Citation
A study of the role of the school principal in facilitating the improvement of struggling beginning teachers

Material Information

Title:
A study of the role of the school principal in facilitating the improvement of struggling beginning teachers
Creator:
Arnold, Patricia Jean
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
230 leaves : ; 28 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Teachers -- In-service training -- United States ( lcsh )
First year teachers -- Supervision of -- United States ( lcsh )
School principals -- United States ( lcsh )
Teacher-administrator relationships ( lcsh )
First year teachers -- Supervision of ( fast )
School principals ( fast )
Teacher-administrator relationships ( fast )
Teachers -- In-service training ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 212-230).
General Note:
School of Education and Human Development
Statement of Responsibility:
by Patricia Jean Arnold.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
40463442 ( OCLC )
ocm40463442
Classification:
LD1190.E3 1998d .A76 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
A Study of the Role of the School Principal in
Facilitating the Improvement of
Struggling Beginning Teachers
A thesis submitted to the
University of Colorado at Denver
In partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Educational Leadership and Innovation
by
Patricia Jean Arnold
B. A., Tabor College, 1969
M. A., University of Colorado, 1988
1998


1998 by Patricia Jean Arnold
All rights reserved.


This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy
degree by
Patricia Jean Arnold
has been approved
by


Doc. Patricia Jean Arnold (Ph.D. Educational Leadership and
Innovation)
A Study of the Role of the School Principal in Facilitating the
Improvement of Struggling Beginning Teachers
Thesis directed by Professor Alan Davis
ABSTRACT
Four principal/teacher triads are studied to
understand the process involved in the principal's role of
facilitating novice struggling teachers' improvements.
This qualitative exploratory study consisted of both
teacher and principal interviews and researcher
observation of teacher and principal interactions.
The research questions that were answered were (a)
How do teachers who have improved from struggling to
competent teachers understand their process of
improvement, and the role of the principal in that process?
(b) How do principals who have successfully coached
struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching
process? (c) In cases of successful transition from
struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature
of the principal/teacher relationship with the transition
process? These questions are important to answer because
they contribute to the body of knowledge in the areas of
the principal's role in instructional leadership and
improved teacher effectiveness.
Findings suggest that principals do affect teacher
improvement. Principals who meet teachers' needs of
being cared about, ensuring succeed, encouraging and
reassuring them, giving them information, feedback, and
suggestions, were those who created relationships which
prompted the teacher to become more competent.


The study found that in order for novice teachers to
improve, their own needs must be met. If principals can
fulfill these needs, then teachers can move beyond what
they need to better understand and provide what children
need and must have in order to achieve.
Further this study suggests that teachers will feel
that they can contribute more to student learning if they
feel they are empowered to make classroom, curricular,
and student related decisions.
This abstract accurately represents the content of the
candidate's thesis. I recommend its publication.
Signed
Alan Davis
v
l
I


DEDICATION
I dedicate this thesis to my husband, Wayne, and my daughters,
Betsy and Maggie. Wayne was my constant encourager,
proofreader, and supporter. My daughters always exhibited their
faith in my abilities and joined Wayne in being my advocates. All
of them assured and motivated me during the long hours of
studying.


ACKNOWLEDGMENT
My thanks to my dissertation committee for all their feedback,
support, and direction. Specials thanks to my advisor, Alan
Davis, for his encouragement, assistance, and support during the
last year.


CONTENTS
CHAPTER Page
1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY...................................1
Statement of the Problem................................3
Orientation and Problem Focus...........................7
Framework...............................................9
Questions the Study Will Answer........................11
Methodology............................................12
Implications of the Study..............................16
Limitations of the Study...............................16
2. LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................18
Overview.............................................. 19
Correlational Studies of Effective Teaching............19
Presage-Product Research..........................20
Input-Output Research.............................21
Process-Product Research..........................22
Task View Research................................24
Contemporary Conceptions of Good Teaching
and the Role of the Teacher in the Classroom...........25
Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement .... 26
Teacher Thinking and Decision Making..............27
Expert Teachers...................................29


Teacher as Manager of the Learning Process............30
Teacher as Facilitator of a Caring Community..........30
Importance of Teacher Self-Concept........................32
Teacher Self-Concept and Self Efficacy................33
Definition of Self-Concept and Self Efficacy..........34
Professional Self-Concept Associated with
Teacher Efficacy......................................35
Self Respect..............................................36
Teacher Efficacy and Locus of Control.................37
Attribution Dimensions That Affect
Efficacy Expectations.................................38
Expectations are Self-Imposed.........................40
Principal's Role in Encouraging Teacher Self-Concept. 40
The Role of the Principal on Teacher Improvement..........42
Evaluation and Supervision............................43
Providing Support and Creating Culture................53
Caring................................................55
Empowering Teachers...................................57
Mentoring and Coaching................................69
Other Forms of Coaching...............................71
Team Building.........................................73
Providing Staff Development Opportunities.............74
Clearly Articulating the Vision Through
School-Wide Initiatives...............................78


3. METHODOLOGY...................................................81
Interviews...............................................86
Purpose of the Interview............................86
Interview Procedures................................87
Flexibility Within a Structure......................89
Interviews as Stories...............................90
Data Analysis............................................98
Cross Case Analysis................................101
4. CASE STUDIES...............................................104
Triad One...............................................105
Principal One...........................................105
Teacher One........................................106
Teacher Two........................................114
Triad Two.............................................. 118
Principal Two......................................... 118
Teacher Three......................................119
Teacher Four.......................................128
Triad Three.............................................134
Principal Three.........................................134
Teacher Five.......................................136
Teacher Six........................................143
Triad Four..............................................151
x


Principal Four....................................151
Teacher Seven.................................152
Teacher Eight.................................159
5. THE ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL IN
FACILITATING THE IMPROVEMENT OF
STRUGGLING BEGINNING TEACHERS.........................165
Research Question 1...............................166
Research Question 2...............................173
Research Question 3...............................183
6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . .189
Overview..........................................190
Findings..........................................191
Implications......................................197
Limitations of this Study.........................198
Recommendations for Principals....................199
Recommendations for Future Researchers............201
Conclusion........................................202
Final Reflections.................................203
APPENDIX
A. Subject Contact Summary Page..........................204
B. Start List of Codes...................................206
REFERENCES...................................................212


FIGURES
Figure
3.1 Principal/Teacher Triads..........................84
XII


TABLES
Table
5.1 Checklist Matrix of Variables of the Coaching
Process.......................................179
5.2 Cross-Case Data Analysis.......................186
xiii


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
As I began my third administrative assignment, I was
excited. I had changed school districts in order to work with a
more diverse community of children. As the new principal of
the school, I was eager to meet all the children. My first day
in this school was a day I will never forget. As I visited
classrooms, I was in total disbelief as I heard one teacher
after another screaming at children-being sarcastic, cruel,
and demeaning in both their words and tone. I wondered why
these teachers behaved in this manner. Having been a teacher,
I believe in and value mutual respect, caring, and dignity. I
watched children, as their facial expressions began matching
those of the teachers, looking very beleaguered. In this school,
discipline problems were high, and student achievement was
very low.
I talked with individual teachers, trying to gain insight
about what was happening. The school's student counselor
became a reliable and credible source of information. Having
been in this school for a number of years, she had seen four
principals and numerous teachers come and go without
>
i
1


improving either the quality of education or the school
climate. From observing in classrooms, I realized that a large
percentage of the teachers had low instructional skill levels,
lacked classroom management strategies, and appeared truly
unhappy at work. I started to wonder how these teachers could
be more effective.
Even though the teachers in this particular school were
extreme cases, my administrative experiences at five
different sites were similar. In every building, I observed
teacher/student interactions that were alarming and puzzling.
In most schools disturbing teacher behaviors were isolated to
one or two specific teachers. I noticed that these were the
people who appeared frustrated and unsure of their abilities.
They were unable to actualize any potential to be truly
effective teachers. Such teachers made me contemplate the
components of effective teaching and behaviors which
influence children. Components of teaching, effective or
ineffective, and equivalent behaviors are established during a
teacher's first few years. Even one year with an ineffective
teacher can significantly impact children and their learning.
Therefore, the role of the principal in coaching less effective
novice teachers to higher levels of competence is crucial.
2


Statement of the Problem
Reflecting on these experiences prompted me to question
what effective teachers do that makes children want to come
to school, helps them feel good about being there, and instills
in them a true desire for and love of learning. The importance
of the teacher's role for student achievement is
understandable. Historian-philosopher Henry Adams observed
that because "a teacher affects eternity, he can never tell
where his influence stops" (Ryans, 1960, p. 1). I wanted to
discover if less effective teachers could grow professionally
in their effectiveness and, if so, how. Focusing on the problem
suggests that the role of the principal must be one which
facilitates teacher improvement. Therefore, the problem of
this study is how can a school principal facilitate the
improvement of struggling beginning teachers?
Over the years extensive research has been done on the
characteristics of effective teachers which include their
behaviors, curricular strategies and methods, knowledge,
experience, classroom management techniques, personality,
attitudes, and self-concept. For almost a century, discussion
and research about teacher effectiveness have taken place.
3


Additionally, almost any person can probably remember at
least one very effective and one ineffective teacher from past
schooling experience. The ineffective teachers are the ones
who do not contribute much to student achievement.
The quality of instructors and their teaching is the most
significant factor for education in our schools (Ryans, 1960).
Throughout the years, schools try new curriculum, different
programs, increased state legislation, and numerous inservice
programs to try to improve student achievement. My
experience both as a teacher and a principal over the past
nineteen years has been that effective teachers bring about
student learning with any curriculum or program. I have also
observed the converse; no matter how great the curriculum,
resources, or programs, ineffective teachers are not able to
facilitate student learning as successfully. Therefore, the
questions that need to be answered are how do teachers
become effective? What support and coaching do they need to
be successful?
Students and teachers are similar from the perspective
of needed support. Teachers continually look for the opportune
moment to assure student learning. Timing is essential; giving
a word of encouragement, supplying some explanation to
clarify concepts, asking reflective questions, and reinforcing
already acquired skills at opportune moments contribute to
4


student achievement. Just as teachers' behaviors, strategies,
methods, and experience affect student success, principals
need to give the same kind of assistance to help struggling and
unsure teachers succeed. Giving help to beginning teachers
may increase the speed and quality of their improvement and
prevent serious problems later.
My study focuses on teachers who at one time have been
less competent, less confident, and questionable in their
ability to succeed with children. It examines the
teacher/principal relationship and the coaching process which
helps novice teachers to make significant improvements. It is
natural for most beginning teachers to be particularly
challenged the first few years. Many novice teachers have
more than one area in which they need to improve. The
difficulties that beginning teachers experience often
contribute to inadequate teaching performance. If, indeed,
struggling teachers can develop and change, I wanted to
discover the specific processes that helped to create this
improvement. As the school's leader, the principal becomes
instrumental in teacher improvement. Therefore, I decided to
investigate the principal's role in remediating the
unsatisfactory beginning teacher.
In an effort to determine how principals can facilitate
the improvement of less skilled neophyte teachers, this study
5


answered the following questions. How do teachers who have
improved from struggling to competent teachers understand
their process of improvement and the role of the principal in
that process? How do principals who have successfully
coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching
process? in cases of successful transition from struggling to
competent teaching, what has been the nature of the
principal/teacher relationship during the transition process?
These questions are important to answer because they
contribute to the body of knowledge about the principal's role
in instructional leadership and improved teacher
effectiveness. They also add to the research on principal
supervision of teachers.
It is first necessary to review the research on effective
teaching. Doing this lays a foundation for understanding,
through the historical framework, the evolution of research on
the complexity of good teaching which positively impacts
student achievement. This review of the research illuminates
the impossibility of simplifying the conglomerate role of
teaching to a formula or checklist of characteristics. The next
area of research review pertains to the importance of teacher
self-concept, and more specifically, teacher efficacy and locus
of control.
6


The last area of research turns to the role of the school
principal in teacher supervision and coaching. Recognizing the
multifaceted nature of teaching requires principals to
reevaluate their role in establishing a support system,
particularly for the novice teacher. This section speaks to
how principals can facilitate the improvement of struggling
novice teachers.
Orientation and Problem Focus
In examining the broader picture, it is significant to note
that, for the last five years, in the United States productivity
has been the highest in the world. However, public
perceptions, often consisting of criticisms of public education
in general, still surface. As responsible educators, we must
constantly explore as many avenues as possible to continue to
improve education. Educators persist in looking for ways to
raise student achievement. In response to state mandates,
local districts are adopting policies created to test students'
academic achievement. Some individual school sites have
designated benchmarks and activities to support state
standards. A number of schools discuss restructuring. Other
schools are identifying and training staff in a variety of
instructional strategies and methods in hopes of raising
7


student performance. The effective schools movement"
(Edmonds, 1978) based on research and descriptions of
effective school practices now spans twenty-five years.
Successful school improvement based on the effective schools
framework, like the effective school itself, is the result of a
change strategy implemented over time through several
phases. The focus continues to be on the mission of learning
for all students.
In the nationwide effort to reform public education, the
question of what it means to be an effective teacher has taken
on an appropriate urgency. If American public schools are to
become places of excellence, then their most important human
resource-teachers--must be carefully developed. With so
many changes on the horizon, teachers' responsibilities are
increasing. The notion of teacher efficacy, "... is teachers'
situation specific expectation that they can help students
learn." (Ashton & Webb, 1986, p. 3) Teachers' efficacy
expectations influence their thoughts and feelings, their
choice of activities, the amount of effort they expend, and the
extent of their persistence in the face of obstacles (Ashton &
Webb, 1986).
Every teacher must be effective for students to learn.
The reality is that not all teachers in school are effective.
Principals need to become aware of what they can do to
8


increase teacher effectiveness and teacher self-concept.
Teachers usually need the most help during their first few
years (Hannum,1974). Therefore, investing time and energy in
providing help to beginning teachers may prevent serious
problems later. Hence, the problem of this study is how a
principal of a school can facilitate the improvement of
struggling beginning teachers.
Framework
The research on teacher effectiveness and the role of the
principal mostly reflects a model of "recipes" for good
teaching and supervision of teachers. Recently, a distinct
alteration has been suggested in both the teacher and principal
roles. Contemporary research speaks to the complexity of the
job of teaching. Realizing this complexity requires a shift in
the principal's role in improving teacher effectiveness from
one of only supervision to that of coaching.
I have modified the old recipe model of effective
teaching to a framework which is composed of three distinct
parts. The concept of teacher effectiveness can be viewed as a
three legged-stool. The three legs are (a) conceptions of good
teaching, (b) professional self-concept, and (c) principal
support and coaching. In order to create balance and optimum
9


stability, all three legs must be present. The first leg is
constructed by utilization of the historical teacher
effectiveness research which leads into more contemporary
complex conceptions of good teaching. Tracing the historical
teacher effectiveness research through the current constructs
of good teaching provides a road map of valuable information
which guides the process of principal coaching. Utilizing this
body of knowledge assists the principal in facilitating the
improvement of less effective beginning teachers.
The second leg is the importance of teacher self-
concept, which includes the impact of the professional self-
concept on student self-concept, teacher efficacy, and locus of
control. Review of the literature (Ekstrom, 1976; Munson,
1991; Pfeifer, 1983; Ryans, 1960) supports the significance
of the teacher's role, not only from the perspective of teacher
experience, strategies and methods, knowledge, and classroom
management, but also from the perspective of the specific
behaviors teachers exhibit. Teachers' self-confidence and
self-concept also are important in conjunction with effective
teacher behaviors (Handley & Thompson, 1992). Behaviors are
influenced by teacher self-concept, which is in turn influenced
by teacher skills, teacher abilities, and teaching experiences.
The circular nature of the self-concept is noted.
10


The third leg is principal support and coaching. The
principal role is beginning to change from a traditional
approach based on teacher supervision and evaluation to a more
contemporary model which emphasizes the teacher/principal
relationship (Blanchard, 1997; Carter & Cunningham, 1997;
Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993: Marshall, Peterson, Rogers, &
Steele, 1996). This relationship consists of coaching,
nurturing, enhancing teacher self-concept, and empowering
teachers.
Because educators shape the lives and minds of our
children, sometimes to a greater extent than their parents
(Munson, 1991), it is imperative that all teachers become
effective. Using this three pronged approach will provide a
framework for answering the question, how do school
principals facilitate the improvement of less competent
beginning teachers?
Questions the Study Will Answer
The following questions guided the data-gathering
process and interpretation for this study.


1. How do teachers who have improved from struggling to
competent teachers understand their process of improvement
and the role of the principal in that process?
2. How do principals who have successfully coached
struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process?
3. In cases of successful transition from struggling to
competent teaching, what has been the nature of the
teacher/principal relationship associated with the transition
process?
Methodology
This qualitative exploratory study examines how a school
principal can utilize the coaching process to improve
beginning teachers' competency. A major part of the study is
the development of several case studies of interaction
between principals and teachers, studying four principals each
in interaction with two teachers. The methodology consists of
both principal and teacher interviews and some observation of
conferences and dialogues between the principal and the
teacher and, in one case, the principal and other support
personnel.
12


Principals were selected based on the criteria of
demonstrated instructional leadership. I have worked with all
four principals who are participants in the study and can
attest to their instructional leadership capabilities. To
further support their competence, I conferenced with each
teacher's superintendent to be positive that the principal fit
the description of being an exceptional leader who was
regarded in the expert status. Each was endorsed as a sound,
highly effective instructional leader. This type of principal
was important to my study because I wanted to discover
exactly what the principals did to make them so capable and
accomplished. The principals in my study represent multiple
school districts.
Teacher participation was determined by principal
selection for the historical cases and teacher self-selection
for the current cases. In all, eight teachers and four principals
were studied. Of the eight teachers, four were historical
cases. This allowed for the re-creation of a record or story of
the processes that took place from both the teachers' and
principals' perspectives relating how the teachers
successfully made the transition from struggling to
competent. The study examined why these were success
stories. Four of the teachers are currently still in the
improvement process; therefore, some observations of the
13


interactions between the teacher and the principal took place
in addition to the interviews.
I conducted interviews with the teachers and principals,
asking questions which elicited stories of change. Interview
questions were research developed, pilot tested, and revised
as needed. I began with a list of questions which guided the
conversation allowing the participants to tell their stories.
As the story unfolded, I modified questions so they were
appropriate and encouraged things that were important to
disclosing the stories. During the interviews, designated
prompts were used and new questions arose as a result of
respondents' comments. Further questions were asked for
purposes of clarification or elaboration. This format allowed
for flexibility in encouraging in-depth answers and adding
richness to stories of improvement. Several interviews took
place with those teachers who were currently in the process
of improving.
The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed for
analysis. Clear differentiation was made between description
of the interviews and observations and interpretation of them
(Eisner, 1991).
Interview data were examined along with field notes on
the principal/teacher interactions. Information about the
process used for teacher improvement surfaced due to the
14


prevailing interventions. Through these observations and self-
reports from both the teacher and the principal, I was able to
start identifying themes and commonalties leading towards
teacher improvement.
To analyze the data, I used triangulation of qualitative
data sources by (a) comparing the perspectives of people from
different points of viewteacher views and principal views,
(b) comparing observational data with interview data, and (c)
checking for consistency in what people say over time. I
studied and interpreted when and why differences existed
(Argyris, Putnam, and Smith, 1985). Different kinds of data
captured different things. I looked for consistencies in overall
patterns of data from different sources. I examined the
processes as I heard the stories of change. Recurring themes,
commonalties, key phrases and words were noted.
In interpreting the data about the processes, I attached
significance to what I found by offering explanations, drawing
conclusions, making inferences, building linkages, attaching
meaning, and describing data irregularities as part of testing
for viability of an interpretation.
15


Implications of the Study
This study contributes new information to the field of
teacher improvement, enhancing the quality of education for
the children in our world. Additionally, it adds to the body of
knowledge on principal supervision of teachers. The
implications of this study are that teachers will have a better
understanding of their process of improvement and principals
will have a clearer awareness of their role as a coach for new
teachers as they facilitate improvement. Understanding
processes which lead to teacher improvement could result in
replication of the processes as a means to more widespread
teacher improvement.
Limitations of the Study
The first limitation is that of size. Four case studies of
principals is a small sampling. The second limitation is time.
A longitudinal study over the course of more years may
provide information. The third limitation is that the primary
source of data was interviews. A wider range of data sources
16


I
I
such as videotaping and reflective journals could provide more
triangulation.
i
i
17


CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter examines the literature pertaining to the
role of the principal in improving the beginning teacher who is
experiencing problems. To help teachers improve the principal
needs to understand good teaching and how competent
principals can encourage it. The principal's job is multi-
faceted. It involves being responsible for the safe and
productive operation and management of the school, monitoring
student achievement, initiating staff development, supervising
and evaluating certified and classified staff, and being an
instructional leader who clearly articulates and embodies the
shared vision and mission. In addition to these charges, the
principal must help struggling novice teachers to improve.
Therefore, I will first Jiscuss what the literature says about
conceptions of good teaching, looking at the evolution of good
teaching over time.
!
18


Overview
This chapter explores the research in four major areas.
First, a discussion of correlational studies of effective
teaching is provided to establish a historical perspective.
Next, contemporary conceptions of good teaching and the role
of the classroom teacher is inspected to demonstrate a shift
in how effective teaching is currently viewed. This is
followed by investigating the literature on the importance of
teacher self-concept. Finally, an inquiry of the role of the
principal on teacher improvement is reviewed.
Correlational Studies of Effective Teaching
Research on teacher effectiveness dates back to the turn
of the century. During this time, different stages of research
into good teaching have emerged. Early research includes
presage product research, input-output research, process-
product research, and task-view research.
19


