An idealized view of the principal's role ignores both the importance that context plays and the unique and dynamic quality of individual principals. Yet, there are three things that good principals do: understand the context, understand themselves, and focus on what is best for students. This article identifies the major community, school, and reform contexts in which principals work and discusses components of self-understanding that are important to enacting the role in a reform setting.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bossert, S., D. Dwyer, B. Rowan, and G. Lee. 1982. The instructional management role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly18 (3): 34–64.
2.
Chapman, J.1990. School-based decision-making and management: Implications for school personnel. In School-based decision-making and management, edited by C. Chapman. London: Falmer.
3.
Christensen, G. 1992. The changing role of the administrator in an accelerated school. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 20–24 April, San Francisco.
4.
Conley, D. T.1991. Lessons from laboratories in school restructuring and site-based decision making. Oregon School Study Bulletin34 (7): 1–61.
5.
Conley, D. T., and P. Goldman. 1994. Ten propositions of facilitative leadership. In Reshaping the principalship: Insights from transformational reform efforts, edited by J. Murphy and K. S. Louis. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
6.
Crow, G. M.1987. Career mobility of elementary school principals and conflict with the central office. The Urban Review19 (3): 139–150.
7.
Crow, G. M.1992. The principal in schools of choice: Middle manager, entrepreneur, and symbol manager. The Urban Review24 (3): 165–174.
8.
Crow, G. M., and M. Pounders. 1995. Organizational socialization of new urban principals: Variations of race and gender. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 18–22 April, San Francisco.
9.
Crowson, R. I., and W. L. Boyd. 1993. Coordinated services for children: Designing arks for storms and seas unknown. American Journal of Education101 (2): 140–179.
10.
Crowson, R., and V. C. Morris. 1985. Administrative control in large city school systems: An investigation in Chicago. Educational Administration Quarterly21 (4): 51–70.
11.
Duke, D. L.1994. Drift, detachment, and the need for teacher leadership. In Teachers as leaders, edited by D. R. Walling. Bloomington, Ind.: Phi Delta Kappan Educational Foundation.
12.
Duke, D. L.1998. The normative context of organizational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly34 (2): 165–195.
13.
Elmore, R. F.1979–1980. Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly94 (4): 601–616.
14.
Glickman, C. D., S. P. Gordon, and J. M. Ross-Gordon. 1998. Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach. 4th ed.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
15.
Goldring, E. B.1990. Elementary school principals as boundary spanners: Their engagement with parents. Journal of Educational Administration28 (1): 53–62.
16.
Goleman, D.1998. What makes a leader?Harvard Business Review76 (6): 93–102.
17.
Hallinger, P., L. Bickman, and K. Davis. 1996. School context, principal leadership, and student reading achievement. Elementary School Journal96 (5): 527–549.
18.
Hallinger, P., and C. Hausman. 1993. The changing role of the principal in a school of choice. In Restructuring schooling: Learning from ongoing efforts, edited by J. Murphy and P. Hallinger. Newbury Park, Calif: Corwin Press.
19.
Hallinger, P., and C. Hausman. 1994. From Atilla the Hun to Mary Had a Little Lamb: Principal role ambiguity in restructured schools. In Reshaping the principalship: Insights from transformational reform efforts, edited by J. Murphy and K. S. Louis. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
20.
Hallinger, P., and R. H. Heck. 1996. Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly32 (1): 5–44.
21.
Hallinger, P., and J. Murphy. 1985. Instructional leadership and school socioeconomic status: A preliminary investigation. Administrators Notebook31 (5): 1–4.
22.
Hallinger, P., J. Murphy, and C. Hausman. 1993. Conceptualizing school restructuring: Principals’ and teachers’ perceptions. In School-based management and school effectiveness, edited by C. Dimmock. London: Routledge.
23.
Kerchner, C.1988. Bureaucratic entrepreneurship: The implications of choice for school administration. Educational Administration Quarterly24 (4): 381–392.
24.
Little, J. W.1982. Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal19 (3): 325–340.
25.
Murphy, J.1991. Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomenon. New York: Teachers College Press.
26.
Peterson, K. D.1984. Mechanisms of administrative control of managers in educational organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly29 (4): 573–597.
27.
Peterson, K. D.1989. Secondary principals and instructional leadership: Complexities in a diverse role. Madison, Wisc.: Center for Educational Research.
28.
Peterson, K., J. Murphy, and P. Hallinger. 1987. Superintendents’ perceptions of the control and coordination of the technical core in effective school districts. Educational Administration Quarterly23 (1): 79–95.
29.
Prestine, N. 1991. Completing the essential schools metaphor: Principal as enabler. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association3–7 April, Chicago.
30.
Smylie, M. A.1992. Teacher participation in school decision-making: Assessing willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis14 (1): 53–67.
31.
Smylie, M. A., R. L. Crowson, V. Chou, and R. A. Levin. 1994. The principal and community-school connections in Chicago's radical reform. Educational Administration Quarterly30 (3): 342–364.
32.
Sternberg, R. J.1998. What school administrators need to know about human intelligence. UCEA ReviewXXXIX (3): 4–5.
