Issues in Urban School District Leadership

Abstract

This article examines the academic frameworks and theoretical concepts presented to students pursuing graduate degrees in educational administration and planning to begin or continue careers in urban school districts. It addresses the absence of a focus or emphasis on the urban context in most graduate schools of education. Additionally, graduate programs in educational administration tend to separate school district leadership into the principalship and the superintendency. The purpose of this article is to present a 1-semester course on urban school district leadership that links the three levels of educational leadership-the principal, central office administration, and the school system superintendent-into a leadership triad. This leadership triad interacts through a series of relationships-political and professional-that facilitate or hinder the creation and/or support of the climate and culture within a school, necessary for teaching and learning to take place.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Astuto, T. A. , Clark, D. L. , Read, A. , McGree, K. , & Fernandez, L.D.P. (1994). Roots of reform: Challenging the assumptions that control change in education. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan.

Blase, J. (Ed.). (1991). The politics of life in schools: Power, conflict, and cooperation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Carruthers, J. H. (1994). Black intellectuals and the crisis in black education. In M. J. Shujaa (Ed.), Too much schooling, too little education: A paradox of black life in White societies (pp. 37-56). Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Council of the Great Cities Schools. (1994). National Urban Educational Goals: 1992-93 Indicator Reports.

Daresh, J. C. (1985). Platform building: A tool for managerial effectiveness. School Business Affairs, 51(4), 52-55, 68.

Englert, R. M. (1993). Understanding the urban context and conditions of practice of school administration. In P. B. Forsyth & M. Tallerico (Eds.), City schools: Leading the way (pp. 1-63). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.

Libler, R. W. (1992). Effective schools: The role of the central office. Contemporary Education, 63, 121-124.

Lunenburg, F C. (1992). The urban superintendent's role in school reform. Education and Urban Society, 25(1), 30-44.

10.

Lytle, J. H. (1992). Prospects for reforming urban schools. Journal of Urban Education, 27(2), 109-131.

11.

Mark, J. H. , & Anderson, B. D. (1984). Schools and the transformation of a metropolis. The Urban Review, 16(1), 3-23.

12.

McGivney, J. H. , & Haught, J. M. (1972). The politics of education: A view from the perspective of the central office staff. Educational Administration Quarterly, 8, 18-38.

13.

National Center for Education Statistics . (1995). Which types of schools have the highest teacher turnover? (Document #IB-5-95). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

14.

National Center for Education Statistics . (1996). Where do minority principals work? (Document #IB-2-96). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

15.

Scott, H. J. (1980). The black superintendent: Messiah or scapegoat? Washington, DC: Howard University Press.

16.

Shujaa, M. J. (Ed.). (1994). Too much schooling, too little education: A paradox of black life in White societies. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

17.

Weick, K. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 673-676.

18.

Yeakey, C. C. (1993). The social consequences of public policy. Journal of Negro Education, 62(2), 125-143.