Presage-Product Research
Research done in the during the forties, fifties, and early
sixties of the nineteenth century established the "trait"
research and the development of rating scales which resulted
in the "presage product" approach. Presage variables are
defined as those characteristics that teachers have before
they enter the classroom. They include attitude and
personality as well as their standardized test scores, grades,
and experience. The driving purpose of this body of research
was to try to demonstrate a correlation between initial
teacher characteristics and subsequent teacher effectiveness.
Test scores were not found to be good predictors of
actual teaching performance (Shields & Richards, 1982, p. 20).
Numerous studies (Seagoe, 1949; Shea, 1955; Thacker, 1964)
correlated pre-service teachers' National Teacher Examination
scores with undergraduate grade point averages, success in
school teaching, and graduate school scores. The studies find a
close correlation between the teacher examination and the
grade point average. Earlier studies done with inservice
teachers (Flanagan, 1941; Lins, 1946) dealt with correlating
National Teachers Examination scores with
20


principal/supervisor ratings of personal characteristics of
teachers, classroom observations, and student gain scores. A
low correlation existed in each area.
Other presage variables studied were teacher years of
experience and permanent certification. LuPone (1961) found
teachers who held permanent certification received better
ratings than probationary teachers in planning and organizing,
making subject matter more meaningful, using classroom
materials effectively, being understanding toward children,
and using outside resources to understand the child better
(Shields & Richards, 1982). These and other studies have not
produced reliable information concerning the relationship
between teacher characteristics and student achievement
(Dunkin & Biddle, 1974).
Input-Output Research
Another tradition of research on school effectiveness,
gained attention in the 1960s included the input-output
studies. In this type of research, the school was treated as a
business which transformed inputs such as books, physical
plant, equipment, activities, student characteristics, and
teacher characteristics into outputs such as achievement
gains, increments of knowledge, or change in attitude. Bridge,
21


Judd, and Moock (1979) suggest the outcomes include
standardized test scores, intelligence test scores, and higher
order cognitive and affective outcomes. Researchers have
attempted to determine the optimal combination of inputs to
produce the best measure of a school's output or effectiveness.
Studies done involving inputs such as instruction and
materials used to teach reading and vocabulary (Bowie & Levin,
1968; Levin, 1971; Winkler, 1975) had their effectiveness
measured by standardized tests. However, standardized test
scores are subject to criticism as a measure of outcomes due
to distortions in school curriculum and test maker
assumptions, inadequate norms, group testing situations, and
computer-read answer sheets. Bridge, Judd, and Moock (1979)
assert these assumptions cannot always be substantiated.
Unlike the presage studies which sought to relate teacher
characteristics and student achievement, the input-output
studies of the 1960s were used to support a view that
teachers were not differentially effective.
Process-Product Research
In 1966, the Coleman Report created quite a sensation,
particularly with the claim that teachers, or more accurately
variations among teachers, do not make a difference in student
22


academic achievement. Coleman professed that student
background variables explained most differences in student
learning, not teacher or school variables.
Educators were amazed by the idea that teachers made no
difference in student learning outcomes. However, it was
argued that Coleman's findings included no data on the actual
teaching events in the classroom. It was in this context that
researchers moved towards observing and recording actual
teaching and classroom behaviors which were thought to
influence student learning. This new organizing framework for
effective teaching research was called process-product
research.
In this new research paradigm, educational researchers
measured variations in the way teachers taught, documented
these variations, and then measured student outcomes through
widely accepted standardized tests. The results of these
studies brought promising news to teachers because
differences were being measured which could be attributed to
teaching. In the same realm, Rosenshine and Berliner (1978)
defined a variable called "academic engaged time" which later
was referred to as time on task". Fisher (1978) assessed the
relationship between the amount of instructional time and
student achievement, and found that these two variables were
positively related.
23


Most process-product studies, whether in agreement on
the identification of effective teacher qualities or not, relate
in some way to the study of pedagogy, and the methods of
teaching which constitute the science and art of teaching.
Product-process researchers came up with broad implications
as predictors of student achievement and some useful ideas
for improving teaching practice. The process-product research
culminated in the 1970s.
Task View Research
In the late nineteen seventies and early nineteen
eighties, the task-view of teaching gained support. This view
operates on the assumption that it is what teachers
accomplish, not what they are or what they do, that makes
them effective. If teachers accomplish specific classroom
tasks, and the students respond with appropriate classroom
behaviors, then it is assumed that student learning will occur.
As this research continued, it was soon realized that
there was an inherent weakness in using standardized tests as
the absolute measure of student learning. Berliner (1976)
emphasized that one problem in studying the teaching process
is estimating how much can legitimately be expected of
teachers or schools as an influence on student growth. He
24


noted that procedures were needed to reduce the influence of
intelligence and ethnicity on test performance in studies of
teacher effectiveness. Berliner further commented that unless
we systematically screen standardized testing materials,
tests will not be very reactive to teaching.
Teaching is a complex set of interactions, which vary
with context and its effects. Researchers are utilizing studies
from the past and are starting to organize this information
into the long-term characteristics of teaching and its effects.
The effects are being based on learning experience and
classroom observation to form empirically based theories of
teaching. Those in the field of education now realize that the
process-product paradigm of the 1970s and the task view of
the 1980s are oversimplifications of classroom instruction
and student learning. These categories were the historical
foundation for designating good teaching. In the 1980s a
distinct shift occurred to more contemporary conceptions of
effective teaching.
Contemporary Conceptions of Good Teaching and the Role of the
Teacher in the Classroom
This section focuses on more contemporary conceptions
of what good teaching looks like. The discussion includes
i
25


teacher expectations and student achievement, teacher
thinking and decision making, interactive decision making of
teachers, expert teachers, teacher as manager of the learning
process, and teacher as facilitator of a caring community.
Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement
Brophy (1981) and Good, Grouws, and Ebmeier (1983),
focused more closely on why teachers do what they do and
what functions are being served by their behaviors. In the
mid-eighties, the research supports a direct correlation
between expectations teachers have for their students and the
achievement demonstrated by them (Sadker & Sadker, 1985:
Brophy, 1985: Good, 1983). Teacher Expectations and Student
Achievement (T.E.S.A.), a teacher-training program designed to
reduce the negative effects of low teacher expectations
resulting in improvement in student achievement and
attitudes, demonstrates this correlation. Rosenthal and
Jacobson (1968) hypothesized that teachers form expectations
for students which cue particular behaviors and result in
students' performance being shaped by these expectations.
Meanwhile, Good and Brophy (1969) found that students
respond to teachers' expectations. In addition, Rogers (1969)
concluded that students learn best from teachers who engage
26


in strategies which promote student self-esteem. Kerman,
Kimball, and Martin (1980) state that all students have a right
to learn from teachers whose interactions promote equity and
personal regard. Hunt (1987) concluded that affective factors
are an important dimension of the teaching-learning process
and that the ways in which teachers respond to students and
classroom situations relate to cognitive outcomes such as
achievement and behavior. Joyce and Showers (1988)
demonstrated that teachers can learn behaviors by practicing
strategies and methods, which positively impact the
performance of their students. These studies corroborate a
connection between how teachers behave and how well their
students perform.
Teacher Thinking and Decision Making
A more extensive and complex picture of the teaching
career appears as research is developed on teacher thinking
and decision making. The interactive decision making of
teachers (Clark & Lampert, 1986) in classrooms with high
levels of on-task behavior and higher achievement test scores
is characterized by "chunking" numerous events and cues into a
few categories, differentiating cues and events by their
importance, and being willing to change the direction of
27


classroom interaction when necessary. Clark and Lampert
(1986) stress how and why teaching is cognitively demanding
and caution about the hazards of developing a body of technical
guidelines or rules for practitioners as a basis for work in
teacher education.
They go on to say that a teacher's role is to produce
intellectual and behavioral changes in students as they
interact with one another. As these issues were dealt with in
the mid to late eighties, the focus of teaching became more
holistic. Short (1985) looked at teacher competence
holistically and described competence as a quality of a person
or a state of being. Holistic conceptualization establishes an
understanding of which quality is to be identified in a person.
Short (1985) explains that a theory of teaching competence
interrelates whatever dimensions of the activity are
considered integral to it, including behaviors, performances,
knowledge, skills, levels of sufficiency, and anything else that
may seem relevant, such as intents, motives, attitudes,
particular qualities, or states of being. As Berliner (1986)
studied this holistic sense of competence, he began to focus on
what he calls the expert teacher."
28


Expert Teachers
Sabers, Cushing, and Berliner (1991) found that expert
teachers (over five years of experience in a wide range of
courses and grade levels) are able to monitor, understand, and
interpret events in more detail and with more insight than
either novices (those who expressed interest in teaching but
had no training or experience in public school teaching) or
advanced beginners (student teachers or first year teachers).
Experts, advanced beginners, and novices significantly
differed in terms of making sense of what they observed.
Expert teachers were found to be significantly more effective,
when asked to make meaning from their observations, than
other participants. Expert teachers demonstrated observable
practices that have causes and effects that can be measured
Wittrock (1986). Complexity is generated because these
practices, causes, and effects are multifaceted, contextually
bound, and difficult to conceptualize and study effectively.
29


Teacher as Manager of the Learning Process
Today the role of the teacher is no longer one of imparter
of knowledge, but rather, that of being a manager of the
learning process. Teachers are expected to utilize a variety of
data sources to determine students' current understandings
and to measure their growth. Data then guide the teacher in
assuring that students are actively engaged in learning
experiences that accommodate specific learner needs (Schurr,
1996; Stooksberry, 1996; Weintraub, 1992; Winter, 1971).
Teacher as Facilitator of a Caring Community
A growing perception exists that classrooms need to be a
caring community where warm relationships flourish among
students and between students and the teacher. It not only
creates a pleasant environment, but it also can be supported
that this kind of classroom fosters academic achievement
(Rost, 1991). Additionally, this atmosphere promotes
attitudes which are congruent with good citizenship
(Glickman, 1990). Therefore, teachers must create these
caring environments within their classrooms where students
30


feel safe and connected to others (Lewis, 1992; Lewis, 1994;
Kohen, 1992, Kaplan, 1997, Bateman, 1991; Bateman, 1996).
Clark and Lamped (1986) state that a large pad of what
guides a teacher's thinking, planning, and decision making,
then, is the goal of maintaining a productive social system.
In reviewing past research, it becomes clear that
defining teacher effectiveness is a multifaceted task.
Assessing a teacher's effectiveness cannot be done in one
setting with one form of examination or assessment tool. No
well-defined standard that all effective teachers meet seems
to exist. Reviewing the research demonstrates that effective
teaching requires extensive and complex variables. It is no
wonder that not all teachers can meet this challenge and be
effective. Beginning teachers frequently enter their
profession feeling uncedain and unprepared. Novice teachers'
lack of confidence, linked with the complexity of good teaching
poses some challenges for principals. Consequently, principals
must have a firm understanding of good teaching, and be
willing and able to assist and mold new, weak teachers into
successful ones. Therefore, a crucial question arises: how can
a building principal transform a shaky, new, and ineffective
teacher into one who succeeds with students?
To gain understanding of these phenomena is the central
purpose of research on teaching, but it is unreasonable to
31


believe that our understanding will often be expressed as
simple, universally applicable propositions. Instead, if
teaching is complex, then our theories concerning it must be
complex also. Moreover, any attempt to apply the results of
research on teaching must surely take into consideration the
contingencies those theories suggest. Research continues in
order to determine what helps nurture effective teaching.
Importance of Teacher Self-Concept
This section defines self-concept and more specifically
teacher self-concept and expounds on why it is a critical
element of good teaching. Additionally, it speaks to how
principals can further enhance the teacher self-concept.
As long ago as Homer's historic epic poem, The Odyssev.
the idea of one's worth was considered. Homer developed the
theme of an appreciation for one's own worth, an emphasis on
the value of self-concept, a presentation of techniques for
encouraging and contributing to others' self-concept and their
personal and social responsibility, and an emphasis on the
importance of building an atmosphere of trust through
recognizing personal feelings and giving others permission to
do the same.
32


Teacher Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy
Munson (1991) reports that almost one-third of teachers
today suffer from low self-concept to the point where it
cripples their effectiveness with students. Aspy (1969) used
the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale and found that the mean
total score for sixty-four secondary teachers was below the
twenty-fifth percentile. Comb's (1965) conclusion that good
teachers feel basically adequate, rather than inadequate,
supports the theory that a teacher's self-perception is of
central concern. Aspy (1969) conducted a study which found
that the average amount gained by students of the high self-
concept teachers was substantially more than the students of
those teachers having lower self-concepts. This study
supports the general hypothesis that there is a correlation
between the levels of teacher self-concept and the cognitive
growth of students. The great potential for growth is released
when educators recognize the power of their own positive
self-concept (Knight & Knight, 1991). Educators shape the
lives and minds of our children, sometimes to a greater extent
than their parents (Munson, 1991).
33


Reasoner (1988) states that one of the most alarming
issues for children today is low self-concept. He suggests
that one of the primary ways to start building the self-concept
of children is to build the self-concept of their teachers.
Teachers influence the students' self-concept (Aspy, 1969).
O'Hara (1989) reviews studies which suggest that faculty
self-concept is the central variable in student learning.
Definition of Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy
James (1980) argues that feelings of self-worth derive
from perceptions of where one sees oneself in relation to
others whose skills and abilities are similar. A formal
definition of self-esteem is the disposition to experience
oneself as competent to cope with the basic challenges of life
and as worthy of happiness (Brandon, 1994). Self-efficacy
(being capable of producing a desired result) and self-respect
are essential components of self-concept. The experience of
self-efficacy generates the sense of control over one's life
that is associated with psychological well-being. Low self-
efficacy tends to produce discomfort with the new and
unfamiliar and over attachment to yesterday's skills. Higher
self-efficacy makes it easier to move up from an earlier level
34


of knowledge and development and to master new knowledge,
skills, and challenges (Sanderlands, Brockner, & Glynn, 1988).
Bandura (1977,1978,1981,1982) describes self-efficacy
as a cognitive mechanism that regulates behavior as an
individual gains a conviction of personal competence: when the
person believes he or she has mastered the behaviors
necessary to achieve a desired outcome, a sense of efficacy is
developing. This shows a relationship between self-efficacy
and a person's professional self-concept.
Professional Self-Concept Associated With Teacher Efficacy
Ashton and Webb (1986) postulated that high
professional self-concept was associated with effectiveness
among teachers. They build a strong foundation for the
evolution of their definition of teachers' sense of efficacy as
. . teachers' situation specific expectation that they can help
students learn. Teachers' efficacy expectations influence
their thoughts and feelings, their choice of activities, the
amount of effort they expend, and the extent of their
persistence in the face of obstacles'1 (p. 3). Positive self-
concept in teachers appears to be a resource which frees these
teachers to assume the supportive helping relationships
needed for enhancing achievement in students. Nearly all
35


beginning teachers enter the profession with an attitude of
strong efficacy. As they proceed with their careers, however,
this attitude may degenerate into a feeling of hopelessness
(Handley & Thompson, 1992). A study to determine the
relationship of teacher efficacy to teachers' self-concept as
measured by the Myself as a Teacher Scale revealed that
successful efforts made by the novice teachers were more
related to their self-concepts. They hypothesized that
teachers with high professional self-concept would also
demonstrate teacher efficacy. They designed a study to
investigate the relationship between preservice teachers'
self-concept and their sense of efficacy. Data showed a
positive relationship between teacher efficacy and self-
concept.
$eifJ3e.spe.ct
Equally as important as self efficacy to self-concept is
self-respect. Self-respect is the conviction of one's own
value. It is feeling proud of and satisfied with one's moral
choices. Three basic premises of self-respect are: (a) people
who respect themselves acts in ways that confirm and
reinforce this respect, such as requiring others to deal with
them appropriately, (b) if people do not respect themselves,
36


they will tend to act in ways that lower their sense of value
even further, and (c) people wishing to raise their level of
self-respect must act in ways that cause it to rise. This
begins with a commitment to the value of one's own person,
which is then expressed through congruent behavior (Brandon,
1994).
Teacher Efficacy and Locus of Control
Teachers with a strong sense of efficacy demonstrate a
"can do" attitude toward overcoming problems. According to
Brophy and Evertson (1976), such feelings of efficacy
discriminate between more effective teachers and less
effective ones. Efficacy among teachers is associated with
their locus of control, internal or external. Externally
controlled teachers in the Brophy and Evertson study tended to
blame others and other factors, such as the cultural milieu,
poor parental support and inadequate teaching facilities, for
poor achievement in students. In contrast, teachers with
internal control traits, rather than make excuses or "give up"
tended to redouble their instructional efforts, giving reluctant
learners more attention by modifying their instructional
activities and increasing instructional time with them. The
37


internally motivated teachers assumed personal responsibility
for the students not learning as expected.
To expand understanding of this concept, Medway and
Rose (1981) designed a scale to measure teachers' generalized
expectations for external-internal control over student
success and failure in the classroom. They developed a schema
including expectancy influences, attribution theory, and social
learning theory. From here, they delved into Rotter's (1966)
work, the internal-external locus of control construct,
adapting Rotter's scale to their research. Rotter's scale was
not designed to measure expectancies associated with
classroom teaching or to be predictive of classroom process
variables and teaching outcomes. Their methodical review
demonstrated the need for an instrument specifically designed
to measure elementary school teachers' perceptions of control
in the classroom.
Attribution Dimensions That Affect Efficacy Expectations
As Medway and Rose (1981) address attribution theory,
so do Ashton and Webb (1986). Both of these studies
referenced and built on Weiners' work done in 1979 which
identified three attribution dimensions that affect efficacy
expectations: (a) stability, (b) locus, and (c) control. Stability
38


speaks to the cause of success or failure as fixed or
fluctuating; locus focuses on the cause being either internal or
external to the individual; and control refers to whether the
cause is controllable or uncontrollable. According to Weiner,
attributions of stable, internal, and controllable are most
likely to lead to positive efficacy expectations. Ames (1975)
concluded that teachers' attributions are influenced by the
situation, the feedback and knowledge teachers have about
their own and their students' performance, along with the
teachers' values. This analysis is consistent with Heider's
(1958) view that attributions are affected by "what ought to
be" (value belief) and "what one would like to be" (self-worth
belief), in addition to "what is" (perception of situation)
(P-109).
The concept of locus of control, aligned with teacher
efficacy, offers another way to look at living by choice or by
chance. Locus of control relates to who or what determines
actions. Most people come from one orientation or the other;
the internal orientation implies accountability, the external
orientation relies on blame. Teachers who have an internal
orientation are able to assist students to begin making their
choices from an internal locus of control. Students who
choose from internal orientation believe in their ability to
create what they want and to make it happen in their lives.
39


Teachers who see themselves as successful are more able to
empower children to be successful.
Expectations are Self-Imposed
James (1980) claims that expectations are self-imposed
and refer to personal levels of aspiration; success enhances
self-concept and failure deflates it. Self-concept is not a
substitute for the knowledge and skills one needs to operate
effectively in the workplace (Brandon, 1994). Self-concept
affects our emotions. Our feelings encourage or discourage
thinking to draw us towards facts, truth, and reality (Brandon,
1994). Hence, all actions involve choice. Teachers choosing to
have negative teacher beliefs or low expectations about
students influence classroom practices and may adversely
affect student performance (Brophy, 1985: Kuykendall, 1992).
Children need people in their lives who show them how life
works best (Munson, 1991).
Principal's Role in Encouraging Teacher Self-Concept
The way teachers feel about themselves is one key to
effective change in schools. Keeping this in mind, a logical
argument can be made that principals who behave in ways
40


which increase teacher self-concept and teacher efficacy will
also be raising student achievement. One would expect studies
of the principal's role in encouraging teacher self-concept to
exist, however, this has not yet been comprehensively
addressed in the literature. The following are related studies.
These three studies suggest the significance of the
principal's role. Hannum (1974) has examined how principals
can utilize teacher self-observation as a tool to encourage
change in self-esteem, O'Hara (1989) has studied the
importance of the leader in establishing the culture of faculty
self-concept for educational institutions, Freeman & Kalaian,
(1987) have examined the leader's role in building self-
confidence in teachers.
Bandura (1977) explored how self-efficacy can be
improved by testing derivations from the social learning
analysis of the process of change. He conducted an experiment
in which severe phobics received treatments designed to
create differential levels of efficacy expectations. Then, the
relationship between self-efficacy and behavioral change was
analyzed extensively. Consistent with the social learning
analysis of the sources of self-efficacy, experiences based on
performance accomplishments produced higher, more
generalized, and stronger efficacy expectations than did
vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, or emotional arousal.
41


It is important to note that the more dependable the
experiential sources, the greater the changes were in
perceived self-efficacy. Bandura (1977) discusses this from
the framework that performance-based procedures have proven
to be most powerful for effecting psychological changes.
Therefore, cognitive events are both induced and altered most
readily by experience of mastery arising from effective
performance.
It can be deduced that if teachers experience success
with students their perceived self-efficacy will rise, further
increasing their abilities. Results of these studies support the
thesis that generalized, lasting changes in self-efficacy and
behavior can best be achieved by principals utilizing
participant methods of powerful inductive procedures initially
to develop capabilities, then removing external aids to verify
personal efficacy, and finally using self-directed mastery to
strengthen and generalize expectations of personal efficacy
(Bandura, 1977). The question that arises is, what can
principals do to sustain the teachers' attitude of efficacy?
The Role of the Principal on Teacher Improvement
As I think back to my administrative training which
happened over ten years ago, emphasis was on teacher
42


evaluation more than supervision and coaching. I pulled my old
texts off the shelf, some titles that were studied at that time
were The Elementary School Principalship. Leadership for the
1980s (Krajewski, Martin, and Walden, 1983) and Educational
Administration and Organizational Behavior (Hanson, 1985).
As I flipped through the indexes neither supervision nor
coaching were mentioned. I reread the chapters on teacher
evaluation. This information was presented in a very
prescriptive routinized fashion. It covered how to be
objective, systematical, professional, and thorough. No
mention was made of relationship building, assisting the
teacher, or asking reflective questions of them. The
leadership style encouraged was managerial in nature. These
were autocratic directives in contrast to ways of improving
teaching. This seemed so foreigrr to what I have learned and
experienced over the last decade as I have tried to help
improve teaching. This upcoming section will begin with
historical background and then move to contemporary
alternatives for teacher improvement.
Evaluation and Supervision
In an ideal world, a separation between administrative
responsibilities and supervision is instrumental in
43


establishing an effective evaluation system (Bolten, 1973). In
much of the literature, (Bolten, 1973; Joyce and Showers,
1988; Bennett, Bennett, and Stevahn, 1991) supervision is
referenced as a cooperative, non threatening experience
occurring between two adults who have a relationship of
professional collaboration. As a part of this relationship, goal
setting, conferencing, suggestions about teaching behaviors,
data collection, and reflection on student assessment are
encouraged.
However, in reality, 80% of instructional supervision is
conducted by principals who observe their teachers because it
is required by their districts' evaluation system. Both the
teacher and the supervisor are inhibited because it becomes
difficult to operate in an open and collegial manner.
Administrators can never completely become a peer to
teachers. Under some conditions on some occasions, some
administrators may be able to act more like instructional
supervisors than building administrators. Evaluative systems
need to make efforts to separate administrator as
administrator and administrator as supervisor (McGreal,
1988). This section examines the historical perspective of
teacher evaluation and speaks to the shift in contemporary
ideas of supervision.
44


