This article provides a case of how changes in standards for principal certification—as required by the State Board of Educator Certification since its establishment in 1995—were meant to promote changes in principal preparation programs in the state of Texas. The examination considers whether the changes were significant in terms of intended impact to improve the preparation programs for principals entering the workforce, including the admission of candidates, the accommodations of the programs, and the assessment of candidates toward the principalship.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarnettB. G., BasomM., YerkesD., & NorrisC. (2000). Cohorts in educational leadership programs: Benefits, difficulties, and the potential for developing leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 255–282.
2.
BravenecD. L. F. (1998). A critical needs survey of Texas elementary and secondary school principals regarding administrator preparation and administration of special education programs.Kingsville: Texas A&M University.
HallingerP., & HeckR. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness: 1980–1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157–191.
5.
HartA. W., & PounderD. G. (1999). Reinventing preparation programs: A decade of activity. In MurphyJ., & ForsythP. B. (Eds.), Educational administration: A decade of reform (pp. 115–151). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
6.
HessF. M., & KellyA. P. (2007). Learning to lead: What gets taught in principal-preparation programs. Teacher College Record, 109(1), 244–274.
7.
JacksonB. L., & KelleyC. (2002). Exceptional and innovative programs in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(192), 192–212.
8.
KelleyC., & PetersonK. (2007). The work of principals and their preparation: Addressing critical needs for the 21st century. In theJossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 351–401). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
McCarthyM. M. (1999). The evolution of educational leadership preparation programs. In MurphyJ., & Seashore-LewisK. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 119–139). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
MercadoL. P. (2002). The secondary principalship academy: A critical ethnography of the Houston Independent School District and the University of Houston's innovative principal preparation program.Houston, TX: University of Houston.
11.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (Rev. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
MurphyJ., & LouisK. (1994). The evolving role of the principal. In MurphyJ., & LouisK. (Eds.), Reshaping the principalship: Insights from transformational reform efforts (pp. 265–279). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
14.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Retrieved September, 20, 2009, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/title.html
15.
OrrM. T. (2006). Research on leadership education as a reform strategy. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 1(1), 1–5. Retrieved February 18, 2008, from http://www.ucea.org/jrle_2006_1_1/
16.
OrrM. T., & OrphanosS. (2007, April). Learning leadership matters: Teachers’ experiences of innovatively and conventionally prepared principals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
17.
PapaF., & BaxterI. (2008). Hiring teachers in New York's public schools: Can the principal make a difference?Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(1), 87–117.
PetersenG. J., & YoungM. D. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act and its influence on current and future district leaders. Journal of Law and Education, 33(3), 343–363.
20.
RostJ. (1991). Leadership for the 21st century.New York: Praeger.
21.
ScribnerJ. P., & DonaldsonJ. F. (2001). The dynamics of group learning in a cohort: From nonlearning to transformative learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(5), 605–636.
VanderhaarJ. E., MunozM. A., & RodoskyR. J. (2006). Leadership as accountability for learning: The effects of school poverty, teacher experience, previous achievement, and principal preparation programs on Student Achievement. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 19(1-2), 17–33.
29.
WalkerA., & QianH. (2006). Beginning principals: Balancing at the top of the greasy pole. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(4), 297–309.
30.
Witters-ChurchillL. J. (1988). University preparation of the school administrator: Evaluations by Texas principals (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University). Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 8815938)
31.
YinR. K. (2008). Case study research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
YoungM. D., FullerE., BrewerC., CarpenterB., & MansfieldK. C. (2007). Quality leadership matters. Policy Brief Series, 1(1), 1–8.
33.
YoungM. D., PetersenG. J., & ShortP. M. (2002). The complexity of substantive reform: A call for interdependence among key stakeholders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 137–175.
