The findings revealed that participating in a leadership training program is the only significant factor that predicts urban educators’ scores on instructional leadership readiness measures.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In an effort to develop and support high quality urban school leaders, this study examined what factors affect pre-service urban school leaders’ perception of preparedness for performing instructional leadership activities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings revealed that participating in a leadership training program is the only significant factor that predicts urban educators’ scores on instructional leadership readiness measures.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Implications for preparing performance ready school leaders in high need urban schools are further discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Leadership Training · Perception of Preparedness · Instructional Leadership
Abstract
In an effort to develop and support high quality urban school leaders, this study examined what factors affect pre-service urban school leaders’ perception of preparedness for performing instructional leadership activities. The findings revealed that participating in a leadership training program is the only significant factor that predicts urban educators’ scores on instructional leadership readiness measures. By examining perception of preparedness of aspiring urban school leaders the findings contribute to our understanding about some perspectives to prepare and develop urban school leaders solve large and complex problems related to the curriculum, instruction and assessment. Implications for preparing performance ready school leaders in high need urban schools are further discussed.
YAVUZ, O., GULMEZ, G. (2018). Preparing Perform and Impact Ready School Leaders for Improving Urban School Success. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership (REAL), Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 1, 88–120. https://ajindex.com/articles/139227
Author (2016). Details deleted for blind peer review purposes. American School Counselor Association (ASCA) (2012). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Bush, T. (2016). Preparation for school principals: Rationale and practice. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 44(4), 537-539. doi:10.1177/1741143216645505 Barnett, D. (2004). School leadership preparation programs: are they preparing tomorrow's leaders? Education, 125(1), 121. Beycioğlu, K., & Aslan, M. (2010). Okul Gelişiminde Temel Dinamik Olarak Değişim ve Yenileşme: Okul Yöneticileri ve Öğretmenlerin Rolleri (ss. 153-173). Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1). Catano, N., & Stronge, J. H. (2006). What are principals expected to do? Congruence between principal evaluation and performance standards. NASSP Bulletin, 90(3), 221-237.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Evaluating teacher effectiveness: How teacher performance assessments can measure and improve teaching. Center for American Progress. Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr. M. T., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing School Leaders for a Changing World: Lessons from Exemplary Leadership Development Programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. Fink, E., & Resnick, L. (2000) Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 598-606.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. Routledge. Fullan, M. (2014). Leading in a culture of change personal action guide and workbook. John Wiley & Sons.Froeschle, J. G., & Nix, S. (2009). A solution-focused leadership model: examining perceptions of effective counselor leadership. Journal of School Counseling, 7(5). Goodwin, R. H., Cunningham, M. L., & Childress, R. (2003). The changing role of the secondary principal. NASSP Bulletin, 87(634), 26-42.