Date of Award
2012
Document Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education
Department
Abraham S. Fischler College of Education
Advisor
Alex Edmonds
Committee Member
Sandra Duncan
Committee Member
Ronald P. Kern
Keywords
accountability, achievement gap, adequate yearly progress, educational accountability, educational leadership, educational policy, effective principals, high stakes testing, instructional leadership, leadership practices, leadership roles, No Child Left Behind, organizational change, policy implementation, principal leadership, principal practices, principal roles, school improvement, school leadership, school reform, school turnaround, student achievement, survey research, school accountability, educational change, leadership effectiveness, principal behaviors, qualitative interviews, school management, student-centered leadership, educational mandates, funding challenges, operational leadership, policy makers, public education, school performance, school takeover, school closure, standards-based reform, contemporary principalship, educational outcomes, facilitator leadership, instructional improvement, leadership adaptation, school effectiveness, educational administration, accountability systems, academic achievement, organizational leadership, change management, leadership strategies, school culture, educational reform, NCLB, principal decision-making, leadership development, people management, educational improvement initiatives, school governance, achievement standards, administrator perspectives, educational programs, student success, performance accountability, educational landscape, leadership competencies, school achievement, data-driven leadership, practitioner learning, school operations, leadership actions, principal interviews, school surveys, reform leadership
Abstract
Leadership is regarded as the key to comprehensive school improvement efforts and the principal is expected to lead the charge/change. Book knowledge is good, but the difference between effective and less effective principals is not what they know but what they actually do. What do principals do to meet AYP? Young (2004) pointed out that some principals recognize they can gain the edge and survive by learning from other effective practitioners. NCLB and AYP demand change to meet the mandates that will bring about improvement in student achievement. NCLB has changed the educational landscape. Numerous articles and literature exists on the negative impact NCLB has had on education. Principals must view the perceived negative impact through different eyes in order to develop a more holistic and solution oriented approach. Interestingly, in studying the negative influences of NCLB, principals have honed a skill set that is undeniably positive and will have far-reaching effects on the educational landscape.
This study was driven by the following central concepts: (a) satisfy the strong aspirations of policy makers to have all school children on the same grade level by 2014; (b) address the widening of the achievement gap; (c) adjust for a lack of adequate funding for educational programs; and (d) manage the impending threat of school takeover or closure for those schools that continually fail to meet AYP mandates. Using interviews and surveys, the study assessed the behaviors and actions of principals that have been successful in meeting the demands of NCLB.
The responses from the principals under study suggest leadership roles have indeed shifted because of NCLB. The principal as the facility and people manager has given way to an operational, student first, facilitator. This is the contemporary NCLB principal.