This article examines the role of the principal in school restructuring using essential school precepts. Based on qualitative data from a longitudinal study covering two and one-half years, the results indicate that the principal must assume a more inclusive and prominent role in schools attempting such restructuring efforts. It is argued that the basic essential schools’ philosophy expressed in the Nine Common Principles must be extended to include the other significant player in school change efforts, the principal. Thus, the metaphor of “student as worker, teacher as coach,” must now be extended to include “principal as enabler.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BacharachS. B., and ConleyS. C.1986. “Education Reform: A Managerial Agenda,”Phi Delta Kappan, 67(9): 641–645.
2.
BermanP., and McLaughlinM. W.1975. Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change: Vol. 4. The Findings in Review.Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
3.
BogdanR. C., and BiklenS. K.1982. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Method.Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
4.
BradyL.1984. “Principal Behavior and Curriculum Decision Making: The Relationship between Organizational Climate and Methods of Curriculum Decision Making,”Journal of Educational Administration, 22(1): 15–23.
5.
ConwayJ. A.1984. “The Myth, Mystery, and Mastery of Participative Decision Making in Education,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(3): 11–40.
6.
DukeD. L.1990. “Setting Goals for Professional Development,”Educational Leadership.47(8): 71–76.
7.
DwyerD., LeeG., RowanB., and BossertS.1983. Five Principals in Action: Perspectives on Instructional Management.San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
8.
FirestoneW. A.1989. “Using Reform: Conceptualizing District Initiative,”Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2): 151–164.
9.
FirestoneW. A., and WilsonB. L.1985. “Using Bureaucratic and Cultural Linkages to Improve Instruction: The Principal's Contribution,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 21(2): 7–30.
10.
FullanM.1985. “Change Processes and Strategies at the Local Level,”Elementary School Journal, 85(3): 391–421.
GoldmanC., and SheaC.1990. “A Culture for Change,”Educational Leadership, 47(8): 41–43.
13.
HallG. E., RutherfordR., HordS., and Huling-AustinL.1984. “Effects of Three Principal Styles on School Improvement,”Educational Leadership, 4(5): 22–29.
14.
HoustonH. M.1988. “Restructuring Secondary Schools,” in Building a Professional Culture in Schools, LiebermanA., ed., New York, NY: Teachers College Press, pp. 109–128.
15.
HunnicuttD.1987. “Improving Education through Quality Circles,”Contemporary Education, 58(3): 138–140.
16.
Illinois Alliance of Essential Schools.1989. “Re: Learning and the Alliance,” available from Illinois Alliance of Essential Schools, 372 Education, Champaign, IL 61820.
17.
Illinois Alliance of Essential Schools.1989. “Memo to Alliance Schools,” available from the Illinois Alliance of Essential Schools, 372 Education, Champaign, IL 61820.
18.
Kammeraad-CampbellS.1989. The Story of Dennis Littky and His Fight for a Better School.Chicago: Contemporary Books.
19.
LeCompteM. D., and GoetzJ. P.1982. “Problems of Reliability and Validity in Ethnographic Research,”Review of Educational Research, 52(1): 31–60.
20.
LeithwoodK. A.1990. “The Principal's Role in Teacher Development,” in Changing School Culture through Staff Development, JoyceB., ed., Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
21.
LeithwoodK., and JantziD.1990. “Transformational Leadership: How Principals Can Help Reform School Cultures,” paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
22.
LeithwoodK., and MontgomeryD.1982. “The Role of the Elementary School Principal in Program Improvement,”Review of Educational Research, 52: 309–339.
23.
LittleJ. W.1984. “Seductive Images and Organizational Realities in Professional Development,”Teachers College Record, 86(1): 84–102.
24.
LittleJ. W.1990. “The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers’ Professional Relations,”Teachers College Record, 91(4): 509–536.
25.
MartinW. J., and WillowerD. J.1981. “The Managerial Behavior of High School Principals,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 17(1): 69–90.
26.
MilesM. B., and HubermanA. M.1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
27.
MurphyM. J., and HartA. W.1988. “Preparing Principals to Lead in Restructured Schools,” paper presented at the Fall Conference of the University Council for Educational Administration, Cincinnati, OH.
28.
ObermanG. L.1990. “The Changing Role of the Principal in Implementing School-Based Management,” paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
29.
OwensR. G.1982. “Methodological Rigor in Naturalistic Inquiry: Some Issues and Answers,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 18: 1–21.
30.
PfefferJ.1981. “Management as Symbolic Action: The Creation and Maintenance of Organizational Paradigms,” in Research in Organizational Behavior; Vol. 3, CummingsL. L., and StawB. M., eds., Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
31.
RistR. C.1982. “On the Application of Ethnographic Inquiry to Education: Procedures and Possibilities,”Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19: 439–450.
32.
RosenholtzS.1985. “Political Myths about Education Reform: Lessons from Research on Teaching,”Phi Delta Kappan, 66: 349–355.
33.
RosenholtzS.1989. Teachers’ Workplace.New York, NY: Longman.
34.
RossmanG. B., CorbettH. D., and FirestoneW. A. (1988). Change and Effectiveness in Schools: A Cultural Perspective.Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
35.
SarabunC. A.1987. “A Principal's Role in Supporting Teachers as Staff Developers,”Journal of Staff Development, 8(1): 49–51.
36.
ScheinE. H.1985. Organizational Culture and Leadership.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37.
SimpsonG. W.1990. “Keeping It Alive: Elements of School Culture That Sustain Innovation,”Educational Leadership, 47(8): 34–37.
38.
SizerT.1989. “Colleagues and Conversation. The Conversation from Schoolhouse to Statehouse,” available from the Education Commission of the States Re: Learning, 1869 Lincoln Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80295.
39.
SizerT.1984. Horace's Compromise: The Dilemma of the American High School.Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
40.
SmithW. F., and AndrewsR. L. (1989). Instructional Leadership: How Principals Make a Difference.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
41.
TimarT.1989. “The Politics of School Restructuring,”Phi Delta Kappan, 71(14): 264–275.
42.
WelshP.1987. “Are Administrators Ready to Share Decision Making with Teachers?” inAmerican Educator: The Professional Journal of the American Federation of Teachers, 11(1): 23–25 and 47–48.
43.
WhitfordB. L., and HovdaR. A.1986. “Schools as Knowledge Work Organizations: Perspectives and Implications from the New Management Literature,”Urban Review, 18(1): 52–70.
WillowerD. J., and KmetzJ. T.1982. “The Managerial Behavior of Elementary School Principals,” paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
46.
YinR. K.1984. Case Study Research: Design and Methods.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
47.
ZielinskiA. E., and HoyW. K.1983. “Isolation and Alienation in Elementary Schools,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 19(2): 27–45.
