We present a framework for considering principals’ knowledge and actions to support high-quality instruction in a specific content area (mathematics). Using design research, we engaged principals in professional development and assessed principals’ ability to identify aspects of high-quality mathematical tasks and instruction through pre–post task sort analyses and classroom video analyses. Significant differences occurred in principals’ identification of high-quality mathematics tasks and instruction, students’ thinking, and teachers’ actions. Subsequent data identified changes in principals’ feedback to mathematics teachers; however, this change was not sustained in following years. We hypothesize necessary conditions for supporting principals as instructional leaders in specific content areas.
ArbaughF.BrownC. (2005). Analyzing mathematical tasks: A catalyst for change. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8, 499-536.
2.
BallD. L.CohenD. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Towards a practice-based theory of professional education. In Darling-HammondL.SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BallD. L.ThamesM. H.PhelpsG. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching what makes it special?Journal of teacher education, 59, 389-407.
4.
BerebitskyD.GoddardR. D.NeumerskiC.SalloumS. J. (2012). The influence of academic press on students’ mathematics and reading achievement. In DiPaolaM. F.ForsythP. B. (Eds.), Contemporary challenges confronting school leaders (pp. 51-72).Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
5.
BoalerJ.StaplesM. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside school. Teachers College Record, 110, 608-645.
6.
BorasiR.FonziJ. (2002). Engaging in scaffolded instructional innovation. In BorasiR. (Ed.), Foundations: Professional development that supports school reform (pp. 83-98). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
7.
BostonM. D. (2012). Assessing the quality of mathematics instruction. Elementary School Journal, 113, 76-104.
8.
BostonM. D. (2013). Connecting changes in secondary mathematics teachers’ knowledge to their experiences in a professional development workshop. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16, 7-31.
9.
BostonM. D.SteeleM. (2014). Analyzing students’ work to reflect on instruction: The instructional quality assessment as a tool for instructional leaders. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 15, 21-33.
10.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
BurchP.SpillaneJ. P. (2003). Elementary school leadership strategies and subject matter: Reforming mathematics and literacy instruction. Elementary School Journal, 103, 519-535.
CobbP.JacksonK. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action for improving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13, 6-33.
14.
CobbP.SmithT. (2008). The challenge of scale: Designing schools and districts as learning organizations for instructional improvement in mathematics. In WoodT.JaworskiB.KrainerK.SullivanP.TiroshD. (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics teacher education (Vol. 3, pp. 231-254). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
15.
CobbP.ZhaoQ.DeanC. (2009). Conducting design experiments to support teachers’ learning: A reflection from the field. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 165-199.
16.
CoburnC. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32, 3-12.
17.
CohenD. K.PeurachD. J.GlazerJ. L.GatesK. E.GoldinS. (2013). Improvement by design: The promise of better schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18.
ElmoreR. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
19.
FinkE.ResnickL. B. (2001). Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 578-606.
20.
FrankeM. L.KazemiE.BatteyD. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practice. In LesterF. K. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 225-256). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
21.
FrankeM. L.KazemiE.ShihJ.BiagettiS.BatteyD. (2005). Changing teachers’ professional work in mathematics: One school’s journey. In RombergT. ACarpenterT. P. (Eds.),Understanding mathematics and science matters (pp. 209-230).
22.
GallucciC. (2008). Using sociocultural theory to link professional learning to organizational support in the context of school district instructional reform. American Journal of Education, 114, 541-581.
23.
GazielH. H. (2007). Re-examining the relationship between principal’s instructional/educational leadership and student achievement. Journal of Social Sciences, 15, 17-24.
24.
GoddardR. D.SweetlandS. R.HoyW. K. (2000). Academic emphasis of urban elementary schools and student achievement in reading and mathematics: A multilevel analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36, 683-702.
25.
GrissomJ. A.KalogridesD.LoebS. (2014). Using student test scores to measure principal performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 3-28.
26.
HallingerP. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 221-239.
27.
HallingerP.HeckR. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 157-191.
28.
HenningsenM.SteinM. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524-549.
29.
HillH. C. (2007). Learning in the teacher workforce. Future of Children, 17, 111-127.
30.
IngvarsonL.MeiersM.BeavisA. (2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Australian Council of Educational Research. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/professional_dev/1
31.
KaufmanJ. H.SteinM. K. (2010). Teacher learning opportunities in a shifting policy environment for instruction. Educational Policy, 24, 563-601.
