This comparative case (Merriam, 2009) study explored two charter school principals’ engagement in instructional leadership. Analysis of three data sources—interviews, observations, and documents—revealed that principals were almost exclusively focused on state accountability and possessed limited knowledge of pedagogical practices. In particular, these two principals had difficulties managing aspects of the instructional program and sustaining a positive school climate, possibly related to their limited educational experience. As a result, these two principals focused on structural changes, delegated instructional issues, and appeared to rely heavily on commercial programs as opposed to enhancement of teacher classroom practices. Comparisons of charter principal practices with traditional principal instructional leadership models are made and implications discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BattleD. (2009). Characteristics of public, private, and Bureau of Indian Education elementary and secondary school principals in the United States: Results from the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES Report No. 2009-323). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
2.
BlakemoreC. (1998). A public school of your own.Golden, CO: Adams-Pomeror Press.
3.
BuddeR. (1996). The evolution of the charter concept. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(1), 72–73.
4.
BurkhauserS., GatesS. M., HamiltonL. S., & IkemotoG. S. (2012). First-year principals in urban districts: How actions and working conditions relate to outcomes.New York: RAND.
CampbellC., & GrossB. (2008). Working without a safety net: How charter school leaders can best survive on the high wire.Seattle, WA: National Charter School Research Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
7.
Center for Research on Educational Outcomes. (2009). Multiple choice: Charter school performance in 16 states.Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
8.
Center on Reinventing Public Education. (2007). Inside charter schools: A systematic look at our nation's charter schools. Project update. Retrieved from http://www.crpe.org
9.
CollinsK. M. T., OnwuegbuzieA. J., & JiaoQ. G. (2007). A mixed methods investigation of mixed methods sampling designs in social and health science research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 267–294.
10.
CooleyV. E., & ShenJ. (2003). School accountability and professional job responsibilities: A perspective from secondary principals. NASSP Bulletin, 87(634), 10–25.
CreswellJ. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
CreswellJ. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Darling-HammondL., LaPointeM., MeyersonD., OrrM. T., & CohenC. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership programs.Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.
15.
DealT. E., & PetersonK. D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (2011). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 92–95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
DresslerB. (2001). Charter school leadership. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 15.
FarkasS., JohnsonJ., & DuffettA. (2003). Rolling up their sleeves: Superintendents and principals talk about what's needed to fix public schools.New York: Public Agenda Foundation.
21.
FinnC., MannoB., & VanourekG. (2000). Charter school in action.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
FrumkinP., MannoB. V., & EdgingtonN. (2011). The strategic management of charter schools.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
23.
GarciaD. R. (2010). Charter schools challenging traditional notions of segregation. In LubienskiC. A., & WeitzelP. C. (Eds.), The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence, and implications (pp. 33–50). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
24.
GleasonP., ClarkM., TuttleC. C., DwoyerE., & SilverbergM. (2010). The evaluation of charter school impact: Final report.Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
25.
GrossB. (2011). Inside charter schools: Unlocking doors to student success.Seattle, WA: National Charter School Research Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
26.
HallingerP. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329–351.
27.
HallingerP. (2011). A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale: A lens on methodological progress in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 271–306.
28.
HallingerP., & HeckR. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–44.
29.
HallingerP., & HeckR. H. (2002). What do we call people with vision? The role of vision, mission and goals in school leadership and improvement. In LeithwoodK. A. (Ed.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 9–40). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
30.
HallingerP., & MurphyJ. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–247.
31.
HallingerP., & SnidvongsK. (2008). Educating leaders: Is there anything to learn from business management?Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(1), 9–31.
32.
HerseyP., BlanchardK. H., & NatemeyerW. E. (1979). Situational leadership, perception, and the impact of power. Group and Organizational Management, 4(4), 418–428.
33.
HoyW. K., & HannumJ. W. (1997). Middle school climate: An empirical assessment of organizational health and student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(3), 290–311.
34.
LeithwoodK. A., LouisK. S., AndersonS., & WahlstromK. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: Review of research.Toronto, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
35.
LeithwoodK. A., PattenS., & JantziD. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 671–706.
36.
LouisK. S., LeithwoodK., WahlstromK. L., AndersonS. E., MichlinM., GordonM. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning: Final report of research findings.Toronto, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
LubienskiC. A., & WeitzelP. C. (2010). Two decades of charter schools: Shifting expectations, partners, and policies. In LubienskiC. A., & WeitzelP. C. (Eds.), The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence, and implications (pp. 1–14). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
41.
MarksH. M., & PrintyS. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370–397.
42.
MerriamS. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
43.
MersethK. K. (2009). Inside urban charter schools.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
44.
MironG., EvergreenS., & UrschelJ. (2008). The impact of school choice reforms on student achievement.Tempe, AZ: Education and the Public Interest Center.
45.
MironG., & NelsonC. D. (2002). What's public about charter schools? Lessons learned about choice and accountability.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
46.
MironG., & UrschelJ. (2009). Profiles of non-profit educational management organizations: 2008-2009.Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Center, Arizona State University.
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2010). Leading learning communities: Standards for what principals should know and be able to do—Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/resources/1/Pdfs/LLC2-ES.pdf
50.
NehringJ. (2002). Upstart startup: Creating and sustaining a public charter school.New York: Teachers College Press.
51.
NiY. (2009). The impact of charter schools on the efficiency of traditional public schools: Evidence from Michigan. Economics of Education Review, 28(5), 571–584.
52.
PriceM. (2009). Still negotiating what do unions mean for charter schools. In LakeR. J. (Ed.), Hopes, fears, and reality: A balanced look at charter schools in 2009.Seattle, WA: National Charter School Research Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
53.
PrintyS. M., MarksH. M., & BowersA. J. (2009). Integrated leadership: How principals and teachers share transformational and instructional Influence. Journal of School Leadership, 19(5), 504–532.
RobinsonV. M. J., LloyedC. A., & RoweK. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674.
56.
ScheinE. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
57.
SchorrJ. (2002). Hard lessons: The promise of an inner city charter school.New York: Ballantine Books.
StakeR. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis.New York: Guilford Press.
60.
StakeR. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work.New York: Guilford Press.
61.
SweetlandS. R., & HoyW. R. (2000). School characteristics and educational outcomes: Toward an organizational model of student achievement in middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 703–729.
62.
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Department of Education Race to the Top Fund—Executive summary: Notice of proposed priorities requirements definitions and selection criteria. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf
63.
VillaniS. (2006). Mentoring and induction programs that support new principals.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
64.
WeiX., YoungV., & PatelD. (2012, April). Are charter school teachers different from traditional public school teachers? Evidence from Texas. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC.
65.
WeitzelP. C., & LubienskiC. A. (2010). Grading charter schools: Access, innovation, and competition. In LubienskiC. A., & WeitzelP. C. (Eds.), The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence, and implications (pp. 15–32). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
66.
YanceyP. (2000). Parents founding charter schools: dilemmas of empowerment and decentralization (Vol. 135). New York: Lang.
67.
ZepedaS. J. (2007). The principal as instructional leader: A handbook for supervisors.Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
68.
ZiebarthT. M. (2010). Bringing to life the school choice and restructuring requirements of NCLB (Closing low-performing schools and reopening them as charter schools: The role of the state). Retrieved from the U.S. Charter Schools website: http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/54/25/5425.pdf
69.
ZimmerR., GillB., BookerK., LavertuS., SassT. R., & WitteJ. (2009). Charter schools in eight states: Effects on achievement, attainment, integration, and competition.Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