Traditional Emphasis:Accountability or Summative
Function of Teacher Evaluation. As mentioned earlier,
traditionally schools have emphasized the accountability or
summative function of teacher evaluation. More recently, this
traditional view has come in conflict with one of instructional
improvement. In 1973, Bolton suggested that numerous
purposes exist for teacher evaluation. These purposes really
can be classified into two areas. The first centers around
personnel decisions or eliminating the "bad teachers"
(summative evaluation). The second is for staff development
(formative evaluation). Summative and formative evaluation
do not hold equal weight (Howsam, 1963), however, school
systems must address both.
Evaluation systems are defined (Me Great, 1983) by a
group of recommended policies, processes, procedures, and
instruments that guide the attitudes and actions of the staff.
In most school districts, principals execute the evaluation
system by implementing district policies, conducting and
documenting evaluation observations, holding conferences
based upon evaluation observations, evaluating the support
skills, keeping and using anecdotal records, providing
remediation to teachers who perform marginally, making
45


summative evaluations, and following due process dismissal
procedures (Glatthorn, 1997). School districts which are
recognized as successful most often make concerted efforts to
align the development and maintenance of what they want
their system to do and be and the systemic requirements
established. Most frequently the test in recognizing the
effectiveness of the system is evidenced by the quality of the
relationship between the teacher and the supervisor (Me Greal,
1983). Both common practice and research support that most
evaluation systems are composed of one or a combination of
the following five evaluation models.
Five Traditional Models. The first model is used by close
to 65% of America's school districts. It is called the "common
law" model. This model is characterized by longevity. It has
been around for so long that no one knows where it came
originated. It relies on simplified processes and procedures
which have not changed for years. It advocates high
supervisor-low teacher involvement. Additionally, evaluation
is synonymous with observation. This model includes the
observation checklists such as Madeline Hunter's which were
very widespread in the late 1979 s and early 1980 s and were
based on findings of process-product research such as T. E. S.
A. The same procedures are used with both tenured and non
tenured teachers. The emphasis is on summative evaluation,
46


using standardized criteria. This structure forces comparative
judgments to be made between and among teachers.
Dissatisfaction with this model grew, which set the
stage for the second most popular form of teacher evaluation,
goal setting (Iwanicki, 1981). The emphasis of this model is
on an individualized approach which contends that the clearer
the person is about what they want to accomplish the more
successful they will be. Procedures followed in goal setting
models include examining the situation, setting the goals,
taking action, examining results, determining if the results
are satisfactoryif so continue as planned- if not, devise
corrections. Many proponents of this model consider it a
philosophical mode rather than a technique. This model does
promote professional growth through correcting weaknesses
and enhancing strengths, it fosters a positive working
relationship between the teacher and the supervisor, it
focuses on the unique professional growth needs of individual
teachers, it clarifies performance expectations and sets
explicit criteria for evaluation, and it integrates individual
performance objectives with the goals and objectives of the
school organization (Iwanicki, 1981).
Of all teacher evaluation models, the one which
consistently generates the most controversy is that of product
models. Product models are those that use student
47


performance measures as a means to assess teacher
competency. This model is based on results of instruction.
Methods, styles, and processes are irrelevant; what matters
are student achievement scores, student behavioral changes,
student growth in skills, knowledge, and attitudes. This
evaluation model coincides with the task view of teacher
effectiveness. Usually either norm referenced (standardized
tests which determine a students performance in relationship
to the performance of others using the same measuring devise)
or criterion-referenced (a students status with respect to
some criterion or performance standard) are used. Borich
(1977) emphasizes that a number of variables contribute to
the inconclusiveness of this model. He states that factors of
parental expectations, the student's prior achievement,
socioeconomic status, and the intellectual quality of the
child's home life may have greater influence on the student's
achievement than the teacher. These things coupled with the
ethnic and socioeconomic discrepancies of tests create
concern for using this model of evaluation. Even though more
recent studies support the premise that teacher influence can
override the above stated factors, much resistance to this
model is prevalent (Hilliard, 1997).
The clinical supervision model stresses the importance
of the relationship between the teacher and the supervisor and
48


is supported by experiential data as being effective in
improving instructional practices. For clinical supervision to
be used most effectively certain guidelines need to be
followed. The first of these is the collegial nature of clinical
supervision. This model stems from the work of Cogan (1973)
and Goldhammer (1969), and Sergiovanni (1982). The
significance of the collegial interactions between the teacher
and the supervisor are designed to improve the classroom
teacher's performance through analysis of observed classroom
events. This model focuses more closely on supervision rather
than evaluation.
Depending upon the researcher there are a variety of
steps and labels for clinical supervision. However, general
agreement exists concerning the sequence of these five stages
of clinical supervision, (a) pre-observation conference, (b)
observation of teaching, (c) analysis and strategy planning (d)
post observation conference, and (e) post-conference analysis.
This model operates on the assumption that when teachers are
given enough information and encouraged to act on it, they will
be self directed to interpret and analyze this information to
improve their teaching. Distinction is made that this is an
effective supervisory model rather than an evaluation model
(Boyan and Copeland, 1974; Shinn, 1976).
49


The artistic or naturalistic model is rarely used in
schools, still draws on different assumptions from the other
methods. Sergiovanni (1982) discusses that the artistic
approach to supervision and teacher evaluation rests on the
belief that teaching is basically an art form, an aesthetic
experience. Eisner (1992) agrees with the idea of the artistic
development of the individual. Artistic approaches to
evaluation allow for the charting of the unpredictableness of
teaching and the recognition of the unanticipated meanings and
results detected through the process of teaching. This method
values these aspects of teaching, even though it is not widely
adopted.
Contemporary Models. Most recently, Glatthom (1997)
explored differentiated supervision. This approach to
supervision enables teachers to have options about the kinds of
supervision and evaluation they receive. This model provides
the non tenured and less effective tenured teachers with
intensive development, while the remaining teachers gain
options concerning how they will cultivate their professional
growth.
The intensive development model which is one part of
differentiated supervision differs from the standard form of
clinical supervision. Clinical supervision focuses on teaching
methods, while intensive development is concerned with
50


learning outcomes (Glatthom, 1997). The clinical supervision
model which is frequently used with ail teachers has a
superficial impact because teachers are observed only twice a
year (Badiali and Levin, 1984). The intensive development
model is designed for those who need it, and typically involves
at least five cycles of the supervisory process with multiple
observations. This frequency can take place because only a
few teachers are involved. In addition, clinical supervision
depends on one kind of observation which is followed by
analysis and conference.
Glatthom, (1997) professes that beginning struggling
teachers greatly benefit from the intensive development
model. In this model a variety of tools are used. These tools
consist of eight components. The first is a taking stock
conference which can take place at any time and may
substitute for the pre-observation conference. The pre-
observation conference is optional. Next, a diagnostic
observation of teaching helps the observer to collect data on
all aspects of both teaching and learning, which serves as a
purpose for diagnosing the teacher's needs. This is followed by
an analysis of the diagnostic observation, to identify a focus
for the developmental work. The fourth component is a
diagnostic debriefing conference between the supervisor and
the teacher to analyze the lesson and to reflect on it in
51


relationship to its significance to the development. The
coaching session comes next. The two parties meet to allow
for coaching on a specific skill that was identified through the
diagnostic process. Under this model coaching includes
providing a knowledge base for the skill, explaining the skill,
demonstrating the skill, providing for guided practice, with
feedback, and providing for independent practice, with
feedback. After this a focused observation of one skill occurs.
A form is designed to obtain information concerning the
teacher's use of that skill (Glatthom, 1997).
Finally, a debriefing conference is held which reviews
and analyzes the results of the focused observation. The steps
in this method are designed to foster teacher growth and it is
entirely separate from teacher evaluation. Whoever is
responsible for evaluation should not provide the intensive
development, because it is essential to have an open
relationship, and openness and evaluation tend to be
incompatible. A mentor-colleague would be an appropriate
person to provide this intensive development. It is key that
the mentor fosters reflection and collaborative inquiry,
instead of having all the answers and being the expert.
Administrators who support teachers by providing them
with the appropriate form of supervision and evaluation based
on their developmental stage, needs, and concerns, will see
52


positive outcomes in teacher behaviors and student
achievement.
Schools reflect the principal's leadership (Hughes,
Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993). Therefore, teacher improvement
requires a change in belief systems by building and
administration leaders and the teachers themselves.
Review of the literature supports several themes as
critical components in the process of principal facilitation of
improvement in novice, troubled teachers. These themes
include providing support and creating culture, caring,
empowering teachers, mentoring and coaching, team building,
and providing staff development opportunities. This portion of
the literature review will examine how these components are
crucial as factors in the role of the principal in improving the
new struggling teacher. Administrators will need to let go of
the prescriptions and reconceptualize how this improvement
will take place.
Providing Support and Creating Culture
The support and assistance of the principal, or lack of it,
plays greatly into teacher effectiveness. According to Bunting
(1997), Sergiovanni (1982), and Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy
(1993), teachers require a supportive culture in order to grow.
53


Principals can support new, as well as experienced teachers,
by (a) encouraging the teachers to remain open to change, (b)
helping teachers to be self-assessing, (c) urging teachers to be
learners in a major activity outside of school, (d) encouraging
teachers to focus on what is enjoyable to them about teaching,
(e) encouraging teachers to contribute to the growth of their
peers, and (f) encouraging teachers to develop interests
outside of teaching (Bunting, 1997). Leaders (principals) have
the ability to manage people's energy by changing what is
focused on to the positive.
All of the aspects of school culture mentioned above
involve communication. To feel supported teachers need
access to information and recognition. Recognition can be
given either in the active mode-verbal compliment-or
passivegiving another a job to do because you trust and have
confidence in them (Blanchard, 1997). Rewarding teachers is
an important piece of the entire process of increasing teacher
improvement. Educational leaders should encourage teachers
with regular praise and celebration of progress toward their
goals (Carter and Cunningham, 1997).
Building relationships with individual teachers and
promoting the concept of team (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy,
1993) is an essential criterion for the principalship role.
Team building is discussed later in this chapter. Marshall,
54


Peterson, Rogers, & Steele (1996) describe how school
administrators, operating from an ethic of care, conduct their
daily practice differently from administrators operating from
traditional leadership models. The traditional models
identified by Sergiovanni (1989) are the following: (a)
rational, (b) mechanistic, (c) organic, and (d) bargaining. These
are driven by scientific management, bureaucratic, collegial,
and political theories of management.
0.9 ring
A secondary analysis of data that were gathered with
career assistant principals (Marshall et al., 1996) showed
that practices of these assistant principals did not fit
traditional administration theories. Contrary to traditional
theory, the ethic of care was evident. Due to the fact that it is
often difficult to separate administrative practices from
organizational structure and professional norms, a secondary
premise was to identify how the demands of both the
organization and the profession interfere with the enactment
of caring.
Additionally, it was noted that typically care givers are
frequently disempowered. Caring is relegated to a low status
connected with teaching and female characteristics. However,
55


from their studies, the authors concluded an ethic of care can
provide administrators with a valuable perspective to guide
their moral reasoning and decision making. This supports both
Burn's (1978) and Rost's (1991) premise of the interactive
relationship element of concern leading to ethical
responsibility. Caring in school requires continuity of
relations and confirmations which means affirming others and
encouraging the best in others. This too, follows the
philosophies of Bums (1978) and Rost (1991).
The participants in the Marshall et al. study were
motivated by an ethic of caring rather than the rational choice
model, which seeks upward mobility. These individuals cared
more about what was happening to people around them than
they cared about money, status, and power. They exhibited a
concern for other people's well-being and a sensitivity to
individual circumstances, which is opposite of bureaucratic
values of efficiency, uniformity, and even-handed enforcement
of policies and rules. It becomes evident that the three
themes in this study revolve around connections, context, and
concern, very much like Follett's (1920) ideas. This type of
administrative behavior promotes followers' self-worth and
self-concept.
56


Empowering Teachers
As significant as caring is the importance of teacher
empowerment. The key to this concept is for principals to
encourage bottom-up involvement and top-down support.
Empowerment is a dominant theme in most organizations.
Rappaport and his colleagues describe empowerment as a
construct that ties personal competencies and abilities to
environments that provide opportunities for choice and
autonomy in demonstrating those competencies (Zimmerman &
Rappaport, 1988). Dunst (1991) suggests that empowerment
consists of enabling experiences, provided within an
organization that fosters autonomy, choice, control, and
responsibility. Such experiences allow the individual to
display existing competencies and learn new competencies
that support and strengthen functioning. In the school setting,
empowerment of teachers, administrators, and students is one
component of restructuring (Murphy & Everton, 1990;
Short & Greer, 1989).
Research supports the assumption that teacher
empowerment relates to greater organizational effectiveness
(Lawler, 1986). One of the fundamental common denominators
57


when attempting to empower teachers lies in the realm of
effective decision making at the local school site. School
systems are acknowledging that decisions are most effective
when made closest to the site where they will be implemented
and monitored. Teachers who influence the work of the
organization feel a greater commitment to meet effectively
and creatively the problems and opportunities that arise.
Lieberman and Miller (1984) found To empower others is to
give a stakeholder share in the movement and direction of the
enterprise" (p.149).
Principals who encourage teachers to participate
actively in making decisions create greater teacher job
satisfaction which results in better teaching and increased
student involvement and learning (Murray, Tinney, Lasseter, &
Atkins, 1993). Happy employees have higher performance
levels. Much debate about whether job satisfaction causes
productivity or productivity causes job satisfaction continues
to occur with researchers in private and public sectors (Petty,
McGee, & Cavender, 1984; laffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985). The
degree of job satisfaction experienced by teachers can be
correlated to the degree of teacher efficacy (Reyes, 1990).
Hoppock (1935) defined job satisfaction as any combination of
psychological, physiological, and environmental circumstances
that cause a person to say they are satisfied with their job.
58


According to research conducted by Goodlad (1984) and his
colleagues, teacher satisfaction is also related to the degree
of staff cohesiveness and the nature of problem-solving and
decision making climates within schools. Study findings
indicate that teachers' perception of empowerment relates to
their perceptions of school climate, which is shaped by the
school principal. Howard (1986) identified certain elements of
the school environment that relate to the school's climate.
Those include continuous academic and social growth, trust
and integrity, high morale, respect among all participants,
school renewal, cohesiveness, caring and opportunities for
input. Additionally, he goes on to identify effective
communication and positive approaches to handling conflict
relating to positive school climate. Teachers in schools with
positive school climate tended to have positive relations
(Rutter, Maugham, Mortimore, Ouston, & Smith, 1979).
Empowerment Impacts the Work of the Organization.
Teachers who perceive a greater sense of empowerment
believe that they impact the work of the organization. They
recognize that they have the power to identify problems,
institute change efforts, and be responsible for organizational
outcomes. Research suggests that teachers who have
confidence in their abilities and believe that teachers in
general make a difference experience less stress (Greenwood,
59


Olejnik, Parkay, 1990). Highly efficacious teachers showed
evidence of less stress than their less confident counterparts,
while at the same time displaying a locus of control which
was significantly more internally oriented (Reeves, 1982).
Empowered teachers tend to assume ownership of
organizational problems and their solutions. Therefore,
teachers may more openly evaluate the work of the
organization, both positively and negatively. Success comes
not from the detailed work done by the school, but mostly by
the staff whose "ownership" will not let the plan fail.
Participants put forth maximum effort to ensure success
(Murray et al., 1993). As in the self-managing team (Lawler,
1986), teachers take on the role of evaluator, monitor,
rewarded, and manager. Problem ownership produces problem
solutions. Based on this information, it becomes critical for a
principal to embrace and model the concept of empowering
their staff.
By giving teachers the power, we give them the control
to make effective choices and demonstrate their competencies
to influence student academic learning and organizational
potential (Boleman & Deal, 1994). Administrators' practice
has not always exemplified their awareness of the benefit
created for students and the school organization when
teachers, through feeling self-efficacy, assume the
60


responsibility for opportunities, innovations, problems, and
successes in schools.
Barriers to Empowerment. Empowerment consists of
opportunities that an individual has for autonomy, choice,
responsibility, and participation in decision making in
organizations (Lightfoot, 1986). It is significant to note that
the process of teacher empowerment does not always operate
smoothly. Several issues may arise. Not all building
administrators either want or feel comfortable having staff
share in decision making. There is a strong correlation
between building level administrators' commitment to the
process and the level of development and actual levels of
success of the implementation of the program (Murray et al.).
Secondly, when staff are empowered, the process of working
collaboratively takes more time by the very nature of
discussion, differing ideas and opinions, and implementation
factors. Third, studies conducted in schools that are
restructuring to create greater teacher empowerment (Short &
Greer, 1989) found that when teachers' involvement in school
decision making increases, the opportunities for conflict
increase due to disclosure of ideologies and perceptions that
usually are not disclosed in the traditional school structure.
The more teachers have input and involvement in critical
61


decisions about the direction of the school organization and
increased autonomy, the more complex the communication and
the greater the need for substantive change that may lead to
organizational conflict. Additionally, as the level of
empowerment increases teachers may even perceive less
positive climate in the school.
These barriers need to be acknowledged, accepted, and
dealt with. To begin, teachers should be taught effective
communication skills and positive ways of handling conflict
(Howard, 1986). Raising teachers' awareness and providing
training in conflict resolution assist in making conflict bring
about positive change. Next, teachers need to develop
organizational problem solving skills as well as planning and
implementation skills. This is best accomplished by a
systematic plan to teach these skills to teachers. Further
research has examined the role of leaders in organizations
with self-managing teams. Many conclude that leadership is at
least as important in organizations with self-managing work
groups as in traditionally structured organizations (Cummings,
1978; Hackman, 1986; Lawler, 1986). Leaders in an
organization with self-managing units need "unleaders"
(p. 411), those who lead others to lead themselves (Manz &
Sims, 1984). Hackman (1986) points out that leadership is
more important and more demanding with self-managing teams
62


than in traditional organizations. The role of the building
level administrator will increase in importance as bottom-up
initiatives occur. These administrators must facilitate
opportunities for teachers to be involved in decision-making
and communications between the instructional staff
andcentral office (Murray et. al., 1993).
Developing an Empowered School. When an empowered
school succeeds, it is because it has developed a program that
is unique to its own staff, students, parents, and community.
Glickman (1990) states "the process of how a school came to
such decisions is more transferable than the program. ... it is
only the general notion of informed, representative decision
making that can be easily transported" (p.72). Teachers need a
variety of opportunities to both practice and observe their
abilities around empowerment.
My experience in the nine years that I have been an
instructional leader has clarified for me that teachers
repeatedly need to be shown that the building leader listens to
their decisions, values them, and acts on them. The principal
must show confidence in teachers' teaching and decision
making abilities and be willing to structure enough time for
staff to discuss and decide school issues. It is equally
important for leaders to determine with staff which decisions
are group decisions and which are not. This is important for
63


several reasons: (a) it provides the principal with both the
right and responsibility to make decisions which need to be
made by the leader (my experience has been these are few in
number), (b) this is an up-front way for teachers to know
instead of having to guess what is within their domain, (c) this
is ethical in that it allows teachers to make decisions that
will have the greatest impact on them, and at the same time
frees them from those decisions which they have no interest in
being involved in (Barth, 1990 &1987: Sergiovanni, 1982).
Based on my experiences, I have learned that staff
members can respond appropriately when they are clear
concerning which decisions they have input in, which ones they
have complete autonomy on, and which ones are not within
their domain. The more they practice these skills, the more
competent they become. As teacher competence and
confidence rise so does their responsibility level. Soon
teachers are tackling tasks and problems which they never
would have considered previously. Even more significant is the
ownership for student learning. Because they have been given
the freedom to determine the curriculum, instructional
delivery, resources, teaching strategies, assessment tools,
remediation plans, parent involvement, and schooling issues,
they also accept the responsibility for individual student
learning. They soon come to believe that they have the control
64


to make sure all children leam. They quit blaming the
curriculum, parents, home life, the system, the society, and
other scapegoats.
Facilitative Interactive Power. Dunlap and Goldman
(1991), examine the facilitative aspects of power in analyzing
processes and outcomes in today's schools. The authors claim
facilitative, interactive power, has become essential when no
single individual or role commands decision making control
without dependence on expert knowledge and cooperation of
colleagues. Specific examples of such circumstances include
the individual education program process in special education
and current practices in clinical supervision. These
demonstrate the barriers of traditional concepts of power and
the usefulness of facilitative power for encompassing the
nature of professional interactions between principals, staff,
and nonprofessionals in schools. Facilitative power appears to
have two other benefits. First, facilitative power may
decentralize and enlarge the decision-making process by
utilizing more involvement by more actors. Second,
facilitative power encourages non-standardized approaches to
and solutions of problems. Facilitative power is not unlike the
integration which Follett (1920) speaks of in her work. This
also complements Astin's (1994) work which suggests the
65


importance of collaboration, creative power, empowering
others through trust, and facilitation.
Control to Empowerment. Bolman and Deal (1994)
suggest that leaders need to refine their roles from control to
empowerment. They reintroduce ancient ideas of Machiavelli
in which people thirst for the magical ingredient that will
provide direction, purpose, passion, imagination, and meaning
to collective activity. They call this "nurture emerging
leadership", where leadership requires a shift in emphasis to
the spiritual and human dimension. This is a softer side of
management which encourages leadership from many different
sources and engages people in trying to solve problems. This
supports both Rost's (1991) and Guzman's (1995) theories of a
reciprocal relationship. Guzman (1995) refers to this
reciprocal relationship as cocreative. It brings people with
conflicting points of view together to work out their
differences so organizations can be productive. Again,
Follett's (1920) views reemerge. Rather than emphasizing
rationality, control, and efficiency, leadership needs to
practice strategies of buildingcoaiitions, integrating, and
empowering.
Control and Deference in New Teacher Leaders and
Principal Relationships. Smylie and Brownlee-Conyers (1992)
conducted an exploratory study of control and deference in new
66