32.
KazemiE.FrankeM. L. (2004). Teacher learning in mathematics: Using student work to promote collective inquiry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7, 203-235.
33.
LappanG.FeyJ. T.FitzgeraldW. M.FrielS. N.PhillipsE. D. (2006). Connected Mathematics Project 2. Menlo Park, CA: Dale Seymour.
34.
LeithwoodK. (1992). The move towards transformational leadership. Educational Leadership, 49, 8-12.
35.
LeithwoodK.Seashore LouisK.AndersonS.WahlstromK. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. University of Minnesota, Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. Retrieved from http://purl.umn.edu/2035
36.
LittleJ. W.GearhartM.CurryM.KafkaJ. (2003). Looking at student work for teacher learning, teacher community, and school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 184-192.
37.
MunterC. (2014). Developing visions of high-quality mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45, 584-635.
38.
MurphyJ.ElliottS. N.GoldringE.PorterA. C. (2007). Leadership for learning: A research-based model and taxonomy of behaviors. School Leadership & Management, 27, 179-201.
39.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
40.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
41.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
42.
National Governor’s Association, Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2011). Common Core State Standards in Mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/Math
43.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
44.
NelsonB. S.SassiA. (2000). Shifting approaches to supervision: The case of mathematics supervision. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36, 553-584.
45.
NelsonB. S.SassiA.GrantC. M. (2001, April). The role of educational leaders in instructional reform: Striking a balance between cognitive and organizational perspectives. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
46.
PutnamR. T.BorkoH. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?Educational Researcher, 29, 4-15.
47.
RigbyJ. G.Larbi-CherifA.MunozC.RosenquistB.CobbP.SmithT. (2014). Principal observation and feedback: Leading towards improvement in inquiry-oriented mathematics instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia, PA .
48.
RobinsonV. M. J. (2006). Putting education back into educational leadership. Leading & Managing, 12, 62-75.
49.
RobinsonV. M. J.LloydC.RoweK. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 635-674.
50.
SmithM. S. (2001). Practice based professional development for teachers of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
51.
SmithM. S.SteinM. K.ArbaughF.BrownC.MossgroveJ. (2004). Characterizing the cognitive demands of mathematical tasks: A task sorting activity. In BrightG.RubensteinR. (Eds.), Professional development guidebook for perspectives on teaching of mathematics: Companion to the sixty-sixth yearbook (pp. 45-72). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
52.
SpillaneJ. P.HalletT.DiamondJ. B. (2003). Forms of capital and the construction of leadership: Instructional leadership in urban elementary schools. Sociology of Education, 76, 1-17.
53.
SpillaneJ. P.HalversonR.DiamondJ. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36, 3-34.
54.
SteeleM. D.JohnsonK. R.OttenS.Herbel-EisenmannB. A.CarverC. L. (2015). Improving instructional leadership through the development of leadership content knowledge: The case of principal learning in algebra. Journal of Research on Leadership Education. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 10, 127-150.
55.
SteinM. K.CoburnC. E. (2008). Architectures for learning: A comparative analysis of two urban school districts. American Journal of Education, 114, 583-626.
56.
SteinM. K.LaneS. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2, 50-80.
57.
SteinM. K.NelsonB. S. (2003). Leadership content knowledge. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 423-448.
58.
SteinM. K.SmithM. S.HenningsenM.SilverE. A. (2009). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
59.
SteinM. K.SmithM. S.SilverE. A. (1999). The development of professional developers: Learning to assist teachers in new settings in new ways. Harvard Educational Review, 69, 237-269.
60.
SteinM. K.SpillaneJ. P. (2005). How can educational leaders support and promote teaching and learning? New conceptions of learning and leading in schools. In FirestoneW. A.RiehlC. (Eds.), A new agenda for research in educational leadership (pp. 28-45). New York: Teachers College Press.
SupovitzJ.SirinidesP.MayH. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 31-56.
63.
TarrJ. E.ReysR. E.ReysB. J.ChavezO.ShihJ.OsterlindS. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula on student achievement and the classroom learning environment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247-280.
64.
ThompsonC. L.ZeuliJ. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry: Standards-based reform and professional development. In Darling-HammondL.SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 341-375). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
65.
WeissI. R.PasleyJ. D.SmithP. S.BanilowerE. R.HeckD. J. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K–12 mathematics and science education in the United States (Highlights report). Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
