Learning from Leadership

Learning from Leadership:Research Findings with Implications

For State Boards and Districts

Karen Seashore Louisklouis@umn.edu

Webinar June 29, 2011National Association of State Boards of Education

Eight Critical Findings

1. We now have even more compelling empirical evidence that leadership has significant effects on student learning.

2. Leadership must focus on the entire school for real change to occur.

3. Leadership must link principals and teachers to create professional community; teachers who are part of professional communities assume leadership for school improvement.

Eight Critical Findings

4. Shared leadership increases principal influence over improvement efforts.

5. Principals’ leadership effects on student learning are greater in elementary schools.

6. Districts improve student learning by building confidence in their principals.

Eight Critical Findings

7. Principals’ tenure in schools is typically very brief, with turnover having strongly negative effects on school improvement efforts.

8. States have a critical leadership role to play, but have limited direct effects at the school level.

WHAT CAN BOARDS DO?

1. Provide direction – through policy

2. Follow direction with action – allocate resources to things that matter for achievement

3. Provide oversight – assess those aspect of leadership behavior that matter most for student achievement

4. Engage all stakeholders in broad discussions of what matters.

1. Leadership Matters• In general, leadership effects on students are

indirect, by creating the best possible conditions for teaching and learning.

• Leadership matters most when and where it is most needed - and then it has large effects.

• Effective leadership combines attention to vision and goals, the capacities of staffs, and attention to the details of good classroom instruction.

Implications

• Focusing on only one leader or leadership role is unlikely to have a big impact on student achievement.

• Evaluations of school and district leaders should include attention to how they create the conditions for successful schooling.

2. A Whole-School Focus

• Effective leaders…– Involve parents and community, as well

as teachers;

– Prioritize instructional improvements and achievement goals for all students and all subjects;

– Engage all (or most) teachers in conversations and plans for improvement.

Implications

• Pay more attention to effective parent involvement – and to removing barriers to involvement.

• Focus on what works for all children without creating silos for G&T, “third tier RTI,” “bubble kids” or other groups.

• Emphasize overall curriculum and instruction issues; not only on those tested.

3. Principal Leadership for Professional Community

• Leadership is most effective when it strengthens “professional community”—which is teachers working together to improve their practice and improve student learning.

• Professional community, in turn, is a strong predictor of instructional practices that are associated with improved student achievement. 

• Professional community also creates a school climate that supports student engagement in and out of classrooms.

Implications

• Review all policies that may affect the development of PLCs; don’t assume that PLCs are a simple structural change.

• Consider how to measure the development and effectiveness of PLCs within and between schools.

4. Leadership Needs to Have an Instructional Focus and Be Shared

We found…• Leadership targeted at improving instruction

affects working relationships and, indirectly, student achievement. (Instructional Leadership).

• When principals and teachers share leadership, teachers’ working relationships are stronger and student achievement is higher. (Shared Leadership).

Implications

• Review how much time in Board and District meetings is devoted to instruction and re-prioritize.

• Ask critical questions about instructional priorities and practices.

• Evaluate district staff, principals’ and teachers’ contributions to meaningful engagement with instructional improvement.

5. Leadership Effects Vary by Building Level

• Principal leadership that “matters” occurs less often in secondary schools, with fewer professional communities among teachers, and less instructional leadership.

• Effective secondary school leaders create strong networks of instructional supports, with teacher leaders having real responsibility for improvements.

5. Leadership and Student Achievement in Elementary

Schools

InstructionalLeadership

SharedLeadership

ProfessionalCommunity

MathAchievement

Implications for Districts and Boards

• Develop differentiated policies for improving elementary and secondary school leaders.

• Consider policies that would change the role of teachers and administrators to create more leadership density.

• Develop different strategies for evaluating elementary and secondary principals.

6. District Leadership and Principal Efficacy

• District leadership focused on building confidence or efficacy of principals to accomplish the districts’ goals have positive effects on school conditions and student learning.

• Principals’ confidence grows when they believe they are working collaboratively with district personnel, other principals, and teachers in their schools.

• Larger districts generally have less influence on principal efficacy.

• Districts have more influence on the confidence of elementary than secondary school principals.

Implications for Districts and Boards

• Develop policies to create better networks among school-based leaders.

• Create opportunities for sustained PD for principals that is context sensitive.

• Differentiate development and networking strategies for elementary and secondary principals

7. Principal TurnoverAffects Student Achievement

• The typical school has a new principal every 3.2 years.– Most districts approach the issue of principal quality as a “hiring

problem” and only two districts in the study had a dynamic policy for managing principal turnover.

• Principal turnover has significantly negative effects on student achievement.– District leaders are able to blunt the negative effects of rapid

principal turnover, but often do not.

• Teachers in strong professional communities are better able to withstand the negative effects of rapid principal turnover.

Implications

• Limit principal turnover where possible; give principals 5-7 years in a school.

• Evaluate principals based on short-term improvements on things that matter as well as longer term changes in achievement.

• Invest in principal development – even in “successful schools” with long-term leaders.

District Professional Development for Leaders is

Mostly Insufficient

• Few districts have a coherent professional development system for principals.

• Over 50% of the principals reported that they met individually once a month or more with a regular contact in the district office.

• Only 52% of principals agree that the district leaders assist them to be better instructional leaders in their schools.

Implications

• Evaluate the district office by how well principals are being supported.

• Improve communication – both frequency and quality – between the district and school leaders.

• Change the focus of conversations to instructional and shared leadership.

Districts, Leadership PD, and Student Learning

• Leaders in higher-performing districts…

– Communicated explicit expectations for principal leadership and provided learning experiences in line with these expectations.

– Monitored principal follow-through and intervened with further support where needed, having discussions with them about school performance and improvement plans, and through informal advising and coaching interventions.

– Modeled effective data use.

Implications

• Districts may need development too:– Coaching– Communication– Evaluation and leadership assessment

strategies– Etc.

Four Key, Mutually Reinforcing Strategies for Boards and Districts

1. Make instructional improvement the #1 priority.

2. Invest in the knowledge development of instructional leaders and their leadership skills.

3. Emphasize teamwork and professional community.

4. Ensure high quality professional development aimed at strengthening capacities to achieve articulated shared purposes.

District effects depend on utilizing all four of these strategies; misaligned or scattered improvement strategies may have negative consequences.

8. State Leadership is Important, but Limited in Direct Impact

State effects are not uniform across US and are limited by locally weak levers for change.

•State leadership (legislation) varies among states and is affected by deep political culture.

•District responses are affected by size and state political culture; School responses to states are affected by district responses.

•NCLB has resulted in “adjustments,” rather than major changes in state policy.

Implications for State BoardsState Boards can…. • Lend their voice to state conversations about the

importance of leadership.

• Thoughtfully adapt all “national messages” to the particular context of their state.

• Reinforce the importance of continuous improvement (some stability in the context of rapid change).

• Provide continuing PD options to improve Boards’ understanding of leadership for school improvement.

Project Publications

Final Report and Executive Summary

Available at the

following web sites:http://www.cehd.umn.edu/CAREI/

http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/oise/

http://www.wallacefoundation.org/Pages/default.aspx