!
teacher leaders and principal relationships. They employed a
micro-political perspective, defined as the strategic use of
power in organizations to achieve preferred outcomes. Three
categories emerged: collaborative, controlled, and
confrontational. The findings reflect strategic, interactive,
and contextual aspects about the development of teacher
leader and principal working relations. Findings suggest that
ambiguities and uncertainties associated with new teacher
leader roles have significant implication for the development
of new working
relationships between teachers who assume those roles and
their principals.
Second, the direction in which principals and teacher
leaders attempt to define their roles and relationships appear
closely related to the perceptions, expectations, interests, and
prerogatives that they bring to their new relationship. Third,
the findings suggest that principals and teacher leaders do
indeed evoke strategies that influence the development of the
new roles and working relationships.
The study suggests that long-standing patterns of
accountability and control exist in relationships: patterns
create fragile balances in relationships, the authority role can
get in the way of relationships, and teachers conditioned to a
hierarchical view of school leadership associated with control
67


had more difficulty with interactive relationships. The
principals who were aware of this and worked with their
teacher leaders more as colleagues than subordinates were
more effective. Those new working relationships based on
collaboration diminished the effect of principal control. These
principals were building relationships and employing what
Rost (1991) calls relationship-based influence, which is
multidirectional, noncoersive influence.
The implications of this are great. Principals who have
helped their staff to learn how to be self-empowered benefit
the organization as a whole, because teachers have learned the
skills of taking initiative, collaboration, problem solving,
conflict resolution, and appropriate decision making.
Empowered teachers are excellent role models for students.
These teachers have the skills to assist students to be
empowered. Teachers who now own the responsibility for
student learning can transition students to own this
responsibility. This is what educators are ultimately striving
to accomplish. Teachers have become in control not only in
their classroom and in their school, but most significantly in
their own life and destiny. This power enables them to dream
the new possibilities (Fitzclarence & Giroux, 1984).
68


Mentoring and Coaching
Principals are responsible for selecting coaches and
mentors for novice teachers and on occasion being a coach or
mentor for beginning teachers, as a means of improving
teacher effectiveness. In Japan, New Zealand, and the Northern
Territory of Australia new teachers are helped to succeed,
through new teacher induction programs (Pacific Rim, 1997).
It becomes the responsibility of the entire staff to ensure the
new teachers' success. "Successful teacher induction
programs, while rooted in the cultures of each country, share
some common characteristics. New teachers are viewed as
professionals on a continuum, with increasing responsibility.
Novice teachers are not expected to do the same job as
experienced teachers without significant support. New
teachers are nurtured and not left to flounder on their own:
interaction with other teachers is maximized. Teacher
induction is a valued activity which exists for a purpose.
Developing and nurturing new teachers is considered the
responsibility of all the staff. All three of these countries
emphasized helping new teachers become better and not
merely "weeding out" incompetent teachers (Pacific Rim,
69


1997). This feeling of school community responsibility for the
success of the new teacher differs from that in the United
States. Models in the U.S. focus on one or a few mentors for
each novice teacher, instead of the entire group working to
ensure the effectiveness of the new staff member.
While the United States has not developed as
comprehensive induction programs as Japan and Australia,
numerous states have adopted legislation calling for inductee
programs which provide new teachers with an experienced
mentor. The rationale for teacher mentors is based on
utilizing the seasoned teachers' practical insights gleaned
form classroom experiences. Platt (1997), defines mentoring
as the study of a person. He elaborates on this concept by
noting the importance of the mentors' interactions with
students, their tone of voice, their responsiveness to students,
the methods and strategies they use, and their demeanor. In
addition to coaching, effective mentors foster supportive
professional friendships (Bennet, Bennet, & Steven, 1991).
Building principals play a significant role in the selection of
the mentors. Instructional leaders must be frequently visible
in classrooms and clearly be aware of the mentor teachers'
strengths and weaknesses. After analyzing the novice
teacher's areas of needed improvement, they can match the
teacher with a mentor that has strengths in the beginning
70


teacher's area of weakness. Typically, the experienced teacher
will mentor the novice teacher from one to three years. Good
role models are the number one form of programmatic
assistance (Kotter, 1988).
Other Forms of Coaching
Other forms of coaching can be initiated by building
principals or teachers. According to Joyce and Showers
(1988), all forms of coaching have the following three
components: (a) they are built on trust and support, (b) they
involve professionals who have a common understanding of the
skills, strategies, or other areas being coached, (c) and they
enable the sharing of teaching through activities that typically
include co-planning lessons, classroom visitations, and
follow-up discussions. Consultative coaching allows for an
administrator, a specialist, or a consultant to collaboratively
coach a teacher for professional growth. The characteristics
of this relationship are trust, support, and mutual respect.
Supervisory evaluation does not enter this relationship (Joyce
and Showers, 1988).
Cognitive coaching, another similar type of coaching is
discussed by Costa and Garmston (1994). Cognitive coaching is
nonjudgemental, relies on trust, facilitates mutual learning,
71


and enhances growth toward working independently with
others. The coaching relationship established among fellow
teachers, administrators and teachers, and administrative
peers utilizes strategies which maintain trust between the
coach and protege and develop flexibility in the learning
process. Goals of this form of teaching are individual
autonomy and collaboration.
Peer Coaching. Peer coaching is another form of
collegial support. Peer coaching or peer supervision (these
two terms are used interchangeably in the literature) has been
recognized as both comprehensive and thorough (Goidsberry,
1986). It implies a reciprocal nature among teachers and
colleagues. The mutual goal of all participants is the
continued development of professional practice and all
participants act as coaches (Swaby, 1984). In this model, the
colleague acts as the facilitator and a source of data.
However, it is significant to note that the observed teacher
controls the agenda, by identifying the focus, determining the
observational form, and taking charge of the debriefing. This
differs from supervision in that the two colleagues focus on
one aspect of development where the teacher wants feedback.
Because the observed has the power, the experience seems less
threatening (Glatthom, 1997). Studies conclude that peer
72


coaching has a positive effect on teachers' attitudes,
experimentation, communication, and changes in teaching
(Goldsberry, 1986; Smyth, 1983; Roper and Hoffman, 1986;
Bruder, 1987). Nevertheless, peer coaching is not free of
drawbacks. If teachers have not been properly trained they
have trouble being reliable data sources, they tend to give
excessive praise, and many teachers still find the experience
threatening (Roper and Hoffman, 1986).
Team Building
Taking peer coaching a step further leads to the concept
of teams. Business and industry have implemented the team
concept, where all members in the team are responsible for all
work (Ohmae, 1997). Schools have also begun to realize the
importance of collaborative teams. Mills and Poliak (1997)
address the matter of how principals can build and maintain
successful teams. They state that principals (a) should hire
new teachers, when possible, who have training and interest in
working in a team environment, (b) should orient new teachers
into the team concept and to their responsibilities on teams,
(c) should give teams of teachers autonomy to capitalize on
their group strengths, and (d) should provide continuous staff
development for teachers. Furthermore, when new members
73


are added to the team, current team members must be willing
to engage in give-and-take with the new team member in order
to evolve a strong new team structure. New teachers must be
willing to contribute to the team from their strengths and
backgrounds, while at the same time respecting team history.
Over time, and with principal facilitation effective teams can
evolve into self-managing ones (Lawler, 1986), where teachers
take on varied roles. Kousus and Posner (1994) claim the truly
effective teams are self-led. The facilitation of team building
is a skill principals can use to maximize teacher
effectiveness.
Providing Staff Development Opportunities
Provision for needed training is essential for fostering
teacher growth. Today's principal must ensure that teachers
are focused on student learning, must keep them aware of the
latest research and successful practice, and dialogue with
teachers about the continuous improvement of the learning
process in their classrooms. One huge criterion that the
principal needs to be responsible for is arranging the
necessary time needed for teacher development activities
(Glatthorn, 1997).
74


I
Culture which Encourages Teachers to Reflect and
Discover. Senge (1990), Barth (1990), Goodlad (1984), and
Drucker (1989) discuss the importance of democratic
principles as foundational in effective organizational systems.
Glickman (1998) speaks about a culture which encourages
teachers to reflect and discover, rather than being "given" all
the answers as one avenue which helps to promote democracy
in education. This idea can be traced back to Socrates and
Jesus. Jesus practiced discussion and interpretation. He
spoke in parables, so people could discern their own meaning.
Socrates frustrated his friends with his unwillingness to
teach and give them the answers. His method was to ask
questions, so others could form their own answers.
New Paradigms for Staff Development. Staff
development opportunities emphasize teachers being well
grounded in knowledge of teaching skills and functioning in
different kinds of schools with students who have a variety of
needs. In the past, and occasionally today, the school principal
will conduct staff development activities or will invite other
experts to work with the school faculty. However, most
recently principals have assumed the role of facilitator of
ongoing professional development experiences.
The type of staff development talked about in the
literature of the late 1990's, is markedly different from the
75


traditional short-term, information-transmission, expert
driven model of earlier years. Currently, staff development is
characterized by a high level of teacher involvement. Teachers
are now encouraged to engage in reflective thinking and have
numerous opportunities for participant interaction and
experimentation through individual activities, study teams,
and peer coaching (Licklider, 1997; McCombs, 1997;
Zimmerman, 1973).
One of the significant outcomes of today's staff
development efforts is the establishment of networks which
foster ongoing reflection, group reflection, and collaboration
from the training aspect, and after training while on the job
(McPike, 1995; Schmoker, 1997; McCombs, 1997; Zimmerman,
1973; and Bunting, 1997).
Another expectation in this more recent concept of staff
development is the goal of developing leadership skills among
teachers, which assists them in directing reform initiatives
within their schools
(McCombs, 1997; Zimmerman, 1973; and Gullatt, 1997).
Asa Hilliard (1997) did extensive studies on effective
staff development, and identified some common elements from
them. In each of the cases, the staff developer was a master
teacher providing the model for the novice teacher. They
actually demonstrated what they could do with students and
76


were available to be observed and critiqued. In every case the
staff developers were physically present during the entire new
teacher training process. Additionally, they were interactive
with these teachers in their learning environment which
follows best practice internship. Again, in every case, the
master teacher (staff developer) had evolved a theory as a
result of their effective practice. The theories were not all
the same, but each had a theory. Furthermore, all cases had
provision for ongoing focused feedback to the new teacher in
her own classroom. Time for deep reflection was designated
in all cases. Specific techniques were developed in all cases.
These were varied. At the structural level, a small range of
core elements exist in valid pedagogy. These techniques,
though important, are less important than what is classified
as "affect". The best teachers stress liberation, love,
relationships, and a caring environment with a sense of family
(Freire, 1973; Hughes, 1995: Willis, 1995).
In this new staff development paradigm, teachers no
longer are the "sponges" soaking up the wisdom of the experts.
Instead the emphasis is on having teachers teach teachers and
having all participants bring their experiences as they address
educational issues (Licklider, 1997).
Staff development is most effective when teachers agree
that it is based on student needs. If a group of educators come
77


together, identify the most critical area of student need, seek
the appropriate ongoing training, utilize a common language
and focus, and continually evaluate student progress, the
synergy invokes a determination to accomplish the goal
(Kousus & Posner, 1994).
The principal's role in professional development is to act
as a bridge in moving educators from where they are to where
they need to be in order to meet the challenges of guiding all
students in achieving higher standards of learning (Carter and
Cunningham, 1997). Effective school administrators support
confidence and experimentation. Leaders help their staff
members develop the courage to take responsibility, to apply
their full ability and skill, and to see that schools achieve
greatness (Fullan and Miles, 1992).
Clearly Articulating the Vision Through School-Wide
Initiatives
School improvement is an evolving journey. The ongoing
effective schools research speaks to this journey. In the
effective schools framework, the destination is both clear and
compelling: learning for all (Edmonds, 1981). The concept
includes equity in quality for all. In the first generation
effective schools research (Edmonds, 1978) five factors were
identified: (a) the principal's leadership and attention to the
78


quality of instruction, (b) a pervasive and broadly understood
instructional focus, (c) an orderly, safe climate conductive to
teaching and learning, (d) teacher behaviors that convey the
expectation that all students will obtain at least minimum
mastery, and (e) the use of measures of pupil achievement as
the basis for program evaluation.
In the second generation (Block, Everton, and Guskey,
1995) of effective schools studies instructional leadership
still remains important, however the focus shifts from the
principal as the primary source to a broader concept of
leadership that includes all adults, especially the teachers.
This is in keeping with the teacher-empowerment concept and
recognizes that principals cannot be the only leader in a
complex organization. With the democratization of schools,
the leadership function becomes one of creating a community
of shared vision and values. The role of the principal has
changed from that of being the "leader of followers" to a
"leader of leaders". Expertise is not considered to be only in
the leader, but rather, dispersed across many members of the
school. The role of the principal today becomes one of
facilitating the elevation of each organizational member's
potential to the optimum level (Burns, 1978).
Those leaders who facilitate the development of a
school-wide shared vision and focus, facilitate training for
79


skills to carry out the initiative, build in incentives and
resources, and help staff to build an action plan, have realized
increased student achievement (Hughes, Ginnett, Cuphy, 1993).
The research and literature cited in this chapter
demonstrate the need for the principal's role to shift,
particularly as principals work to improve teaching. My study
will examine these very issues by looking at the process that
four successful principals employ when working with
struggling novice teachers, in order to help them become
effective and competent in dealing with students. By delving
into the process, this study will help to fill some of the gaps
in the literature on this topic.
i
80


CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This chapter introduces the methodological framework
used for this qualitative exploratory study. The purpose of
this study was to examine how a school principal can
facilitate the improvement of struggling beginning teachers.
The study examines the teacher/principal interactions and
relationships of teachers who at one time were ineffective
with students and have significantly evolved to be effective.
The following questions guided the data gathering process and
interpretations for this study: (a) how do teachers who have
improved from struggling to competent teachers understand
their process of improvement, and the role of the principal in
that process? (b) how do principals who have successfully
coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching
process? (c) in cases of successful transition from struggling
to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the
teacher/principal relationship associated with the transition
process?
These questions were not the type that lent themselves
to numerical data, because they explore participants'
81


perceptions of processes and relationships. Because the
purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions of
teachers and principals in the teacher improvement process, I
selected a qualitative exploratory approach as a qualitative
researcher interested in "matters of motive and in the quality
of experience undergone by those in the situation studied
(Eisner, 1991, p. 35).
Twelve participants were selected to be interviewed
about the interactive teacher/principal improvement process.
Four principal case studies were done utilizing teacher and
principal interviews and observation. Of the eight teachers,
four were teachers the principals were currently working with
and still in the improvement process. This provided
opportunities for some observation of the interactions
between the teacher and the principal, as well as the
interviews. By interviewing subjects and observing the
interactions between these teachers and their principal, I was
able to note the process used for teacher improvement. Four
teachers constituted historical cases that recreated a record
of the process that took place from both the teachers' and
principals' points of view relating how the teachers
successfully transitioned from struggling to competent
teachers. The study of the four triads, each consisting of one
82


principal and two teachers, determined why these were
success stories. These triads are represented in Figure 3.1.
All four school sites were a K-5 elementary
configuration. Two of the representative schools were small
in population, under 350 students. These schools were
predominantly comprised of students identified as high risk
and from low SES homes. Class size was 14 students, in an
effort to better meet the needs of the student population. The
other two schools both have a student population of over 500
students. The administration and teachers defined the
majority of students as middle class. Class size ranged from
19-22 students.
The principals selected for this study were initially
chosen by me because of my personal knowledge of their
instructional leadership ability. I had been an assistant
principal with two of the principals and could speak to their
abilities from experience. The third principal was a
professional colleague of mine for ten years. Our principalship
careers very closely mirrored each others'. This principal is
recognized in her district as having the ability to improve
student achievement through high expectations of staff. The
fourth principal is also a colleague of mine. She is in the same
district that I am in, and I can attest to initiatives she has
implemented to increase student achievement. Furthermore, I
i
83


Figure 3.1
Principal Teacher Triads
Four triad cases were studied. Each triad consists of a principal and two teachers
that principal has coached or currently is coaching.
84


felt it important to speak with the superintendent in each of
the school districts to be certain that they endorsed all
principal participants as effective and exceptional
instructional leaders. It was imperative that I select the
principals with the most expertise as highly competent
leaders, so I could study exactly what they did that made them
so successful. As I suspected, the superintendents validated
my perceptions of all the principals. Three of the principals
were female and one was male.
I spoke with each of the principals and shared the
purpose of my study with them. Each was eager to participate.
Two of the principals gave me permission to invite all new
teachers in their building, those in their first three years, to
participate in the study. None of the schools had more than
three new teachers. Teacher participants were self-
nominated, based on their belief that they were having some
difficulties and struggling. Those feeling this way became
part of a developed list of potential subjects, from which I
chose two teachers per site. When I spoke with the new
teachers, I explained that they would be randomly selected.
Then, I approached these two principals to see if they agreed
that the selected participants fell into the struggling
category. All did.
85


Another principal was on special assignment in
preparation for opening a new school, therefore both of her
teachers were historical cases. The last principal had no new
teachers, so both of his were historical cases.
Interviews
An interview is defined by Borden and Bilken (1992) as a
"purposeful conversation, usually between two people that is
directed by one in order to get information" (p. 135, as cited in
Ely et al., 1991). Additionally, Berg (1989) referred to
interviews as a "conversation with a purpose" (p. 13). Seidman
(1991) asserted: "At the very heart of what it means to be
human is the ability of people to symbolize their experience
through language" (p. 32). My intent was to see the process
through the eyes of the participants; interviewing was
instrumental in this study.
Purpose of the interview
Information gathering is one piece of the entire puzzle.
Seidman (1991) talks about what the purpose of interviewing
is beyond information:
86


The purpose of interviewing is not to get answers to
questions, nor to test hypotheses, and not to "evaluate"
as the term is normally used. At the root of in-depth
interviewing is an interest in understanding the
experience of other people and the meaning they make of
that experience, (p. 3).
In order for me to understand what the participants
knew, I needed to ask questions that required thoughtful
reflection on the part of the participants. Bertaux (1981)
expanded on this thinking: "If given a chance to talk freely,
people appear to know a lot about what is going on" (p. 39).
Ely et al. (1991) augmented the idea of an interview
further than being a basic mode of inquiry (Seidman, 1991) to
the inclusion of nonverbal signals that happen throughout the
interview situation. "Interviews are at the heart of doing
ethnography because they seek the words of the people we are
studying, the richer the better, so that we can understand their
situations with increasing clarity" (Ely et al., 1991, p. 58).
Consequently, both the spoken words combined with the
nuances, gestures, and moods in the interviews were examined.
Interview Procedures
Interviews were conducted and audio-taped one-on one.
As the researcher, I used a semi-structured interview
i
87


Full Text

PAGE 1

I I I I I : I : I A Study of the Role of the School Principal in Facilitating the Improvement of Struggling Beginning Teachers A thesis submitted to the University of Colorado at Denver In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Educational Leadership and Innovation by Patricia Jean Arnold B. A., Tabor College, 1969 M. A., University of Colorado, 1988 1998

PAGE 2

1998 by Patricia Jean Arnold All rights reserved.

PAGE 3

This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy degree by Patricia Jean Arnold has been approved Alan Davis Linda Damon ;o; 'Date

PAGE 4

Doc. Patricia Jean Amold (Ph.D. Educational Leadership and Innovation) A Study of the Role of the School Principal in Facilitating the Improvement of Struggling Beginning Teachers Thesis directed by Professor Alan Davis ABSTRACT Four principal/teacher triads are studied to understand the process involved in the principal's role of facilitating novice struggling teachers' improvements. This qualitative exploratory study consisted of both teacher and principal interviews and researcher observation of teacher and principal interactions. The research questions that were answered were (a) How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent teachers understand their process of improvement, and the role of-the principal in that process? (b) How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? (c) In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the principaVteacher relationship with the transition process? These questions are important to answer because they contribute to the body of knowledge in the areas of the principal's role in instructional leadership and improved teacher effectiveness. Findings suggest that principals do affect teacher improvement. Principals who meet teachers' needs of being cared about, ensuring succeed, encouraging and reassuring them, giving them information, feedback, and suggestions, were those who created relationships which prompted the teacher to become more competent. iv

PAGE 5

The study found that in order for novice teachers to improve, their own needs must be met. If principals can fulfill these needs, then teachers can move beyond what they need to better understand and provide what children need and must have in order to achieve. Further this study suggests that teachers will feel that they can contribute more to student learning if they feel they are empowered to make classroom, curricular, and student related decisions. This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidate's thesis. I recommend its publication. Signed Alan Davis v

PAGE 6

DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my husband, Wayne, and my daughters, Betsy and Maggie. Wayne was my constant encourager, proofreader, and supporter. My daughters always exhibited their faith in my abilities and joined Wayne in being my advocates. All of them assured and motivated me during the long hours of studying.

PAGE 7

My thanks to my dissertation committee for all their feedback, support, and direction. Specials thanks to my advisor, Alan Davis, for his encouragement, assistance, and support during the last year.

