Ready to Lead, but How? Teachers’ Experiences in High-Poverty Urban Schools

Abstract

Background/Context Many strategies to improve failing urban schools rest on efforts to improve leadership within the school. Effective school-based leadership depends not only on the activities of the principal, but also on teachers’ efforts to address school-wide challenges. Research has shown that the principal is pivotal in such ventures, but we know little about how teachers conceive of their role in leadership, how they respond to opportunities provided or denied by their principal, or how they initiate leadership on their own. Purpose We studied how teachers in six high-poverty urban schools participate in leadership beyond their classroom. We asked: What role do teachers in high-poverty urban schools play in their school's improvement? How do principals conceive of teachers’ potential for leadership and how do they act on it? How do teachers respond to the opportunities and constrains they encounter as they seek to exercise leadership in their schools? Research Design We interviewed 95 teachers and administrators in six high-poverty schools of one large urban district (two elementary schools, one K–8 school, one middle school, and two high schools). The schools, which served large proportions of low-income and minority students, had varying records of student performance. Data Collection and Analysis In each school, we interviewed the principal, other administrators, and a broad sample of teachers. We reviewed documents and observed day-to-day practices. After writing a structured, thematic summary for each respondent and school, we coded all transcripts and analyzed themes and practices within and across schools. Findings Teachers were willing and ready to address their school's challenges. They conditionally granted their principal discretion in setting the agenda, based on the perceived authority and expertise of the principal and teachers’ opportunities for engagement as partners. When the principal took an instrumental approach to their contributions, teachers resented it, withdrew to their classrooms, and considered leaving the school. When the principal took an inclusive approach, demonstrating genuine interest in their views and contributions, teachers invested in school-wide reforms. Conclusions/Recommendation Although a principal may develop a strategic plan for improvement, that plan cannot simply be “rolled out.” Doing so without teachers’ contributions and endorsement likely means that the plan is incomplete and will be rejected outright or adopted perfunctorily. District administrators should select and develop principals who take an inclusive approach to teacher leadership. Policy makers and researchers should go beyond assessing the success of specific reforms and study the process of change within schools as reforms are developed and implemented.

How strong principals succeed: improving student achievement in high-poverty urban schools

“…In other words, principals in these schools harnessed the influence of multiple people to help make strategic decisions aimed at improving the teaching and learning environment. When leadership is shared, it promotes stronger working relationships, higher levels of trust and a more supportive environment for improving instruction Murphy, 2017, 2018;Louis, 2006;Louis et al, 1996Louis et al, , 2010aWahlstrom and Louis, 2008;Johnson et al, 2014;Kraft et al, 2015).…”

“…When leadership is shared, it promotes stronger working relationships, higher levels of trust and a more supportive environment for improving instruction (Louis and Murphy, 2017, 2018; Louis, 2006; Louis et al. , 1996, 2010a, b; Wahlstrom and Louis, 2008; Johnson et al. , 2014; Kraft et al.…”

"Personal Rather Than Positional Power": Defining Teacher Leadership and Exploring Preparation

“…As accountability for schools increases so does the need for leadership. Federal legislation and programming such as No Child Left Behind (2002) and Reading First have created new demands for positions for teacher experts to serve as instructional coaches (Johnson et al, 2014). However, teacher leadership is multifaceted and York- Barr and Duke (2004) have recognized seven different dimensions of teacher leadership including (a) coordination and management, (b) school or district curriculum work, (c) professional development of colleagues, (d) participation in school change/improvement, (e) parent and community involvement, (f) contributions to the profession, and (g) preservice teacher education.…”

“…Teacher leaders have reported feeling more confident, empowered, and professionally satisfied with their work (Wenner & Campbell, 2017). In a study of six urban, high-poverty schools, principals who used inclusive practices to incorporate teachers into decision-making processes saw benefits in teacher engagement in reform efforts (Johnson et al, 2014). Indeed, holding teachers to high instructional standards is strongly tied to higher student achievement (Ingersoll et al, 2017).…”

Examining Elementary Teachers’ Risk for Occupational Stress: Associations with Teacher, School, and State Policy Variables

“…In American school systems, principals hold enormous power over teachers' course and grade-level assignments, discipline policies, and other general personnel decisions (Johnson, 2006). Teachers who perceive themselves as equitable stakeholders in school-level decisions report a more favorable view of their principals and, by extension, their workplace climate (Johnson et al, 2014;Ladd, 2011). School leaders who lean toward more democratic approaches of administration include teachers in building-level policy making, curtail superfluous bureaucracy, and effectively communicate their vision.…”