America's school principals find that unlike my pear tree their efforts bear little fruit in a difficult environment filled with stress and weak support. With this sense of futility comes the uncertainty principals face in the shift to site-based decision making and the inconsistencies found in their university preparation. While some “hero” principals are overcoming the stress and uncertainty of new leadership demands, others are looking for greater support. Promising strides have been made in the identification of the knowledge base and related competences and skills and in the development of professional studies degree programs which can prepare principals who are able to inspire teachers and students to greater achievements and who will build a strong support base.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BissingerH. G.1990. Friday Night Lights.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
2.
BradleyA.1990. “Poll Finds Drop in Teacher Satisfaction with Degree of Control,”Education Week, 10(1): 9.
3.
BratlienM. J., HoyleJ. R., and OatesA. D.1990. The Professional Studies Doctorate: Leaders for Learning. Paper presented at the meeting of the University Council of Educational Administration, Pittsburgh, PA.
4.
ErlandsonD. A.1989. The Management Profile: A Handbook for the Development of Management Skills.College Station, TX: Texas A&M University's Principals’ Center.
5.
ErlandsonD. A., LacyV. J., and WilmoreB. E.1990. “The Management Profile,” in The Principalship in the 1990s and Beyond: Current Research on Performance-Based Preparation and Professional Development.ErlandsonD. A., and Witters-ChurchillL. J., eds. UCEA Monograph Series. Tempe, AZ: University Council for Educational Administration.
6.
ErlandsonD. A., and Witters-ChurchillL. J., eds. 1990. The Principalship in the 1990s and Beyond: Current Research on Performance-Based Preparation and Professional Development.UCEA Monograph Series. Tempe, AZ: University Council for Educational Administration.
7.
GlickmanC. D., and PajakE. F.1983. “A Cause beyond Oneself,”Synthesis. Policy paper, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin, Texas, 6(4).
8.
GreenfieldW. D.1990. “Five Standards for Good Practice for the Ethical Administrator.”NASSP Bulletin.74(528): 47–50.
9.
GuthrieH., and MatthewsG. S.Restructuring: A Model for Increasing School Effectiveness through More Campus-Level Decision-Making. A paper presented to a graduate class at Texas A&M University, November, 1990.
10.
HarpL.1990. “Kentucky Districts Seen Jumping on Reform Bandwagon,”Education Week, 9(40), 36.
11.
HerzbergF.1966. Work and the Nature of Man.Cleveland: World Publishing Co., Inc.
12.
HoyleJ. R.1982. Guidelines for the Preparation of School Administrators (2nd ed.). Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
13.
HoyleJ. R.1990. “The Future of Educational Administration: Knowledge and Faith,”Record in Educational Administration and Supervision, 11(3).
14.
HoyleJ. R., EnglishF., and SteffyB. 1985, 1990. Skills for Successful School Leaders.Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
15.
JohnsonS. M.1986. “Incentives for Teachers: What Motivates, What Matters,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(3).
16.
KellyE. A.1986. “Implications for Universities: Defining the Mission of the University Involvement.”NASSP Bulletin, 70(486): 47–50.
17.
National Association of Secondary School Principals.1985. Performance-Based Preparation of Principals. A Framework for Improvement.A special report of the NASSP Consortium for the Performance-Based Preparation of Principals. Reston, VA: NASSP.
18.
National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration.1987. Leaders for America's Schools.The report of the National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University and the University Council for Educational Administration.
19.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration.1989. Improving the Preparation of School Administrators.Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
20.
OwensR. G.1987. Organizational Behavior in Education.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21.
PierceN. R.1990. “Big-City School Boards Obsolete?”Houston Chronicle, 2E.
22.
PetersonK. D.1987. “Research, Practice, and Conceptual Models: Underpinnings of a Principals’ Institute,” in Approaches to Administrative Training in Education.MurphyJ., and HallingerP., eds. New York: SUNY Press, pp. 213–229.
23.
ThomsonS. D.1990a. Principals for Our Changing Schools: Preparation and Certification.Report of the National Commission for the Principalship. Fairfax, VA: National Commission for the Principalship.
24.
ThomsonS. D.1990b. New Framework for Preparing Principals Developed by the National Commission for the Principalship.News release. Fairfax, VA: National Commission for the Principalship.