PAGE 8

CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY. Statement of the Problem . Orientation and Problem Focus Framework .......... Questions the Study Will Answer Methodology . . . Implications of the Study Limitations of the Study 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Overview . ... Correlational Studies of Effective Teaching Presage-Produd Research Input-Output Research. . Process-Produd Research Task View Research . . Contemporary Conceptions of Good Teaching and the Role of the Teacher in the Classroom Page 1 3 7 9 11 12 16 16 18 19 .19 20 21 .22 24 25 Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement 26 Teacher Thinking and Decision Making . . 27 Expert Teachers . . . . . . . . 29 viii

PAGE 9

Teacher as Manager of the Learning Process 0 0 30 Teacher as Facilitator of a Caring Community 0 0 30 Importance of Teacher Self-Concept 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 Teacher Self-Concept and Self Efficacy 0 0 33 Definition of Self-Concept and Self Efficacy 0 0 34 Professional Self-Concept Associated with Teacher Efficacy 0 0 35 Setf Respect 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Teacher Efficacy and Locus of Control. 0 37 Attribution Dimensions That Affect Efficacy Expectations . 0 0 0 38 Expectations are Self-Imposed 0 0 0 40 Principal's Role in Encouraging Teacher Self-Concept 0 0 40 The Role of the Principal on Teacher Improvement 0 0 42 Evaluation and Supervision 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 Providing Support and-Creating Culture 0 0 53 Caring 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 Empowering Teachers 0 0 57 Mentoring and Coaching 0 69 Other Forms of Coaching 0 71 Team Building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 Providing Staff Development Opportunities 0 7 4 Clearty Articulating the Vision Through School-Wide Initiatives. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 ix

PAGE 10

3 METHODOLOGY 81 Interviews . 86 Purpose of the Interview . 86 Interview Procedures . 87 Flexibility Within a Structure . 89 Interviews as Stories. 90 Data Analysis . . . . 98 Cross Case Analysis. 101 4 CASE STUDIES 104 Triad One . 105 Principal One 105 Teacher One 106 Teacher Two 114 Triad Two ... .. 118 Principal Two 118 Teacher Three. 119 Teacher Four 128 Triad Three . 134 Principal Three 134 Teacher Five 136 Teacher Six 143 Triad Four ..... 151 X

PAGE 11

5. Principal Four . . Teacher Seven Teacher Eight THE ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL IN FACILITATING THE IMPROVEMENT OF STRUGGLING BEGINNING TEACHERS Research Question 1 Research Question 2 Research Question 3 151 152 159 165 166 173 183 6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 189 APPENDIX Overview. Findings .. Implications Limitations of this Study Recommendations for Principals Recommendations for Future Researchers Conclusion . Final Reflections A. Subject Contact Summary Page 190 191 197 198 199 201 202 203 204 B. Start Ust of Codes . . . . . . . . . . 206 REFERENCES ............................ 212 xi

PAGE 12

RGURES Figure 3.1 Principalffeacher Triads . . . . . . . . . . . 84 i l xii I II

PAGE 13

TABLES Table 5.1 Checklist Matrix of Variables of the Coaching Process .................................... 179 5.2 Cross-Case Data Analysis ..................... 186 xiii

PAGE 14

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION As I began my third administrative assignment, I was excited. I had changed school districts in order to work with a more diverse community of children. As the new principal of the school, I was eager to meet all the children. My first day in this school was .a day I will never forget. As I visited classrooms, I was in total disbelief as I heard one teacher after another screaming at children--being sarcastic, cruel, and demeaning in both their words and tone. I wondered why these teachers behaved in this manner. Having been a teacher, I believe in and value mutual respect, caring, and dignity. watched children, as their facial expressions began matching those of the teachers, looking very beleaguered. In this school, discipline problems were high, and student achievement was very low. I talked with individual teachers, trying to gain insight about what was happening. The school's student counselor became a reliable and credible source of information. Having been in this school for a number of years, she had seen four principals and numerous teachers come and go without 1

PAGE 15

improving either the quality of education or the school climate. From observing in classrooms, I realized that a large percentage of the teachers had low instructional skill levels, lacked classroom management strategies, and appeared truly unhappy at work. started to wonder how these teachers could be more effective. Even though the teachers in this particular school were extreme cases, my administrative experiences at five different sites were similar In every building, I observed teacher/student interactions that were alarming and puzzling. In most schools disturbing teacher behaviors were isolated to one or two specific teachers. I noticed that these were the people who appeared frustrated and unsure of their abilities. They were unable to actualize any potential to be truly effective teachers. Such teachers made me contemplate the components of effective teaching and behaviors which influence children. Components of teaching, effective or ineffective, and equivalent behaviors are established during a teacher's first few years. Even one year with an ineffective teacher can significantly impact children and their learning. Therefore, the role of the principal in coaching less effective novice teachers to higher levels of competence is crucial. 2

PAGE 16

Statement of the Problem Reflecting on these experiences prompted me to question what effective teachers do that makes children want to come to school, helps them feel good about being there, and instills in them a true desire for and love of learning. The importance of the teacher's role for student achievement is understandable. Historian-philosopher Henry Adams observed that because a teacher affects eternity, he can never tell where his influence stops (Ryans, 1960, p. 1 ). I wanted to discover if less effective teachers could grow professionally in their effectiveness and, if so, how. Focusing on the problem suggests that the role of the principal must be one which facilitates teacher improvement. Therefore, the problem of this study is how can a school principal facilitate the improvement of struggling beginning teachers? Over the years extensive research has been done on the characteristics of effective teachers which include their behaviors, curricular strategies and methods, knowledge, experience, classroom management techniques, personality, attitudes, and self-concept. For almost a century, discussion and research about teacher effectiveness have taken place. 3

PAGE 17

Additionally, almost any person can probably remember at least one very effective and one ineffective teacher from past schooling experience. The ineffective teachers are the ones who do not contribute much to student achievement. The quality of instructors and their teaching is the most significant factor for education in our schools (Ryans, 1960). Throughout the years, schools try new curriculum, different programs, increased state legislation, and numerous inservice programs to try to improve student achievement. My experience both as a teacher and a principal over the past nineteen years has been that effective teachers bring about student learning with any curriculum or program. I have also observed the converse; no matter how great the curriculum, resources, or programs, ineffective teachers are not able to facilitate student learning as successfully. Therefore, the questions that need to be answered are how do teachers become effective? What support and coaching do they need to be successful? Students and teachers are similar from the perspective of needed support. Teachers continually look for the opportune moment to assure student learning. Timing is essential; giving a word of encouragement, supplying some explanation to clarify concepts, asking reflective questions, and reinforcing already acquired skills at opportune moments contribute to 4

PAGE 18

student achievement. Just as teachers behaviors, strategies, methods, and experience affect student success, principals need to give the same kind of assistance to help struggling and unsure teachers succeed. Giving help to beginning teachers may increase the speed and quality of their improvement and prevent serious problems later. My study focuses on teachers who at one time have been less competent, less confident, and questionable in their ability to succeed with children. It examines the teacher/principal relationship and the coaching process which helps novice teachers to make significant improvements. It is natural for most beginning teachers to be particularly challenged the first few years. Many novice teachers have more than one area in which they need to improve. The difficulties that beginning teachers experience often contribute to inadequate teaching performance. If, indeed, struggling teachers can develop and change, I wanted to discover the specific processes that helped to create this improvement. As the school's leader, the principal becomes instrumental in teacher improvement. Therefore, I decided to investigate the principal's role in remediating the unsatisfactory beginning teacher. In an effort to determine how principals can facilitate the improvement of less skilled neophyte teachers, this study 5

PAGE 19

answered the following questions. How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent teachers understand their process of improvement and the role of the principal in that process? How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the principal/teacher relationship during the transition process? These questions are important to answer because they contribute to the body of knowledge about the principal's role in instructional leadership and improved teacher effectiveness. They also add to the research on principal supervision of teachers. It is first necessary to review the research on effective teaching. Doing this lays a foundation for understanding, through the historical framework, the evolution of research on the complexity of good teaching which positively impacts student achievement. This review of the research illuminates the impossibility of simplifying the conglomerate role of teaching to a formula or checklist of characteristics. The next area of research review pertains to the importance of teacher self-concept, and more specifically, teacher efficacy and locus of control. 6

PAGE 20

The last area of research turns to the role of the school principal in teacher supervision and coaching. Recognizing the multifaceted nature of teaching requires principals to reevaluate their role in establishing a support system, particularly for the novice teacher. This section speaks to how principals can facilitate the improvement of struggling novice teachers. Orientation and Problem Focus In examining the broader picture, it is significant to note that, for the last five years, in the United States productivity has been the highest in the world. However, public perceptions, often consisting ot criticisms of public education in general, still surface. As responsible educators, we must constantly explore as many avenues as possible to continue to improve education. Educators persist in looking for ways to raise student achievement. In response to state mandates, local districts are adopting policies created to test students' academic achievement. Some individual school sites have designated benchmarks and activities to support state standards. A number of schools discuss restructuring. Other schools are identifying and training staff in a variety of instructional strategies and methods in hopes of raising 7

PAGE 21

student performance. The .. effective schools movement (Edmonds, 1978) based on research and descriptions of effective school practices now spans twenty-five years. Successful school improvement based on the effective schools framework, like the effective school itself, is the result of a change strategy implemented over time through several phases. The focus continues to be on the mission of learning for all students. In the nationwide effort to reform public education, the question of what it means to be an effective teacher has taken on an appropriate urgency. If American public schools are to become places of excellence, then their most important human resource--teachers--must be carefully developed. With so many changes on the horizon, teachers responsibilities are increasing. The notion of teacher efficacy, ... is teachers situation specific expectation that they can help students learn ... (Ashton & Webb, 1986, p. 3) Teachers efficacy expectations influence their thoughts and feelings, their choice of activities, the amount of effort they expend, and the extent of their persistence in the face of obstacles (Ashton & Webb, 1986). Every teacher must be effective for students to learn. The reality is that not all teachers in school are effective. Principals need to become aware of what they can do to 8

PAGE 22

increase teacher effectiveness and teacher self-concept. Teachers usually need the most help during their first few years {Hannum, 1974). Therefore, investing time and energy in providing help to beginning teachers may prevent serious problems later. Hence, the problem of this study is how a principal of a school can facilitate the improvement of struggling beginning teachers. Framework The research on teacher effectiveness and the role of the principal mostly reflects a model of "recipesu for good teaching and supervision of teachers. Recently, a distinct alteration has been suggested in both the teacher and principal roles. Contemporary research speaks to the complexity of the job of teaching. Realizing this complexity requires a shift in the principal's role in improving teacher effectiveness from one of only supervision to that of coaching. I have modified the old recipe model of effective teaching to a framework which is composed of three distinct parts. The concept of teacher effectiveness can be viewed as a three legged-stool. The three legs are {a) conceptions of good teaching, (b) professional self-concept, and (c) principal support and coaching. In order to create balance and optimum 9

PAGE 23

stability, all three legs must be present. The first leg is constructed by utilization of the historical teacher effectiveness research which leads into more contemporary complex conceptions of good teaching. Tracing the historical teacher effectiveness research through the current constructs of good teaching provides a road map of valuable information which guides the process of principal coaching. Utilizing this body of knowledge assists the principal in facilitating the improvement of less effective beginning teachers. The second leg is the importance of teacher self concept, which includes the impact of the professional self concept on student self-concept, teacher efficacy, and locus of control. Review of the literature (Ekstrom, 1976; Munson, 1991; Pfeifer, 1983; Ryans, 1960) supports the significance of the teacher's role, not only from the perspective of teacher experience, strategies and methods, knowledge, and classroom management, but also from the perspective of the specific behaviors teachers exhibit. Teachers self-confidence and self-concept also are important in conjunction with effective teacher behaviors (Handley & Thompson, 1992). Behaviors are influenced by teacher self-concept, which is in turn influenced by teacher skills, teacher abilities, and teaching experiences. The circular nature of the self-concept is noted. 10

PAGE 24

The third leg is principal support and coaching. The principal role is beginning to change from a traditional approach based on teacher supervision and evaluation to a more contemporary model which emphasizes the teacher/principal relationship (Blanchard, 1997; Carter & Cunningham, 1997; Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993: Marshall, Peterson, Rogers, & Steele, 1996). This relationship consists of coaching, nurturing, enhancing teacher self-concept, and empowering teachers. Because educators shape the lives and minds of our children, sometimes to a greater extent than their parents (Munson, 1991 ), it is imperative that all teachers become effective. Using this three pronged approach will provide a framework for answering the question, how do school principals facilitate the improvement of less competent beginning teachers? Questions the Study Will Answer The following questions guided the data-gathering process and interpretation for this study. 1 1

PAGE 25

1 How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent teachers understand their process of improvement and the role of the principal in that process? 2. How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? 3. In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the teacher/principal relationship associated with the transition process? Methodology This qualitative exploratory study examines how a school principal can utilize the coaching process to improve beginning teachers' competency. A major part of the study is the development of several case studies of interaction between principals and teachers, studying four principals each in interaction with two teachers. The methodology consists of both principal and teacher interviews and some observation of conferences and dialogues between the principal and the teacher and, in one case, the principal and other support personnel 12

PAGE 26

Principals were selected based on the criteria of demonstrated instructional leadership. have worked with all four principals who are participants in the study and can attest to their instructional leadership capabilities. To further support their competence, I conferenced with each teachers superintendent to be positive that the principal fit the description of being an exceptional leader who was regarded in the expert status. Each was endorsed as a sound, highly effective instructional leader. This type of principal was important to my study because I wanted to discover exactly what the principals did to make them so capable and accomplished. The principals in my study represent multiple school districts. Teacher participation was determined by principal selection for the historical cases and teacher self-selection for the current cases. In all, eight teachers and four principals were studied. Of the eight teachers, four were historical cases. This allowed for the re-creation of a record or story of the processes that took place from both the teachers' and principals' perspectives relating how the teachers successfully made the transition from struggling to competent. The study examined why these were success stories. Four of the teachers are currently still in the improvement process; therefore, some observations of the 13

PAGE 27

interactions between the teacher and the principal took place in addition to the interviews. I conducted interviews with the teachers and principals, asking questions which elicited stories of change. Interview questions were research developed, pilot tested, and revised as needed. I began with a list of questions which guided the conversation allowing the participants to tell their stories. As the story unfolded, I modified questions so they were appropriate and encouraged things that were important to disclosing the stories. During the interviews, designated prompts were used and new questions arose as a result of respondents' comments. Further questions were asked for purposes of clarification or elaboration. This format allowed for flexibility in encouraging in-depth answers and adding richness to stories of improvement. Several interviews took place with those teachers who were currently in the process of improving. The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed for analysis. Clear differentiation was made between description of the interviews and observations and interpretation of them (Eisner, 1991 ). Interview data were examined along with field notes on the principal/teacher interactions. Information about the process used for teacher improvement surfaced due to the 14

PAGE 28

prevailing interventions. Through these observations and self reports from both the teacher and the principal, I was able to start identifying themes and commonalties leading towards teacher improvement. To analyze the data, I used triangulation of qualitative data sources by (a) comparing the perspectives of people from different points of view--teacher views and principal views, (b) comparing observational data with interview data, and (c) checking for consistency in what people say over time. studied and interpreted when and why differences existed (Argyris, Putnam, and Smith, 1985). Different kinds of data captured different things. I looked for consistencies in overall patterns of data from different sources. I examined the processes as I heard the stories of change. Recurring themes, commonalties, key phrases and -words were noted. In interpreting the data about the processes, I attached significance to what I found by offering explanations, drawing conclusions, making inferences, building linkages, attaching meaning, and describing data irregularities as part of testing for viability of an interpretation. 15

PAGE 29

Implications of the Study This study contributes new information to the field of teacher improvement, enhancing the quality of education for the children in our world. Additionally, it adds to the body of knowledge on principal supervision of teachers. The implications of this study are that teachers will have a better understanding of their process of improvement and principals will have a clearer awareness of their role as a coach for new teachers as they facilitate improvement. Understanding processes which lead to teacher improvement could result in replication of the processes as a means to more widespread teacher improvement. Limitations of the Study The first limitation is that of size. Four case studies of principals is a small sampling. The second limitation is time. A longitudinal study over the course of more years may provide information. The third limitation is that the primary source of data was interviews. A wider range of data sources 16

PAGE 30

such as videotaping and reflective journals could provide more triangulation. 17

PAGE 31

CHAPTER2 LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter examines the literature pertaining to the role of the principal in improving the beginning teacher who is experiencing problems. To help teachers improve the principal needs to understand good teaching and how competent principals can encourage it. The principal's job is multi faceted. It involves being responsible for the safe and productive operation and management of the school, monitoring student achievement, initiating staff development, supervising and evaluating certified and classified staff, and being an instructional leader who clearly articulates and embodies the shared vision and mission. In addition to these charges, the principal must help struggling novice teachers to improve. Therefore, I will first discuss what the literature says about conceptions of good teaching, looking at the evolution of good teaching over time. 18

PAGE 32

Overview This chapter explores the research in four major areas. First, a discussion of correlational studies of effective teaching is provided to establish a historical perspective. Next, contemporary conceptions of good teaching and the role of the classroom teacher is inspected to demonstrate a shift in how effective teaching is currently viewed. This is followed by investigating the literature on the importance of teacher self-concept. Finally, an inquiry of the role of the principal on teacher improvement is reviewed. Correlational Studies Of Effective Teaching Research on teacher effectiveness dates back to the turn of the century. During this time, different stages of research into good teaching have emerged. Early research includes presage product research, input-output research, process product research, and task-view research. 19

PAGE 33

Presage-Product Research Research done in the during the forties, fifties, and early sixties of the nineteenth century established the "trait" research and the development of rating scales which resulted in the presage product approach. Presage variables are defined as those characteristics that teachers have before they enter the classroom. They include attitude and personality as well as their standardized test scores, grades, and experience. The driving purpose of this body of research was to try to demonstrate a correlation between initial teacher characteristics and subsequent teacher effectiveness. Test scores were not foundto be good predictors of actual teaching performance (Shields & Richards, 1982, p. 20). Numerous studies (Seagoe, 1949; Shea, 1955; Thacker, 1964) correlated pre-service teachers' National Teacher Examination scores with undergraduate grade point averages, success in school teaching, and graduate school scores. The studies find a close correlation between the teacher examination and the grade point average. Earlier studies done with inservice teachers (Flanagan, 1941; Lins, 1946) dealt with correlating National Teachers Examination scores with 20

PAGE 34

principal/supervisor ratings of personal characteristics of teachers, classroom observations, and student gain scores. A low correlation existed in each area. Other presage variables studied were teacher years of experience and permanent certification. LuPone (1961) found teachers who held permanent certification received better ratings than probationary teachers in planning and organizing, making subject matter more meaningful, using classroom materials effectively, being understanding toward children, and using outside resources to understand the child better {Shields & Richards, 1982). These and other studies have not produced reliable information concerning the relationship between teacher characteristics and student achievement (Dunkin & Biddle, 1974). Input-Output Research Another tradition of research on school effectiveness, gained attention in the 1960s included the input-output studies. In this type of research, the school was treated as a business which transformed inputs such as books, physical plant, equipment, activities, student characteristics, and teacher characteristics into outputs such as achievement gains, increments of knowledge, or change in attitude. Bridge, 21

PAGE 35

Judd, and Moock (1979) suggest the outcomes include standardized test scores, intelligence test scores, and higher order cognitive and affective outcomes. Researchers have attempted to determine the optimal combination of inputs to produce the best measure of a schools output or effectiveness. Studies done involving inputs such as instruction and materials used to teach reading and vocabulary (Bowie & Levin, 1968; Levin, 1971; Winkler, 1975) had their effectiveness measured by standardized tests. However, standardized test scores are to criticism as a measure of outcomes due to distortions in school curriculum and test maker assumptions, inadequate norms, group testing situations, and computer-read answer sheets. Bridge, Judd, and Moock (1979) assert these assumptions cannot always be substantiated. Unlike the presage studies whichsought to relate teacher characteristics and student achievement, the input-output studies of the 1960s were used to support a view that teachers were not differentially effective. Process-Product Research In 1966, the Coleman Report created quite a sensation, particularly with the claim that teachers, or more accurately variations among teachers, do not make a difference in student 22

PAGE 36

academic achievement. Coleman professed that student background variables explained most differences in student learning, not teacher or school variables. Educators were amazed by the idea that teachers made no difference in student learning outcomes. However, it was argued that Colemans findings included no data on the actual teaching events in the classroom. It was in this context that researchers moved towards observing and recording actual teaching and classroom behaviors which were thought to influence student learning. This new organizing framework for effective teaching research was called process-product research. In this new research paradigm, educational researchers measured variations in the way teachers taught, documented these variations, and then measured student outcomes through widely accepted standardized tests. The results of these studies brought promising news to teachers because differences were being measured which could be attributed to teaching. In the same realm, Rosenshine and Berliner (1978) defined a variable called "academic engaged time .. which later was referred to as atime on task. Fisher (1978) assessed the relationship between the amount of instructional time and student achievement, and found that these two variables were positively related. 23

PAGE 37

Most process-product studies, whether in agreement on the identification of effective teacher qualities or not, relate in some way to the study of pedagogy, and the methods of teaching which constitute the science and art of teaching. Product-process researchers came up with broad implications as predictors of student achievement and some useful ideas for improving teaching practice. The process-product research culminated in the 1970s. Task View Research In the late nineteen seventies and early nineteen eighties, the task-view of teaching gained support. This view operates on the assumption that it is what teachers accomplish, not what they are orwhat they do, that makes them effective. If teachers accomplish specific classroom tasks, and the students respond with appropriate classroom behaviors, then it is assumed that student learning will occur. As this research continued, it was soon realized that there was an inherent weakness in using standardized tests as the absolute measure of student learning. Berliner (1976) emphasized that one problem in studying the teaching process is estimating how much can legitimately be expected of teachers or schools as an influence on student growth. He 24

