Understanding District Support for Leader Development and Success in the Accountability Era: A Review of the Literature Using Social-Cognitive Theories of Motivation

Abstract

As an intermediary between U.S. state and federal policy and the school, the school district, many scholars maintain, remains a key player in meeting the needs of school-level leadership. Moreover, the job of the principal is difficult and has become increasingly complex as a result of increased pressure, accountability, and oversight under the No Child Left Behind Act (now the Every Student Succeeds Act) in the United States. These two propositions raise important questions about what we know (and do not yet know) about how to support school leaders’ learning and development in their quest to effectively lead a school. In this review, we use extant social-cognitive theories of motivation to organize the research on district effectiveness in pursuit of the following question: How does the district as a key player in school/instructional improvement facilitate conditions under which school principals’ learning, development, and success are enhanced? In pursuing this question, we hoped to strengthen two particular weaknesses in this strand of scholarship: (1) the concern that research in this particular area is relatively atheoretical and (2) concerns about the applicability of this research to practice.

Improving instructional practice through peer observation and feedback: A review of the literature

“…This descriptive approach also helped informed conclusions about the generalizability of peer observation and feedback beyond the context of the studies by reflecting some of the standards of reporting in the field (American Educational Research Association [AERA], 2006; American Psychological Association [APA], 2020). Finally, although we recognize that research can be guided by key issues, debates, barriers, gaps in the literature, or practical concerns (APA, 2020) we were particularly attentive to the presence or absence of theoretical and conceptual frameworks because of critiques and findings that education research is relatively atheoretical (e.g., Ford, Lavigne, Fiegener, & Si, 2020;Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000;Trujillo, 2013Trujillo, , 2016 and is at risk of becoming even more so, diminishing our ability to reach conclusions about larger patterns in human development and learning (Dimitriadis, 2009).…”

Střední článek ve vzdělávání: vymezení pojmu, přístupy a implikace pro vzdělávací politiku

“…V tomto ohledu existují dvě podstatné výjimky v oblasti výzkumu SČ. První jsou studie, které se snaží empiricky měřit efektivitu školských obvodů a jejich vliv na výsledky žáků (district effectiveness; Anderson & Young, 2018b;Ford et al, 2020). Druhým typem jsou pak studie, které se zabývají otázkou optimální velikosti SČ (Schiltz & De Witte, 2017).…”

A Psychometric Look at Principal Professional Development

“…Because the role of the principal has changed drastically, more tenured principals may struggle just as much as new principals. For this reason, it is in a district' s best interest to find ways to best support principal development (Ford, Lavigne, Fiegener, & Si, 2020).…”

“…Effective principals can no longer serve simply as a building manager (Bell, 1991;Bush, 2008); they are to fulfill the roles of aspirational leader, instructional leader, coach, change agent, and team builder (Acton, 2021;Alvoid & Black, 2014;Hallinger, 1992;Reid, 2020). Principal professional development needs have not been met by many districts, despite the suggestion that districts should share in this responsibility (Acton, 2021;Ford, Lavigne, Fiegener, & Si, 2020;Richardson, Watts, & Hollis, 2016).…”