Griffiths, Ed.). Tempe, AZ: University Council on Educational Administration.
70.
National Staff Development Council . (2000). Learning to lead: Leading to learn. Oxford, OH: Author.
71.
Neuman, M. , & Simmons, W. (2000). Leadership for student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 82,9-12.
72.
Playko, M. , & Daresh, J. (1989, October). Entry year programs and principal development. Paper presented atthe annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration, St. Louis, MO.
73.
Presidential Task Force on Psychology in Education and the American Psychological Association . (1993). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Denver, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory.
74.
Purkey, S. C. , & Smith, M. S. (1982, February). Effective schools—Areview. Paper presented atthe NIE National Invitational Conference, Airlee House, Warrenton, VA.
75.
Restine, N. (1997). Experience, meaning, and principal development. Journal of Educational Administration, 35, 253-267.
76.
Robinson, G. (1985). Effective schools research: Aguide to school improvement. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
77.
Schiff, T. (2002). Principals’readiness for reform: A comprehensive approach. Principal Leadership, 2(5), 21-27.
78.
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The key to continuous school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
79.
Schon, D. (1991). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
80.
Sebring, P. B. , & Bryk, A. S. (2000). School leadership and the bottom line in Chicago. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 440-443.
81.
Senge, P. , Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn: Afifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York: Doubleday.
82.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1998). Leadership as pedagogy, capital development and school effectiveness. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(1), 37-46.
83.
Short, E. C. (1994). When school leaders function as true educators: A review of key sources in the context of school renewal and restructuring. Journal of School Leadership, 4, 502-516.
84.
Skrla, L. , Scheurich, J. J., & Johnson, J. F. (2000, September). Equity-driven achievement focused school districts. Report on systemic school success in four Texas school districts serving diverse student populations. Report prepared for the Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas at Austin.
85.
Smith, M. , & O’Day, J. (1991). Education politics for the new century. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), 1990 yearbook of the politics of education association (pp. 233-267). Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis.
86.
Smith, W. F. , & Andrews, R. L. (1989). Instructional leadership: How principals make a difference. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
87.
Starratt, R. (1994). Building an ethical school. Bristol, PA: Falmer.
88.
Sternberg, R. (2001). The ultimate stress. The School Administrator, 58(8), 6-13.
89.
Tirozzi, G. (2001). The artistry of leadership: The evolving role of the secondary school principal. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 434-439.
90.
Valentine, J. (2001). Goals 2000 principal leadership development project: Final report. Final report of Goals 2000 grant, Columbia, MO.
91.
Valentine, J. W. , & Bowman, M. L. (1991). Effective principal, effective school: Does research support the assumption?NASSP Bulletin, 75, 539-539.
92.
Young, M. (1999, April). The leadership crisis in Iowa. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