PAGE 38

noted that procedures were needed to reduce the influence of intelligence and ethnicity on test performance in studies of teacher effectiveness. Berliner further commented that unless we systematically screen standardized testing materials, tests will not be very reactive to teaching. Teaching is a complex set of interactions, which vary with context and its effects. Researchers are utilizing studies from the past and are starting to organize this information into the long-term characteristics of teaching and its effects. The effects are being based on leaming experience and classroom observation to form empirically based theories of teaching. Those in the field of education now realize that the process-product paradigm of the 1970s and the task view of the 1980s are oversimplifications of classroom instruction and student learning. These categories were the historical foundation for designating good teaching. In the 1980s a distinct shift occurred to more contemporary conceptions of effective teaching. Contemporary Conceptions of Good Teaching and the Role of the Teacher in the Classroom This section focuses on more contemporary conceptions of what good teaching looks like. The discussion includes 25

PAGE 39

teacher expectations and student achievement, teacher thinking and decision making, interactive decision making of teachers, expert teachers, teacher as manager of the learning process, and teacher as facilitator of a caring community. Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement Brophy (1981) and Good, Grouws, and Ebmeier (1983), focused more closely on why teachers do what they do and what functions are being served by their behaviors. In the mid-eighties, the research supports a direct correlation between expectations teachers have for their students and the achievement demonstrated by them (Sadker & Sadker, 1985: Brophy, 1985: Good, 1983). Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement (T.E.S.A.), a teacher-training program designed to reduce the negative effects of low teacher expectations resulting in improvement in student achievement and attitudes, demonstrates this correlation. Rosenthal and Jacobson ( 1968) hypothesized that teachers form expectations for students which cue particular behaviors and result in students' performance being shaped by these expectations. Meanwhile, Good and Brophy (1969) found that students respond to teachers' expectations. In addition, Rogers (1969) concluded that students learn best from teachers who engage 26

PAGE 40

in strategies which promote student self-esteem. Kerman, Kimball, and Martin (1980) state that all students have a right to learn from teachers whose interactions promote equity and personal regard. Hunt (1987) concluded that affective factors are an important dimension of the teaching-learning process and that the ways in which teachers respond to students and classroom situations relate to cognitive outcomes such as achievement and behavior. Joyce and Showers (1988) demonstrated that teachers can learn behaviors by practicing strategies and methods, which positively impact the performance of their students. These studies corroborate a connection between how teachers behave and how well their students perform. Teacher Thinking and Decision Making A more extensive and complex picture of the teaching career appears as research is developed on teacher thinking and decision making. The interactive decision making of teachers (Clark & Lampert, 1986) in classrooms with high levels of on-task behavior and higher achievement test scores is characterized by chunking numerous events and cues into a few categories, differentiating cues and events by their importance, and being willing to change the direction of 27

PAGE 41

classroom interaction when necessary. Clark and Lampert (1986) stress how and why teaching is cognitively demanding and caution about the hazards of developing a body of technical guidelines or rules for practitioners as a basis for work in teacher education. They go on to say that a teacher's role is to produce intellectual and behavioral changes in students as they interact with one another. As these issues were dealt with in the mid to late eighties, the focus of teaching became more holistic. Short (1985) looked at teacher competence holistically and described competence as a quality of a person or a state of being. Holistic conceptualization establishes an understanding of which quality is to be identified in a person. Short ( 1985) explains that a theory of teaching competence interrelates whatever dimensions of the activity are considered integral to it, including behaviors, performances, knowledge, skills, levels of sufficiency, and anything else that may seem relevant, such as intents, motives, attitudes, particular qualities, or states of being. As Berliner (1986) studied this holistic sense of competence, he began to focus on what he calls the .. expert teacher. p 28

PAGE 42

Expert Teachers Sabers, Cushing, and Berliner (1991) found that expert teachers (over five years of experience in a wide range of courses and grade levels) are able to monitor, understand, and interpret events in more detail and with more insight than either novices (those who expressed interest in teaching but had no training or experience in public school teaching) or advanced beginners (student teachers or first year teachers). Experts, advanced beginners, and novices significantly differed in terms of making sense of what they observed. Expert teachers were found to be significantly more effective, when asked to make meaning from their observations, than other participants. Expert teachers demonstrated observable practices that have causes and effects that can be measured Wittrock (1986). Complexity is generated because these practices, causes, and effects are multifaceted, contextually bound, and difficult to conceptualize and study effectively. 29

PAGE 43

Teacher as Manager of the Learning Process Today the role of the teacher is no longer one of imparter of knowledge, but rather, that of being a manager of the learning process. Teachers are expected to utilize a variety of data sources to determine students' current understandings and to measure their growth. Data then guide the teacher in assuring that students are actively engaged in learning experiences that accommodate specific learner needs (Schurr, 1996; Stooksberry, 1996; Weintraub, 1992; Winter, 1971 ). Teacher as Facilitator of a Caring Community A growing perception exists that classrooms need to be a caring community where warm relationships flourish among students and between students and the teacher. It not only creates a pleasant environment, but it also can be supported that this kind of classroom fosters academic achievement (Rost, 1991 ). Additionally, this atmosphere promotes attitudes which are congruent with good citizenship (Glickman, 1990). Therefore, teachers must create these caring environments within their classrooms where students 30

PAGE 44

feel safe and connected to others (Lewis, 1992; Lewis, 1994; Kohen, 1992, Kaplan, 1997, Bateman, 1991; Bateman, 1996). Clark and Lampert (1986) state that a large part of what guides a teachers thinking, planning, and decision making, then, is the goal of maintaining a productive social system. In reviewing past research, it becomes clear that defining teacher effectiveness is a multifaceted task. Assessing a teachers effectiveness cannot be done in one setting with one form of examination or assessment tool. No well-defined standard that all effective teachers meet seems to exist. Reviewing the research demonstrates that effective teaching requires extensive and complex variables. It is no wonder that not all teachers can meet this challenge and be effective. Beginning teachers frequently enter their profession feeling uncertain and unprepared. Novice teachers' lack of confidence, linked with the complexity of good teaching poses some challenges for principals. Consequently, principals must have a firm understanding of good teaching, and be willing and able to assist and mold new, weak teachers into successful ones. Therefore, a crucial question arises: how can a building principal transform a shaky, new, and ineffective teacher into one who succeeds with students? To gain understanding of these phenomena is the central purpose of research on teaching, but it is unreasonable to 31

PAGE 45

believe that our understanding will often be expressed as simple, universally applicable propositions. Instead, if teaching is complex, then our theories concerning it must be complex also. Moreover, any attempt to apply the results of research on teaching must surely take into consideration the contingencies those theories suggest. Research continues in order to determine what helps nurture effective teaching. Importance of Teacher Self-Concept This section defines self-concept and more specifically teacher self-concept and expounds on why it is a critical element of good teaching. Additionally, it speaks to how principals can further enhance the teacher self-concept. As long ago as Homer's historic epic poem, The Odyssey, the idea of one's worth was considered. Homer developed the theme of an appreciation for one's own worth, an emphasis on the value of self-concept, a presentation of techniques for encouraging and contributing to others' self-concept and their personal and social responsibility, and an emphasis on the importance of building an atmosphere of trust through recognizing personal feelings and giving others permission to do the same. 32

PAGE 46

Teacher Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy Munson (1991) reports that almost one-third of teachers today suffer from low self-concept to the point where it cripples their effectiveness with students. Aspy ( 1969) used the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale and found that the mean total score for sixty-four secondary teachers was below the twenty-fifth percentile. Comb's ( 1965) conclusion that good teachers feel basically adequate, rather than inadequate, supports the theory that a teacher's self-perception is of central concern. Aspy (1969) conducted a study which found that the average amount gained by students of the high self concept teachers was substantially more than the students of those teachers having lower self-concepts. This study supports the general hypothesis that there is a correlation between the levels of teacher self-concept and the cognitive growth of students. The great potential for growth is released when educators recognize the power of their own positive self-concept (Knight & Knight, 1991 ). Educators shape the lives and minds of our children, sometimes to a greater extent than their parents (Munson, 1991 ). 33

PAGE 47

Reasoner ( 1988) states that one of the most alarming issues for children today is low self-concept. He suggests that one of the primary ways to start building the self-concept of children is to build the self-concept of their teachers. Teachers influence the students' self-concept (Aspy, 1969). O'Hara (1989) reviews studies which suggest that faculty self-concept is the central variable in student learning. Definition of Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy James (1980) argues that feelings of self-worth derive from perceptions of where one sees oneself in relation to others whose skills and abilities are similar. A formal definition of self-esteem is the disposition to experience oneself as competent to cope with the basic challenges of life and as worthy of happiness (Brandon, 1994}. Self-efficacy (being capable of producing a desired result) and self-respect are essential components of self-concept. The experience of self-efficacy generates the sense of control over one's life that is associated with psychological well-being. Low self efficacy tends to produce discomfort with the new and unfamiliar and over attachment to yesterday's skills. Higher self-efficacy makes it easier to move up from an earlier level 34

PAGE 48

of knowledge and development and to master new knowledge, skills, and challenges (Sanderlands, Brockner, & Glynn, 1988). Bandura (1977,1978,1981,1982) describes self-efficacy as a cognitive mechanism that regulates behavior as an individual gains a conviction of personal competence: when the person believes he or she has mastered the behaviors necessary to achieve a desired outcome, a sense of efficacy is developing. This shows a relationship between self-efficacy and a persons professional self-concept. Professional Self-Concept Associated With Teacher Efficacy Ashton and Webb ( 1986) postulated that high professional self-concept was associated with effectiveness among teachers. They build a strong foundation for the evolution of their definition of teachers sense of efficacy as u. teachers situation specific expectation that they can help students learn. Teachers efficacy expectations influence their thoughts and feelings, their choice of activities, the amount of effort they expend, and the extent of their persistence in the face of obstacles (p. 3). Positive self concept in teachers appears to be a resource which frees these teachers to assume the supportive helping relationships needed for enhancing achievement in students. Nearly all 35

PAGE 49

beginning teachers enter the profession with an attitude of strong efficacy. As they proceed with their careers, however, this attitude may degenerate into a feeling of hopelessness (Handley & Thompson, 1992). A study to determine the relationship of teacher efficacy to teachers self-concept as measured by the Myself as a Teacher Scale revealed that successful efforts made by the novice teachers were more related to their self-concepts. They hypothesized that teachers with high professional self-concept would also demonstrate teacher efficacy. They designed a study to investigate the relationship between preservice teachers' self-concept and their sense of efficacy. Data showed a positive relationship between teacher efficacy and self concept. Self-Respect Equally as important as self efficacy to self-concept is self-respect. Self-respect is the conviction of one's own value. It is feeling proud of and satisfied with one s moral choices. Three basic premises of self-respect are: (a) people who respect themselves acts in ways that confirm and reinforce this respect, such as requiring others to deal with them appropriately, (b) if people do not respect themselves, 36

PAGE 50

they will tend to act in ways that lower their sense of value even further, and (c) people wishing to raise their level of self-respect must act in ways that cause it to rise. This begins with a commitment to the value of one's own person, which is then expressed through congruent behavior (Brandon, 1994). Teacher Efficacy and Locus of Control Teachers with a strong sense of efficacy demonstrate a "can do attitude toward overcoming problems. According to Brophy and Evertson (1976), such feelings of efficacy discriminate between more effective teachers and less effective ones. Efficacy among teachers is associated with their locus of control, internal or external. Externally controlled teachers in the Brophy and Evertson study tended to blame others and other factors, such as the cultural milieu, poor parental support and inadequate teaching facilities, for poor achievement in students. In contrast, teachers with intemal control traits, rather than make excuses or give up" tended to redouble their instructional efforts, giving reluctant learners more attention by modifying their instructional activities and increasing instructional time with them. The 37

PAGE 51

internally motivated teachers assumed personal responsibility for the students not learning as expected. To expand understanding of this concept, Medway and Rose (1981) designed a scale to measure teachers' generalized expectations for external-internal control over student success and failure in the classroom. They developed a schema including expectancy influences, attribution theory, and social learning theory. From here, they delved into Rotter's ( 1966) work, the internal-external locus of control construct, adapting Rotter's scale to their research. Rotter's scale was not designed to measure expectancies associated with classroom teaching or to be predictive of classroom process variables and teaching outcomes. Their methodical review demonstrated the need for an instrument specifically designed to measure elementary school teachers' perceptions of control in the classroom. Attribution Dimensions That Affect Efficacy Expectations As Medway and Rose ( 1981) address attribution theory, so do Ashton and Webb (1986). Both of these studies referenced and built on Weiners' work done in 1979 which identified three attribution dimensions that affect efficacy expectations: (a) stability, (b) locus, and (c) control. Stability 38

PAGE 52

speaks to the cause of success or failure as fixed or fluctuating; locus focuses on the cause being either internal or external to the individual; and control refers to whether the cause is controllable or uncontrollable. According to Weiner, attributions of stable, internal, and controllable are most likely to lead to positive efficacy expectations. Ames (1975) concluded that teachers' attributions are influenced by the situation, the feedback and knowledge teachers have about their own and their students' performance, along with the teachers' values. This analysis is consistent with Heider's ( 1958) view that attributions are affected by "what ought to be .. (value belief) and .. what one would like to be .. (self-worth belief), in addition to what is (perception of situation) (p.109). The concept of locus of cc>ntrol, aligned with teacher efficacy, offers another way to look at living by choice or by chance. Locus of control relates to who or what determines actions. Most people come from one orientation or the other; the internal orientation implies accountability, the external orientation relies on blame. Teachers who have an internal orientation are able to assist students to begin making their choices from an internal locus of control. Students who choose from internal orientation believe in their ability to create what they want and to make it happen in their lives. 39

PAGE 53

Teachers who see themselves as successful are more able to empower children to be successful. Expectations are Self-Imposed James ( 1980) claims that expectations are self-imposed and refer to personal levels of aspiration; success enhances self-concept and failure deflates it. Self-concept is not a substitute for the knowledge and skills one needs to operate effectively in the workplace (Brandon, 1994). Self-concept affects our emotions. Our feelings encourage or discourage thinking to draw us towards facts, truth, and reality (Brandon, 1994). Hence, all actions involve choice. Teachers choosing to have negative teacher beliefs or low expectations about students influence classroom practices and may adversely affect student performance (Brophy, 1985: Kuykendall, 1992). Children need people in their lives who show them how life works best (Munson, 1991). Principal's Role in Encouraging Teacher Self-Concept The way teachers feel about themselves is one key to effective change in schools. Keeping this in mind, a logical argument can be made that principals who behave in ways 40

PAGE 54

which increase teacher self-concept and teacher efficacy will also be raising student achievement. One would expect studies of the principal's role in encouraging teacher self-concept to exist, however, this has not yet been comprehensively addressed in the literature. The following are related studies These three studies suggest the significance of the principal's role. Hannum (1974) has examined how principals can utilize teacher self-observation as a tool to encourage change in self-esteem, O'Hara (1989) has studied the importance of the leader in establishing the culture of faculty self-concept for educational institutions, Freeman & Kalaian, (1987) have examined the leader's role in building self confidence in teachers. Bandura (1977) explored how self-efficacy can be improved by testing derivations from the social learning analysis of the process of change. He conducted an experiment in which severe phobics received treatments designed to create differential levels of efficacy expectations. Then, the relationship between self-efficacy and behavioral change was analyzed extensively. Consistent with the social learning analysis of the sources of self-efficacy, experiences based on performance accomplishments produced higher, more generalized, and stronger efficacy expectations than did vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, or emotional arousal. 41

PAGE 55

It is important to note that the more dependable the experiential sources, the greater the changes were in perceived self-efficacy. Bandura ( 1977) discusses this from the framework that performance-based procedures have proven to be most powerful for effecting psychological changes. Therefore, cognitive events are both induced and altered most readily by experience of mastery arising from effective performance. It can be deduced that if teachers experience success with students their perceived self-efficacy will rise, further increasing their abilities. Results of these studies support the thesis that generalized, lasting changes in self-efficacy and behavior can best be achieved by principals utilizing participant methods of powerfur inductive procedures initially to develop capabilities, then removing external aids to verify personal efficacy, and finally using self-directed mastery to strengthen and generalize expectations of personal efficacy (Bandura, 1977). The question that arises is, what can principals do to sustain the teachers attitude of efficacy? The Role of the Principal on Teacher Improvement As I think back to my administrative training which happened over ten years ago, emphasis was on teacher 42

PAGE 56

evaluation more than supervision and coaching. I pulled my old texts off the shelf, some titles that were studied at that time were The Elementary School Principalship. Leadership for the 1980s (Krajewski, Martin, and Walden, 1983) and Educational Administration and Organizational Behavior (Hanson, 1985). As I flipped through the indexes neither supervision nor coaching were mentioned. I reread the chapters on teacher evaluation. This information was presented in a very prescriptive routinized fashion. It covered how to be objective, systematical, professional, and thorough. No mention was made of relationship building, assisting the teacher, or asking reflective questions of them. The leadership style encouraged was managerial in nature. These were autocratic directives in contrast to ways of improving teaching. This seemed so foreign to what I have learned and experienced over the last decade as I have tried to help improve teaching. This upcoming section will begin with historical background and then move to contemporary alternatives for teacher improvement. Evaluation and Supervision In an ideal world, a separation between administrative responsibilities and supervision is instrumental in 43

PAGE 57

establishing an effective evaluation system (Bolten, 1973). In much of the literature, (Bolten, 1973; Joyce and Showers, 1988; Bennett, Bennett, and Stevahn, 1991) supervision is referenced as a cooperative, non threatening experience occurring between two adults who have a relationship of professional collaboration. As a part of this relationship, goal setting, conferencing, suggestions about teaching behaviors, data collection, and reflection on student assessment are encouraged. However, in reality, 80% of instructional supervision is conducted by principals who observe their teachers because it is required by their districts' evaluation system. Both the teacher and the supervisor are inhibited because it becomes difficult to operate in an open and collegial manner. Administrators can never completely become a peer to teachers. Under some conditions on some occasions, some administrators may be able to act more like instructional supervisors than building administrators Evaluative systems need to make efforts to separate administrator as administrator and administrator as supervisor (McGreal, 1988). This section examines the historical perspective of teacher evaluation and speaks to the shift in contemporary ideas of supervision. 44

PAGE 58

Traditional Emphasis:Accountability or Summative Function of Teacher Evaluation. As mentioned earlier, traditionally schools have emphasized the accountability or summative function of teacher evaluation. More recently, this traditional view has come in conflict with one of instructional improvement. In 1973, Bolton suggested that numerous purposes exist for teacher evaluation. These purposes really can be classified into two areas. The first centers around personnel decisions or eliminating the 11bad teachersu (summative evaluation). The second is for staff development (formative evaluation). Summative and formative evaluation do not hold equal weight (Howsam, 1963), however, school systems must address both. Evaluation systems are defined (Me Greal, 1983) by a group of recommended policies, processes, procedures, and instruments that guide the attitudes and actions of the staff. In most school districts, principals execute the evaluation system by implementing district policies, conducting and documenting evaluation observations, holding conferences based upon evaluation observations, evaluating the support skills, keeping and using anecdotal records, providing remediation to teachers who perform marginally, making 45

PAGE 59

summative evaluations, and following due process dismissal procedures (Giatthorn, 1997). School districts which are recognized as successful most often make concerted efforts to align the development and maintenance of what they want their system to do and be and the systemic requirements established. Most frequently the test in recognizing the effectiveness of the system is evidenced by the quality of the relationship between the teacher and the supervisor (Me Greal, 1983). Both common practice and research support that most evaluation systems are composed of one or a combination of the following five evaluation models. Five Traditional Models. The first model is used by close to 65o/o of America's school districts. It is called the "common law.. model. This model is characterized by longevity. It has been around for so long that no one knows where it came originated. It relies on simplified processes and procedures which have not changed for years. It advocates high supervisor-low teacher involvement. Additionally, evaluation is synonymous with observation. This model includes the observation checklists such as Madeline Hunter's which were very widespread in the late 1979 s and early 1980 s and were based on findings of process-product research such as T. E. S. A. The same procedures are used with both tenured and non tenured teachers. The emphasis is on summative evaluation, 46

PAGE 60

using standardized criteria. This structure forces comparative judgments to be made between and among teachers. Dissatisfaction with this model grew, which set the stage for the second most popular form of teacher evaluation, goal setting (Iwanicki, 1981 ) The emphasis of this model is on an individualized approach which contends that the clearer the person is about what they want to accomplish the more successful they will be. Procedures followed in goal setting models include examining the situation, setting the goals, taking action, examining results, determining if the results are satisfactory--if so continue as plannedif not, devise corrections. Many proponents of this model consider it a philosophical mode rather than a technique. This model does promote professional growth through correcting weaknesses and enhancing strengths, it fosters a positive working relationship between the teacher and the supervisor, it focuses on the unique professional growth needs of individual teachers, it clarifies performance expectations and sets explicit criteria for evaluation, and it integrates individual performance objectives with the goals and objectives of the school organization (Iwanicki, 1981 ). Of all teacher evaluation models, the one which consistently generates the most controversy is that of product models. Product models are those that use student 47

PAGE 61

performance measures as a means to assess teacher competency. This model is based on results of instruction. Methods, styles, and processes are irrelevant; what matters are student achievement scores, student behavioral changes, student growth in skills, knowledge, and attitudes. This evaluation model coincides with the task view of teacher effectiveness. Usually either norm referenced (standardized tests which determine a students performance in relationship to the performance of others using the same measuring devise) or criterion-referenced (a students status with respect to some criterion or performance standard) are used. Borich ( 1977) emphasizes that a number of variables contribute to the inconclusiveness of this model. He states that factors of parental expectations, the student's prior achievement, socioeconomic status, and the mtellectual quality of the child's home life may have greater influence on the student's achievement than the teacher. These things coupled with the ethnic and socioeconomic discrepancies of tests create concern for using this model of evaluation. Even though more recent studies support the premise that teacher influence can override the above stated factors, much resistance to this model is prevalent (Hilliard, 1997). The clinical supervision model stresses the importance of the relationship between the teacher and the supervisor and 48

