From Policy into Practice: The Effects of Principal Preparation Programs on Principal Behavior

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the effectiveness of principals who have undergone administrative training compared to those who have not. The article begins with a discussion of the status of principalship in various contexts. It then reviews the potential impact of the new policy on principal training in Turkey and the literature regarding the effects of principal training programs. The methodology, results, limitations, and the conclusions are presented. The principal is a crucial factor in a school regarding both evidence and experience (Gunraj & Rutherford, 1999). The current status of educational administration both as an academic field and as a profession in practice differs from one country to another. The reasons for the differences may be many, but mainly they can be attributed to cultural, political, and socioeconomic differences. For example, Turkey has a very centralized educational system, whereas it is decentralized at the systemic level in the United States and Britain. When compared to the United States and Britain, educational administration as a profession is not well enough recognized, organized, or structured (Daresh & Male, 2000) to create as well as sustain the development of effective schools in Turkey. There are differences among these countries on the current status of educational administration both as an academic field and a profession in practice. For example, selection criteria, appointment, employment procedures, and the responsibilities of principals are considerably different in these countries. In the United States, "university-based programs are designed to prepare administrators for a variety of positions. At the school level, these include department heads, assistant principals, and principals" (Alkin, 1992, p. 22). Educational administration programs overall have several common weaknesses. They are (Murphy, 1992a) recruitment and selection methods, models used to guide learning from their experiences, and the contents of training programs. Therefore, in the United States, "reform reports continue to emphasize the recruitment, selection, training, development, and renewal of highquality school administrators" (Srotnik & Durden, 1996, p. 539).

Neoliberal Governance and the “New Professionalism” of Israeli Principals

“…The present article sheds light on the Israeli PTL reform in its historical and social contexts, and links the PTL reform to the strengthening of the neo-liberal agenda in educational policies and administration. Findings are consistent with the claim that political, social, and economic elements significantly influence the formulation of the role of school principals and the training they receive (Isik 2003).…”

“…The role and training of school principals have changed several times over the past century due to the rise in popularity of scientific trends and socialeconomical ideologies (Murphy 1998). In this regard, the leading motivation for the restructuring of training programs for principals is often ideological in nature (Isik 2003) and the dominant ideological influence in the west in current neo-liberalism (Eyal and Berkovich 2011).…”

Preparing novice principals in Australia and Turkey: How similar are their needs?

“…Not only is restructuring on the agenda, but also the current state of educational administration in Turkey is being debated. As Isik (2003) states, 'there has been a separation between the study of educational administration at universities and its practice in the schools:… "There were no links between academic programs designed to prepare school administrators and the employment policies for the principalship'" (p. 261). MoNE does not take the graduates of educational administration programs of universities into account while employing principals or promoting teachers to the principalship.…”

“…The basic requirement for appointment to the principalship has been a minimum of 3 years of teaching experience. Recently, however, prospective state school principals have been required to complete a pre-service administration program of 120 hour education (Isik 2003).…”

The Efficiency of Seminars in Elementary Education

“…Second, principals themselves may intentionally or unintentionally resist these developments. However, these programs cannot be the only means of training the principals (Isık, 2003). Nevertheless, in-service training is necessary for every occupation; however, it has a special place and importance for teachers.…”