Developing Successful Principals
Review of Research
Researchers look at a variety of principal-training programs, examine their strengths and weaknesses, and discuss how they can be improved.
August 2005
Table of Contents
Document
- Author(s)
- Stephen Davis, Linda Darling-Hammond, Michelle LaPointe, and Debra Meyerson
- Publisher(s)
- Stanford Educational Leadership Institute
Page Count
27 pages
Summary
How we did this
The report is based on a review of existing research and literature. It was launched as part of a study to identify effective pre- and inservice programs and program structures that produce the most highly qualified school leaders.
Principals can play a vital role in raising student achievement. But knowledge on the best ways to develop these leaders is insufficient. In this report, the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute and The Finance Project review research on features of effective leadership preparation and identify gaps. The report has four key findings:
Elements of Good Leadership
There is general consensus on what good school leadership looks like. Research shows that successful school leaders influence student achievement through two pathways. The first is supporting and developing teachers. The second is organizational processes. Principal preparation and licensing requirements increasingly reflect this understanding. Both commonly set expectations for similar knowledge, skills, and dispositions of school leaders. But more research is needed to determine the importance of school leadership in key areas. These include curriculum, assessment, and addressing local needs.
Features of Effective Programs
Research suggests that high-quality principal development has certain features. Effective principal development programs:
- Are research based
- Have a coherent curriculum
- Provide internships or problem-based learning
- Use cohort groupings and mentors
- Support collaboration between universities and school districts
Despite consensus in the research, empirical evidence for the impact of these features is minimal.
Diversity of Principal Preparation
The diversity of principal development programs makes evaluating their effectiveness challenging. Goals for leadership development often vary for good reason. Research supports the idea that leading different kinds of schools demands different competencies.
Principal development programs are also led by many different entities. These generally fall into four categories:
- University-led
- School district-led
- Led by an outside organization such as a nonprofit or the state
- Led by a partnership such as between a university and school district.
- Researchers suggest that the impact of program components can be determined by comparing the outcomes of programs in the same category. These outcomes include principal performance and student achievement.
Inservice programs are more diverse in design and offered by many more entities. This raises serious questions about how to evaluate and compare their effectiveness. The report proposes a partial solution. Researchers can focus more narrowly on specific types of in-service programs such as statewide leadership academies and local professional development academies.
Policy and Financing to Support Principal Preparation
States and districts are increasingly active in designing leadership development programs. But there is little information to guide them on the policy and financing strategies that can best support high-quality programs. Additional research is needed to understand how successful programs and policies are implemented, governed, and financed.
Key Takeaways
- In this report, the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute and The Finance Project conduct a literature review on features of effective principal development. They find significant gaps in the research.
- There is general consensus on many aspects of good leadership. These include the ability to develop teachers and establish organizational processes. But more research is needed to determine the importance of school leadership in key areas. These include curriculum, assessment, and addressing local needs.
- Research suggests that high-quality principal development has certain features. These include a research base, a coherent curriculum, authentic learning, cohort grouping, mentors, and collaboration between universities and school districts. Despite consensus in the research, empirical evidence for the impact of these features is minimal.
- The diversity of principal development programs makes evaluating their effectiveness challenging. One approach is to compare programs based on the entity leading them such as a school district or university.
- States and districts are increasingly active in designing leadership development programs. But there is little information to guide them on the policy and financing strategies that can best support high-quality programs.
In the wake of liberalized policy developments and certification requirements in some states, the emergence of district owned and operated programs has become an increasingly attractive way of supplying the administrative pipeline with qualified candidates.
What We Don't Know
- How and to what degree do specific principal development program components influence leadership behaviors, on-the-job performance, and student outcomes?
- What is the relative importance of the following leadership practices to student achievement?
- Designing and implementing the curriculum
- Supporting effective instructional and student assessment practices
- Recognizing individual and school accomplishments
- Adapting leadership to address the specific needs of teachers, students, and other stakeholders
- What state policy and fiscal structures and strategies are most likely to support effective principal preparation and inservice programs?
Topics:
Now Viewing:
Overview
Next: Research Approach