PAGE 62

is supported by experiential data as being effective in improving instructional practices. For clinical supervision to be used most effectively certain guidelines need to be followed. The first of these is the collegial nature of clinical supervision. This model stems from the work of Cogan (1973) and Goldhammer (1969}, and Sergiovanni (1982). The significance of the collegial interactions between the teacher and the supervisor are designed to improve the classroom teacher's performance through analysis of observed classroom events. This model focuses more closely on supervision rather than evaluation. Depending upon the researcher there are a variety of steps and labels for clinical supervision. However, general agreement exists concerning the sequence of these five stages of clinical supervision, (a) pre-observation conference, (b) observation of teaching, (c) analysis and strategy planning (d) post observation conference, and (e) post-conference analysis. This model operates on the assumption that when teachers are given enough information and encouraged to act on it, they will be self directed to interpret and analyze this information to improve their teaching. Distinction is made that this is an effective supervisory model rather than an evaluation model (Boyan and Copeland, 1974; Shinn, 1976). 49

PAGE 63

The artistic or naturalistic model is rarely used in schools, still draws on different assumptions from the other I methods. Sergiovanni (1982) discusses that the artistic I I approach to supervision and teacher evaluation rests on the I I 1 belief that teaching is basically an art form, an aesthetic :I 1 experience. Eisner (1992) agrees with the idea of the artistic I I i I I I j i I :I I development of the individual. Artistic approaches to evaluation allow for the charting of the unpredictableness of teaching and the recognition of the unanticipated meanings and results detected through the process of teaching. This method values these aspects of teaching, even though it is not widely adopted. Contemporary Models. Most recently, Glatthom (1997) explored differentiated supervision. This approach to supervision enables teachers to have options about the kinds of supervision and evaluation they receive. This model provides the non tenured and less effective tenured teachers with intensive development, while the remaining teachers gain options concerning how they will cultivate their professional growth. The intensive development model which is one part of differentiated supervision differs from the standard form of clinical supervision. Clinical supervision focuses on teaching methods, while intensive development is concerned with 50

PAGE 64

; I learning outcomes (Giatthom, 1997). The clinical supervision model which is frequently used with all teachers has a superficial impact because teachers are observed only twice a year (Badiali and Levin, 1984). The intensive development model is designed for those who need it, and typically involves at least five cycles of the supervisory process with multiple observations. This frequency can take place because only a few teachers are involved. In addition, clinical supervision depends on one kind of observation which is followed by analysis and conference. Glatthorn, (1997) professes that beginning struggling teachers greatly benefit from the intensive development model. In this model a variety of tools are used. These tools consist of eight components. The first is a taking stock conference which can take place at any time and may substitute for the pre-observation conference. The pre observation conference is optional. Next, a diagnostic observation of teaching helps the observer to collect data on all aspects of both teaching and learning, which serves as a purpose for diagnosing the teacher's needs. This is followed by an analysis of the diagnostic observation, to identify a focus for the developmental work. The fourth component is a diagnostic debriefing conference between the supervisor and the teacher to analyze the lesson and to reflect on it in 51

PAGE 65

! i i I j I 'i I I ; I :I __ j relationship to its significance to the development. The coaching session comes next. The two parties meet to allow for coaching on a specific skill that was identified through the diagnostic process. Under this model coaching includes providing a knowledge base for the skill, explaining the skill, demonstrating the skill, providing for guided practice, with feedback, and providing for independent practice, with feedback. After this a focused observation of one skill occurs. A form is designed to obtain information concerning the teacher's use of that skill (Giatthom, 1997). Finally, a debriefing conference is held which reviews and analyzes the results of the focused observation. The steps in this method are designed to foster teacher growth and it is entirely separate from teacher evaluation. Whoever is responsible for evaluation should not provide the intensive development, because it is essential to have an open relationship, and openness and evaluation tend to be incompatible. A mentor-colleague would be an appropriate person to provide this intensive development. It is key that the mentor fosters reflection and collaborative inquiry, instead of having all the answers and being the expert. Administrators who support teachers by providing them with the appropriate form of supervision and evaluation based on their developmental stage, needs, and concerns, will see 52

PAGE 66

! I I ; i I positive outcomes in teacher behaviors and student achievement. Schools reflect the principal's leadership (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993). Therefore, teacher improvement requires a change in belief systems by building and administration leaders and the teachers themselves. Review of the literature supports several themes as critical components in the process of principal facilitation of improvement in novice, troubled teachers. These themes include providing support and creating culture, caring, empowering teachers, mentoring and coaching, team building, and providing staff development opportunities. This portion of the literature review will examine how these components are crucial as factors in the role of the principal in improving the new struggling teacher. Administrators will need to let go of the prescriptions and reconceptualize how this improvement will take place. Providing Support and Creating Culture The support and assistance of the principal, or lack of it, plays greatly into teacher effectiveness. According to Bunting (1997), Sergiovanni (1982), and Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy (1993), teachers require a supportive culture in order to grow. 53

PAGE 67

: i i. Principals can support new, as well as experienced teachers, by (a) encouraging the teachers to remain open to change, (b) helping teachers to be self-assessing, (c) urging teachers to be learners in a major activity outside of school, (d) encouraging teachers to focus on what is enjoyable to them about teaching, (e) encouraging teachers to contribute to the growth of their peers, and (f) encouraging teachers to develop interests outside of teaching (Bunting, 1997). Leaders (principals) have the ability to manage people's energy by changing what is focused on to the positive. All of the aspects of school culture mentioned above involve communication. To feel supported teachers need access to information and recognition. Recognition can be given either in the active mode--verbal compliment--or passive--giving another a job to do because you trust and have confidence in them (Blanchard, 1997). Rewarding teachers is an important piece of the entire process of increasing teacher improvement. Educational leaders should encourage teachers with regular praise and celebration of progress toward their goals (Carter and Cunningham, 1997). Building relationships with individual teachers and promoting the concept of team (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 1993) is an essential criterion for the principalship role. Team building is discussed later in this chapter. Marshall, 54

PAGE 68

I I : I ; I :I I I :I :I :I I I I Peterson, Rogers, & Steele (1996) describe how school administrators, operating from an ethic of care, conduct their daily practice differently from administrators operating from traditional leadership models. The traditional models identified by Sergiovanni (1989) are the following: (a) rational, (b) mechanistic, (c) organic, and (d) bargaining. These are driven by scientific management, bureaucratic, collegial, and political theories of management. Caring A secondary analysis of data that were gathered with career assistant principals (Marshall et al., 1996) showed that practices of these assistant principals did not fit traditional administration theories. Contrary to traditional theory, the ethic of care was evident. Due to the fact that it is often difficult to separate administrative practices from organizational structure and professional norms, a secondary premise was to identify how the demands of both the organization and the profession interfere with the enactment of caring. Additionally, it was noted that typically care givers are frequently disempowered. Caring is relegated to a low status connected with teaching and female characteristics. However, 55

PAGE 69

from their studies, the authors concluded an ethic of care can provide administrators with a valuable perspective to guide their moral reasoning and decision making. This supports both : I Bum's (1978) and Rost's (1991) premise of the interactive : 1 relationship element of concern leading to ethical : I responsibility. Caring in school requires continuity of I relations and confirmations which means affirming others and I 1 encouraging the best in others. This too, follows the I I I I i philosophies of Bums (1978) and Rost (1991). The participants in the Marshall et al. study were motivated by an ethic of caring rather than the rational choice model, which seeks upward mobility. These individuals cared more about what was happening to people around them than they cared about money, status, and power. They exhibited a concern for other people's well-being and a sensitivity to individual circumstances, which is opposite of bureaucratic values of efficiency, uniformity, and even-handed enforcement of policies and rules. It becomes evident that the three themes in this study revolve around connections, context, and concern, very much like Follett's (1920) ideas. This type of administrative behavior promotes followers' self-worth and self-concept. 56

PAGE 70

. I : I I I I j : I I Empowering Teachers As significant as caring is the importance of teacher empowerment. The key to this concept is for principals to encourage bottom-up involvement and top-down support. Empowerment is a dominant theme in most organizations. Rappaport and his colleagues describe empowerment as a construct that ties personal competencies and abilities to environments that provide opportunities for choice and autonomy in demonstrating those competencies (Zimmerman & Rappaport, 1988). Dunst (1991) suggests that empowerment consists of enabling experiences, provided within an organization that fosters autonomy, choice, control, and responsibility. Such experiences allow the individual to display existing competencies and learn new competencies that support and strengthen functioning. In the school setting, empowerment of teachers, administrators, and students is one component of restructuring (Murphy & Everton, 1990; Short & Greer, 1989). Research supports the assumption that teacher empowerment relates to greater organizational effectiveness (lawler, 1986). One of the fundamental common denominators 57

PAGE 71

. I : i I I I : I I I i I I : I i i when attempting to empower teachers lies in the realm of effective decision making at the local school site. School systems are acknowledging that decisions are most effective when made closest to the site where they will be implemented and monitored. Teachers who influence the work of the organization feel a greater commitment to meet effectively and creatively the problems and opportunities that arise. Lieberman and Miller (1984) found "To empower others is to give a stakeholder share in the movement and direction of the enterprise (p.149) Principals who encourage teachers to participate actively in making decisions create greater teacher job satisfaction which results in better teaching and increased student involvement and learning (Murray, Tinney, Lasseter, & Atkins, 1993). Happy employees have higher performance levels. Much debate about whether job satisfaction causes productivity or productivity causes job satisfaction continues to occur with researchers in private and public sectors (Petty, McGee, & Cavender, 1984; laffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985). The degree of job satisfaction experienced by teachers can be correlated to the degree of teacher efficacy (Reyes, 1990). Hoppock (1935) defined job satisfaction as any combination of psychological, physiological, and environmental circumstances that cause a person to say they are satisfied with their job. 58

PAGE 72

According to research conducted by Goodlad (1984) and his colleagues, teacher satisfaction is also related to the degree of staff cohesiveness and the nature of problem-solving and : I decision making climates within schools. Study findings indicate that teachers' perception of empowerment relates to their perceptions of school climate, which is shaped by the school principal. Howard (1986) identified certain elements of the school environment that relate to the school's climate. I I : i I : I : I I : I I [ Those include continuous academic and social growth, trust and integrity, high morale, respect among all participants, school renewal, cohesiveness, caring and opportunities for input. Additionally, he goes on to identify effective communication and positive approaches to handling conflict relating to positive school climate. Teachers in schools with positive school climate tended to have positive relations (Rutter, Maugham, Mortimore, Ouston, & Smith, 1979). Empowerment Impacts the Work of the Organization. Teachers who perceive a greater sense of empowerment believe that they impact the work of the organization. They recognize that they have the power to identify problems, institute change efforts, and be responsible for organizational outcomes. Research suggests that teachers who have confidence in their abilities and believe that teachers in general make a difference experience less stress (Greenwood, 59

PAGE 73

, I I : I I I I I I I , I I :I I I Olejnik, Parkay, 1990). Highly efficacious teachers showed evidence of less stress than their less confident counterparts, while at the same time displaying a locus of control which was significantly more internally oriented (Reeves, 1982). Empowered teachers tend to assume ownership of organizational problems and their solutions. Therefore, teachers may more openly evaluate the work of the organization, both positively and negatively. Success comes not from the detailed work done by the school, but mostly by the staff whose .. ownership.. will not let the plan fail. Participants put forth maximum effort to ensure success (Murray et al., 1993). As in the self-managing team (Lawler, 1986), teachers take on the role of evaluator, monitor, rewarded, and manager. Problem ownership produces problem solutions. Based on this information, it becomes critical for a principal to embrace and model the concept of empowering their staff. By giving teachers the power, we give them the control to make effective choices and demonstrate their competencies to influence student academic learning and organizational potential (Boleman & Deal, 1994). Administrators practice has not always exemplified their awareness of the benefit created for students and the school organization when teachers, through feeling self-efficacy, assume the 60

PAGE 74

I I I I I I I I I I I : I ! I I I : I I I i I responsibility for opportunities, innovations, problems, and successes in schools. Barriers to Empowerment. Empowerment consists of opportunities that an individual has for autonomy, choice, responsibility, and participation in decision making in organizations (Lightfoot, 1986). It is significant to note that the process of teacher empowerment does not always operate smoothly. Several issues may arise. Not all building administrators either want or feel comfortable having staff share in decision making. There is a strong correlation between building level administrators' commitment to the process and the level of development and actual levels of success of the implementation of the program (Murray et al.). Secondly, when staff are empowered, the process of working collaboratively takes more time by the very nature of discussion, differing ideas and opinions, and implementation factors. Third, studies conducted in schools that are restructuring to create greater teacher empowerment (Short & Greer, 1989) found that when teachers' involvement in school decision making increases, the opportunities for conflict increase due to disclosure of ideologies and perceptions that usually are not disclosed in the traditional school structure. The more teachers have input and involvement in critical 61

PAGE 75

decisions about the direction of the school organization and increased autonomy, the more complex the communication and I the greater the need for substantive change that may lead to 1 organizational conflict. Additionally, as the level of empowerment increases teachers may even perceive less ; I positive climate in the school. These barriers need to be acknowledged, accepted, and dealt with. To begin, teachers should be taught effective communication skills and positive ways of handling conflict (Howard, 1986). Raising teachers' awareness and providing training in conflict resolution assist in making conflict bring : j about positive change. Next, teachers need to develop I organizational problem solving skills as well as planning and implementation skills. This is best accomplished by a : j systematic plan to teach these skills to teachers. Further I : I research has examined the role of leaders in organizations with self-managing teams. Many conclude that leadership is at least as important in organizations with self-managing work groups as in traditionally structured organizations (Cummings, 1978; Hackman, 1986; Lawler, 1986). Leaders in an organization with self-managing units need uunleadersu (p. 411 ), those who lead others to lead themselves (Manz & Sims, 1984). Hackman (1986) points out that leadership is more important and more demanding with self-managing teams 62

PAGE 76

I I : I I than in traditional organizations. The role of the building level administrator will increase in importance as bottom-up initiatives occur. These administrators must facilitate opportunities for teachers to be involved in decision-making and communications between the instructional staff andcentral office (Murray et. al., 1993). Developing an Empowered School. When an empowered : I school succeeds, it is because it has developed a program that is unique to its own staff, students, parents, and community. : I I I I : I I i I i I Glickman (1990) states -.he process of how a school came to such decisions is more transferable than the program. .. it is only the general notion of informed, representative decision making that can be easily transported (p.72). Teachers need a variety of opportunities to both practice and observe their abilities around empowerment. My experience in the nine years that I have been an instructional leader has clarified for me that teachers repeatedly need to be shown that the building leader listens to their decisions, values them, and acts on them. The principal must show confidence in teachers teaching and decision making abilities and be willing to structure enough time for staff to discuss and decide school issues. It is equally important for leaders to determine with staff which decisions are group decisions and which are not. This is important for 63

PAGE 77

several reasons: (a) it provides the principal with both the I : 1 right and responsibility to make decisions which need to be i I made by the leader (my experience has been these are few in 'I I / number), (b) this is an up-front way for teachers to know I instead of having to guess what is within their domain, (c) this : 1 is ethical in that it allows teachers to make decisions that :I 'i :I : I I I ; I i i will have the greatest impact on them, and at the same time frees them from those decisions which they have no interest in being involved in (Barth, 1990 &1987: Sergiovanni, 1982). Based on my experiences, I have learned that staff members can respond appropriately when they are clear concerning which decisions they have input in, which ones they have complete autonomy on, and which ones are not within their domain. The more they practice these skills, the more competent they become. As teacher competence and confidence rise so does their responsibility level. Soon teachers are tackling tasks and problems which they never would have considered previously. Even more significant is the ownership for student learning. Because they have been given the freedom to determine the curriculum, instructional delivery, resources, teaching strategies, assessment tools, remediation plans, parent involvement, and schooling issues, they also accept the responsibility for individual student learning. They soon come to believe that they have the control 64

PAGE 78

'I : I : I I ; I to make sure all children learn. They quit blaming the curriculum, parents, home life, the system, the society, and other scapegoats. Facilitative Interactive Power. Dunlap and Goldman (1991), examine the facilitative aspects of power in analyzing processes and outcomes in today's schools. The authors claim facilitative, interactive power, has become essential when no single individual or role commands decision making control without dependence on expert knowledge and cooperation of colleagues. Specific examples of such circumstances include the individual education program process in special education 1 and current practices in clinical supervision. These : I demonstrate the barriers of traditional concepts of power and I : I the usefulness of facilitative power for encompassing the nature of professional interactions between principals, staff, and nonprofessionals in schools. Facilitative power appears to have two other benefits. First, facilitative power may decentralize and enlarge the decision-making process by utilizing more involvement by more actors. Second, : I facilitative power encourages non-standardized approaches to I I I I I I I i I i I and solutions of problems. Facilitative power is not unlike the integration which Follett (1920) speaks of in her work. This also complements Astin's (1994) work which suggests the 65

PAGE 79

' ; I I I I i I I I I 'i I : I I I i I : I I I importance of collaboration, creative power, empowering others through trust, and facilitation Control to Empowerment. Solman and Deal ( 1994) suggest that leaders need to refine their roles from control to empowerment. They reintroduce ancient ideas of Machiavelli in which people thirst for the magical ingredient that will provide direction, purpose, passion, imagination, and meaning to collective activity. They call this nurture emerging leadership, where leadership requires a shift in emphasis to the spiritual and human dimension. This is a softer side of management which encourages leadership from many different sources and engages people in trying to solve problems. This supports both Rost's (1991) and Guzman's (1995) theories of a reciprocal relationship. Guzman (1995) refers to this reciprocal relationship as cocreative. It brings people with conflicting points of view together to work out their differences so organizations can be productive. Again, Follett's (1920) views reemerge. Rather than emphasizing rationality, control, and efficiency, leadership needs to practice strategies of buildingcoalitions, integrating, and empowering. Control and Deference in New Teacher Leaders and Principal Relationships. Smylie and Brownlee-Conyers (1992) conducted an exploratory study of control and deference in new 66

PAGE 80

I :I teacher leaders and principal relationships. They employed a micro-political perspective, defined as the strategic use of power in organizations to achieve preferred outcomes. Three : I categories emerged: collaborative, controlled, and confrontational. The findings reflect strategic, interactive, and contextual aspects about the development of teacher i leader and principal working relations. Findings suggest that ambiguities and uncertainties associated with new teacher leader roles have significant implication for the development of new working relationships between teachers who assume those roles and their principals. Second, the direction in which principals and teacher leaders attempt to define their roles and relationships appear closely related to the perceptions, expectations, interests, and prerogatives that they bring to their new relationship. Third, the findings suggest that principals and teacher leaders do indeed evoke strategies that influence the development of the new roles and working relationships. The study suggests that long-standing patterns of accountability and control exist in relationships: patterns create fragile balances in relationships, the authority role can get in the way of relationships, and teachers conditioned to a hierarchical view of school leadership associated with control 67

PAGE 81

had more difficulty with interactive relationships. The principals who were aware of this and worked with their teacher leaders more as colleagues than subordinates were I : 1 more effective. Those new working relationships based on I I :I : I ; I collaboration diminished the effect of principal control. These principals were building relationships and employing what Rost (1991) calls relationship-based influence, which is multidirectional, noncoersive influence. The implications of this are great. Principals who have helped their staff to learn how to be self-empowered benefit the organization as a whole, because teachers have learned the skills of taking initiative, collaboration, problem solving, conflict resolution, and appropriate decision making. : I Empowered teachers are excellent role models for students. : I These teachers have the skills to assist students to be empowered. Teachers who now own the responsibility for student learning can transition students to own this responsibility. This is what educators are ultimately striving to accomplish. Teachers have become in control not only in their classroom and in their school, but most significantly in their own life and destiny. This power enables them to dream the new possibilities (Fitzclarence & Giroux, 1984). 68

PAGE 82

; I i I ; I j I I I I I I i I I : I 'I I Mentoring and Coaching Principals are responsible for selecting coaches and mentors for novice teachers and on occasion being a coach or mentor for beginning teachers, as a means of improving teacher effectiveness. In Japan, New Zealand, and the Northern Territory of Australia new teachers are helped to succeed, through new teacher induction programs (Pacific Rim, 1997). It becomes the responsibility of the entire staff to ensure the new teachers' success. ..Successful II teacher induction programs, while rooted in the cultures of each country, share some common characteristics. New teachers are viewed as professionals on a continuum, with increasing responsibility. Novice teachers are not expected to do the same job as experienced teachers without significant support. New teachers are nurtured and not left to flounder on their own: interaction with other teachers is maximized. Teacher induction is a valued activity which exists for a purpose. Developing and nurturing new teachers is considered the responsibility of all the staff. All three of these countries emphasized helping new teachers become better and not merely .. weeding out .. incompetent teachers (Pacific Rim, 69

PAGE 83

1997). This feeling of school community responsibility for the success of the new teacher differs from that in the United States. Models in the U.S. focus on one or a few mentors for each novice teacher, instead of the entire group working to ensure the effectiveness of the new staff member. While the United States has not developed as comprehensive induction programs as Japan and Australia, numerous states have adopted legislation calling for inductee : j programs which provide new teachers with an experienced :I mentor. The rationale for teacher mentors is based on I utilizing the seasoned teachers practical insights gleaned I form classroom experiences. Platt (1997), defines mentoring as the study of a person. He elaborates on this concept by noting the importance of the mentors interactions with students, their tone of voice, their responsiveness to students, the methods and strategies they use, and their demeanor. In : j addition to coaching, effective mentors foster supportive ; I professional friendships (Bennet, Bennet, & Steven, 1991 ). I I Building principals play a significant role in the selection of the mentors. Instructional leaders must be frequently visible in classrooms and clearly be aware of the mentor teachers strengths and weaknesses. After analyzing the novice teachers areas of needed improvement, they can match the teacher with a mentor that has strengths in the beginning 70

PAGE 84

, I I I I I I teachers area of weakness. Typically, the experienced teacher will mentor the novice teacher from one to three years. Good role models are the number one form of programmatic assistance (Kotter, 1988). Other Forms of Coaching Other forms of coaching can be initiated by building principals or teachers. According to Joyce and Showers (1988}, all forms of coaching have the following three components: (a) they are built on trust and support, (b) they involve professionals who have a common understanding of the skills, strategies, or other areas being coached, (c) and they enable the sharing of teaching through activities that typically include co-planning lessons, classroom visitations, and follow-up discussions. Consultative coaching allows for an administrator, a specialist, or a consultant to collaboratively coach a teacher for professional growth. The characteristics of this relationship are trust, support, and mutual respect. Supervisory evaluation does not enter this relationship (Joyce and Showers, 1988). Cognitive coaching, another similar type of coaching is discussed by Costa and Garmston ( 1994). Cognitive coaching is nonjudgemental, relies on trust, facilitates mutual learning, 71

PAGE 85

1 and enhances growth toward working independently with I others. The coaching relationship established among fellow teachers, administrators and teachers, and administrative I : I I I I : I I I i I I : I I .I peers utilizes strategies which maintain trust between the coach and protege and develop flexibility in the learning process. Goals of this form of teaching are individual autonomy and collaboration. Peer Coaching. Peer coaching is another form of collegial support. Peer coaching or peer supervision (these two terms are used interchangeably in the literature) has been recognized as both comprehensive and thorough (Goldsberry, 1986). It implies a reciprocal nature among teachers and colleagues. The mutual goal of all participants is the continued development of professional practice and all participants act as coaches (Swaby, 1984). In this model, the colleague acts as the facilitator and a source of data. However, it is significant to note that the observed teacher controls the agenda, by identifying the focus, determining the observational form, and taking charge of the debriefing. This differs from supervision in that the two colleagues focus on one aspect of development where the teacher wants feedback. Because the observed has the power, the experience seems less threatening ( Glatthom, 1997). Studies conclude that peer 72

PAGE 86

coaching has a positive effect on teachers' attitudes, experimentation, communication, and changes in teaching (Goldsberry, 1986; Smyth, 1983; Roper and Hoffman, 1986; : i Bruder, 1987). Nevertheless, peer coaching is not free of drawbacks. If teachers have not been property trained they have trouble being reliable data sources, they tend to give I I I i I ; I excessive praise, and many teachers still find the experience threatening (Roper and Hoffman, 1986). Team Building Taking peer coaching a step further leads to the concept of teams. Business and industry have implemented the team concept, where all members in the team are responsible for all work (Ohmae, 1997). Schools have also begun to realize the importance of collaborative teams. Mills and Pollak (1997) address the matter of how principals can build and maintain successful teams. They state that principals (a) should hire new teachers, when possible, who have training and interest in working in a team environment, (b) should orient new teachers into the team concept and to their responsibilities on teams, (c) should give teams of teachers autonomy to capitalize on their group strengths, and (d) should provide continuous staff development for teachers. Furthermore, when new members 73

PAGE 87

:I are added to the team, current team members must be willing to engage in give-and-take with the new team member in order to evolve a strong new team structure. New teachers must be 1 willing to contribute to the team from their strengths and : backgrounds, while at the same time respecting team history. Over time, and with principal facilitation effective teams can evolve into self-managing ones (Lawler, 1986), where teachers take on varied roles. Kousus and Posner (1994) claim the truly effective teams are self-led. The facilitation of team building is a skill principals can use to maximize teacher effectiveness. Providing Staff Development Opportunities Provision for needed training is essential for fostering teacher growth. Todays principal must ensure that teachers are focused on student learning, must keep them aware of the latest research and successful practice, and dialogue with teachers about the continuous improvement of the learning process in their classrooms. One huge criterion that the principal needs to be responsible for is arranging the necessary time needed for teacher development activities (Giatthorn, 1997). 74

PAGE 88

I . I Culture which Encourages Teachers to Reflect and Discover. Senge (1990), Barth (1990), Goodlad (1984), and Drucker ( 1989) discuss the importance of democratic : 1 principles as foundational in effective organizational systems. : I Glickman (1998) speaks about a culture which encourages I I teachers to reflect and discover, rather than being ngiven" all the answers as one avenue which helps to promote democracy in education. This idea can be traced back to Socrates and Jesus. Jesus practiced discussion and interpretation. He spoke in parables, so people could discern their own meaning. Socrates frustrated his friends with his unwillingness to teach and give them the answers. His method was to ask questions, so others could form their own answers. New Paradigms for Staff Development. Staff development opportunities emphasize teachers being well grounded in knowledge of teaching skills and functioning in different kinds of schools with students who have a variety of : 1 needs. In the past, and occasionally today, the school principal will conduct staff development activities or will invite other experts to work with the school faculty. However, most recently principals have assumed the role of facilitator of ongoing professional development experiences. The type of staff development talked about in the literature of the late 1990's, is markedly different from the 75

PAGE 89

traditional short-term, information-transmission, expert driven model of earlier years. Currently, staff development is characterized by a high level of teacher involvement. Teachers are now encouraged to engage in reflective thinking and have numerous opportunities for participant interaction and experimentation through individual activities, study teams, and peer coaching (Licklider, 1997; McCombs, 1997; Zimmerman, 1973). One of the significant outcomes of todays staff development efforts is the establishment of networks which foster ongoing reflection, group reflection, and collaboration from the training aspect, and after training while on the job (McPike, 1995; Schmoker, 1997; McCombs, 1997; Zimmerman, 1973; and Bunting, 1997). Another expectation in this more recent concept of staff development is the goal of developing leadership skills among teachers, which assists them in directing reform initiatives within their schools (McCombs, 1997; Zimmerman, 1973; and Gullatt, 1997). Asa Hilliard (1997) did extensive studies on effective staff development, and identified some common elements from them. In each of the cases, the staff developer was a master teacher providing the model for the novice teacher. They actually demonstrated what they could do with students and 76

PAGE 90

i :I :I : I i I I I I were available to be observed and critiqued. In every case the staff developers were physically present during the entire new teacher training process. Additionally, they were interactive with these teachers in their learning environment which follows best practice internship. Again, in every case, the master teacher (staff developer) had evolved a theory as a result of their effective practice. The theories were not all the same, but each had a theory. Furthermore, all cases had provision for ongoing focused feedback to the new teacher in her own classroom. Time for deep reflection was designated in all cases. Specific techniques were developed in all cases. These were varied. At the structural level, a small range of core elements exist in valid pedagogy. These techniques, though important, are less important than what is classified as "affect". The best teachers stress liberation, love, relationships, and a caring environment with a sense of family (Freire, 1973; Hughes, 1995: Willis, 1995). In this new staff development paradigm, teachers no longer are the nsponges" soaking up the wisdom of the experts. Instead the emphasis is on having teachers teach teachers and having all participants bring their experiences as they address educational issues (Licklider, 1997). Staff development is most effective when teachers agree that it is based on student needs. If a group of educators come 77

PAGE 91

I I together, identify the most critical area of student need, seek the appropriate ongoing training, utilize a common language and focus, and continually evaluate student progress, the synergy invokes a determination to accomplish the goal (Kousus & Posner, 1994). The principal's role in professional development is to act as a bridge in moving educators from where they are to where they need to be in order to meet the challenges of guiding all students in achieving higher standards of learning (Carter and Cunningham, 1997). Effective school administrators support confidence and experimentation. Leaders help their staff members develop the courage to take responsibility, to apply their full ability and skill, and to see that schools achieve greatness (Fullan and Miles, 1992). Clearly Articulating the Vision Throygh School-Wide Initiatives School improvement is an evolving journey. The ongoing effective schools research speaks to this journey. In the effective schools framework, the destination is both clear and compelling: learning for all (Edmonds, 1981 ). The concept includes equity in quality for all. In the first generation effective schools research (Edmonds, 1978) five factors were identified: (a) the principal's leadership and attention to the 78

PAGE 92

quality of instruction, (b) a pervasive and broadly understood instructional focus, (c) an orderly, safe climate conductive to teaching and learning, {d) teacher behaviors that convey the expectation that all students will obtain at least minimum I mastery, and (e) the use of measures of pupil achievement as the basis for program evaluation. In the second generation (Block, Everton, and Guskey, 1995) of effective schools studies instructional leadership still remains important, however the focus shifts from the principal as the primary source to a broader concept of leadership that includes all adults, especially the teachers. This is in keeping with the teacher-empowerment concept and recognizes that principals cannot be the only leader in a complex organization. With the democratization of schools, the leadership function becomes one of creating a community : I of shared vision and values. The role of the principal has changed from that of being the leader of followersu to a reader of leadersu. Expertise is not considered to be only in the leader, but rather, dispersed across many members of the school. The role of the principal today becomes one of facilitating the elevation of each organizational member's potential to the optimum level (Burns, 1978). Those leaders who facilitate the development of a school-wide shared vision and focus, facilitate training for 79

PAGE 93

:I :I i :I I :I I :I I ; I skills to carry out the initiative, build in incentives and resources, and help staff to build an action plan, have realized increased student achievement (Hughes, Ginnett, Cuphy, 1993). The research and literature cited in this chapter demonstrate the need for the principal's role to shift, particularly as principals work to improve teaching. My study will examine these very issues by looking at the process that four successful principals employ when working with struggling novice teachers, in order to help them become effective and competent in dealing with students. By delving into the process, this study will help to fill some of the gaps in the literature on this topic 80

PAGE 94

: I I I I I I i I :I : I :I ; I : I I I .I I I I : I I i I : I I I ; I II CHAPTERS fvETKXXl...OGY This chapter introduces the methodological framework used for this qualitative exploratory study. The purpose of this study was to examine how a school principal can facilitate the improvement of struggling beginning teachers. The study examines the teacher/principal interactions and relationships of teachers who at one time were ineffective with students and have significantly evolved to be effective. The following questions guided the data gathering process and interpretations for this study: (a) how do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent teachers understand their process of improvement, and the role of the principal in that process? (b) how do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? (c) in cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the teacher/principal relationship associated with the transition process? These questions were not the type that lent themselves to numerical data, because they explore participants' 81

PAGE 95

I : I I I I I I I ; I : I I I i ; I I I I perceptions of processes and relationships. Because the purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions of teachers and principals in the teacher improvement process, selected a qualitative exploratory approach as a qualitative researcher interested in matters of motive and in the quality of experience undergone by those in the situation studied (Eisner, 1991, p. 35). Twelve participants were selected to be interviewed about the interactive teacher/principal improvement process. Four principal case studies were done utilizing teacher and principal interviews and observation. Of the eight teachers, four were teachers the principals were currently working with and still in the improvement process. This provided opportunities for some observation of the interactions between the teacher and the principal, as well as the interviews. By interviewing subjects and observing the interactions between these teachers and their principal, I was able to note the process used for teacher improvement. Four teachers constituted historical cases that recreated a record of the process that took place from both the teachers' and principals' points of view relating how the teachers successfully transitioned from struggling to competent teachers. The study of the four triads, each consisting of one 82

PAGE 96

. I I I I I principal and two teachers, determined why these were success stories. These triads are represented in Figure 3.1 All four school sites were a K-5 elementary configuration. Two of the representative schools were small in population, under 350 students. These schools were predominantly comprised of students identified as high risk and from low SES homes. Class size was 14 students, in an effort to better meet the needs of the student population. The other two schools both have a student population of over 500 students. The administration and teachers defined the majority of students as middle class. Class size ranged from 19-22 students. The principals selected for this study were initially chosen by me because of my personal knowledge of their : I instructional leadership ability. I had been an assistant I I principal with two of the principals and could speak to their :I 1 abilities from experience. The third principal was a I professional colleague of mine for ten years. Our principalship careers very closely mirrored each others'. This principal is recognized in her district as having the ability to improve student achievement through high expectations of staff. The fourth principal is also a colleague of mine. She is in the same district that I am in, and I can attest to initiatives she has implemented to increase student achievement. Furthermore, 83

PAGE 97

: I : l j : I :! : I Pl Figure 3.1 PrincipalTeacher Triads P2 P3 P4 Four triad cases were studied. Each triad consists of a principal and two teachers that principal has coached or currently is coaching. 84

PAGE 98

:I ; I I I :I I felt it important to speak with the superintendent in each of the school districts to be certain that they endorsed all principal participants as effective and exceptional instructional leaders. It was imperative that I select the principals with the most expertise as highly competent leaders, so I could study exactly what they did that made them so successful. As I suspected, the superintendents validated my perceptions of all the principals. Three of the principals were female and one was male. I spoke with each of the principals and shared the purpose of my study with them. Each was eager to participate. Two of the principals gave me permission to invite all new teachers in their building, those in their first three years, to participate in the study. None of the schools had more than three new teachers. Teacher participants were selfnominated, based on their belief that they were having some difficulties and struggling. Those feeling this way became part of a developed list of potential subjects, from which chose two teachers per site. When I spoke with the new teachers, I explained that they would be randomly selected. Then, I approached these two principals to see if they agreed that the selected participants fell into the struggling category. All did. 85

PAGE 99

I I i I I I Another principal was on special assignment in preparation for opening a new school, therefore both of her teachers were historical cases. The last principal had no new teachers, so both of his were historical cases. Interviews An interview is defined by Borden and Silken (1992) as a .. purposeful conversation, usually between two people that is directed by one in order to get information (p. 135, as cited in Ely et al., 1991). Additionally, Berg (1989) referred to interviews as a conversation with a purpose (p. 13). Seidman 1 ( 1991 ) asserted: At the very heart of what it means to be I human is the ability of people to symbolize their experience through languageu (p. 32). My intent was to see the process through the eyes of the participants; interviewing was instrumental in this study. : J Purpose of the interview Information gathering is one piece of the entire puzzle. Seidman (1991) talks about what the purpose of interviewing is beyond information: 86 II

PAGE 100

I : I I I I I I I I I The purpose of interviewing is not to get answers to questions, nor to test hypotheses, and not to evaluateu as the term is normally used. At the root of in-depth interviewing is an interest in understanding the experience of other people and the meaning they make of that experience. (p. 3). In order for me to understand what the participants knew, I needed to ask questions that required thoughtful reflection on the part of the participants. Bertaux ( 1981 ) expanded on this thinking: If given a chance to talk freely, people appear to know a lot about what is going onu (p. 39). Ely et al. (1991) augmented the idea of an interview further than being a basic mode of inquiry (Seidman, 1991) to the inclusion of nonverbal signals that happen throughout the interview situation. Interviews are at the heart of doing ethnography because they seek the words of the people we are studying, the richer the better, so that we can understand their situations with increasing clarity .. (Ely et al., 1991, p. 58). Consequently, both the spoken words combined with the nuances, gestures, and moods in the interviews were examined. Interview Procedures Interviews were conducted and audio-taped one-on one. As the researcher, I used a semi-structured interview 87

PAGE 101

:I i I : I protocol. Interview questions were developed, pilot tested, and revised as needed. I conducted in-depth interviews of the eight teachers and the four principals asking questions which elicited stories of change. I began with a list of questions which guided the conversation allowing the participants to tell their stories. Teachers told of the struggles and challenges they faced. Principals identified the steps they took or were currently taking towards teacher improvement, and the kinds of interactions they did or were doing with the teachers. Two of the principals opted to meet in their office, the other two chose to meet in restaurants, which had secluded tables. All teacher interviews took place in the teachers classrooms. The settings were both private and had minimal distractions. Each interview lasted at least 90 minutes. Those participants who elaborated greatly, exceeded two hours. As Berg (1989) asserts, taped and written transcription of interview discourse minimizes the likelihood of miscommunication. Spradley (1979) claims that tape recorded interviews, when fully transcribed, represent one of the most complete expanded accounts" (as cited by Ely et al., 1991) p. 83). I recorded and immediately transcribed all interviews. In doing so I was able to start to see patterns and themes, and ponder ways to ask further probing questions of upcoming participants which would require them to more deeply reflect on their 88

PAGE 102

:I I I I I I I experiences. I also devised a contact summary page on each participant. This summarized both information given by the participants combined with non-verbal data. Flexibility Within a Structure Throughout the interviews, an interview guide was used. Teachers were asked thirteen specific questions divided into four stages: identification of a problem, initial resources, initial interaction with the principal, and effort at change. Principals were asked eleven specific questions. Each interview took on its own tone. I became aware of a need for flexibility. Some teachers needed clarification, prompting, exploring with the participant instead of probing (Berg, 1989), or additional time to respond. This is confirmed by Ely et al. (1991 ). ..In naturalistic research the tables are turned, so to speak, and the ethnographer adapts to the participants and the social situation that the field demands (p. 60). Ely and her colleagues elaborate: The tasks of an ethnographic interviewer include providing focus, observing, giving directions, being sensitive to clues given by participants, probing, questioning, listening, and amalgamating statements, and generally being as involved as possible, At their most useful, ethnographic interviews are interwoven dances of questions and answers in which the researcher follows 89

PAGE 103

. I : I I :I I I ; I I i i I I i i i I I i I I :I I as well as leads. Qualitative researchers have added their own twists to the meaning of ainvolved. n (p. 59) Interviews as stories I noticed that a single question frequently became an invitation for a lengthy and involved story. Seidman (1991) makes this observation: Stories are a way of knowing. Telling stories is essentially a meaning making process. When people tell stories, they select details of their experience from their steam of consciousness. It is this process of selecting constitutive details of experience, reflecting on them, giving them order, and thereby making sense of them that makes telling stories a meaning-making experience. {p. 1) As their stories unfolded, I modified questions so they were appropriate and encouraged things that were important to disclosing events and processes. During the interviews, designated prompts were used and new questions arose as a result of respondents comments. Further questions were asked for purposes of clarification or elaboration. This format allowed for flexibility in ascertaining in depth answers and adding richness to stories of improvement. Several interviews took place with those teachers who were currently in the process of improving. Information about the process 90

PAGE 104

: I : I : I used for teacher improvement surfaced and included interventions. Through observation and self-report from both the teacher and the principal, I was able to start identifying themes in teacher improvement. The following is a list of representative questions used to guide the conversation with the teachers. The interview was divided into three stages. Identification of a problem 1. How did things start out in your classroom? (I will try to get details about student misbehavior, disrespect of students, lack of effort by students and so forth.) 2. How did you feel about how things were going? (Probe details about self-efficacy, anxiety, fears for future, how you feel about your potential as a teacher at this time, etc. ) Initial resources 3. (Assuming there were problems) Was anyone else aware of the problems you were having ? 4. What did you do about (the problems)? 91

PAGE 105

I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I i I I I ': 'i I I i i I I ____ __j 5. Where did you consider going for help? Did you follow up on this? Why or why not? Initial interaction with Principal 6. Tell me how your principal fit into the picture at this time. 7. How did you feel about asking you principal for help? 8. 9 Describe your relationship with your principal. What did your principal do at first? Prompts: Did you seek help from your principal? Did the principal ask you if you wanted help? Did the principal tell you that you needed help? Effort at change 1 0. What did you try? 11 What support did you get in trying that? 12. How did you feel at that time? Prompts: Did anything work? What things changed? 92

PAGE 106

. I I I I I 13. Describe your self-concept at the time this was happening. What is your self-concept like today? How did you feel about yourself as a teacher? How did you feel about yourself as a person? How did you feel about your potential as a teacher? Prompts: Has it changed? How? 14. Do you feel empowered? Prompts: How? Which academic or organizational decisions do you have an active voice in? Classroom, building, district? For those teachers currently in the intervention process with their principal, additional interviews occurred. It was necessary to interview these teachers more than once to gain knowledge on how the intervention process unfolded. During these interviews, questions were personalized to determine : 1 what principal actions, interactions, words of encouragement, :I and reflective questioning helped the teacher to improve. Because questions were tailored to each individual, they were 93

PAGE 107

specific and reflected teacher needs. The questions below are representative of the second interviews. 1. What has happened in your classroom since we met last month? 2. Tell me about your progress as a teacher and how 1 the principal played a part. I :I 3. What has changed? 4. How are you feeling about what is happening in your classroom now? 5. How are you feeling about yourself as a teacher at this point? In conjunction with the teacher interviews were the principal interviews. It was important to find out if teacher perceptions and those of the principal were similar or divergent. I wanted to know if principals identified the same components that the teachers did in helping with improvement? The interviews were tape recorded and I transcribed them for analysis, where I was able to identify reoccurring themes, key phrases and words. These questions were asked to guide principals during their interviews. 94

PAGE 108

1. Describe your relationship with this teacher. 2. How did you know this teacher was struggling? 3. How did you initially approach this teacher when you realized she was struggling? 4. How often do/did you observe this teacher? 5. During observations what are/were you looking for? 6. What is the process you use( d) for coaching this teacher? 7. How do/did you give feedback? 8. If you find the process you are using to coach this teacher is not facilitating improvement, what do you do next? What evidence do you use for making this decisions? If the process is helping with improvement, what are your next steps? 9. What methods do/did you use with this teacher to get her to reflect upon her teaching? 10. Overtime have you seen any change in this teacher's self-concept? 11. Do you see this teacher acting in ways that exhibit empowerment? Again, these questions were field tested with principals prior to the actual study. Additional interviews were 95

PAGE 109

' i I i I I I I I I : I conducted with principals in reference to those teachers with whom they were currently working. The following questions are representative for a second principal interview. 1. Why and how do you see this teacher as needing improvement? 2. What areas are you going to target with this teacher? 3. Identify the steps you are going to take to help this teacher become more effective. 4. What strategies or methods will you utilize with this teacher? 5. How often will you observe and meet with this teacher? 6. How will you know if you are helping this teacher? After each interview I did two things. I immediately developed a participant contact summary page (See Appendix A). This was a form on which I recorded main issues or themes, summary of information I received from the interview, anything that struck me as salient, illuminating, or important in this contact, any non-verbal information that seemed important, new or remaining target questions I had for the next contact with the participant, and any concerns. Next I 96

PAGE 110

I transcribed the interviews. These transcriptions were recorded from the teacher perspective and that of the principal. I made four copies of all the data and one master copy was kept on my computer with back-up discs. Another hard copy was kept in a safe place, and three additional hard copies were used for different kinds of analysis. One of these three remained a complete copy throughout the analysis and was a key resource for locating materials and maintaining the context for raw data. One was written on for coding purposes, I and one was used for cutting and pasting (Patton, 1990) . I selected to do more in depth examination of the one I teacher in this study who struggled the most. Observational data were gathered through watching the principal/teacher evaluation conference. I tape recorded and took field notes of the discussion and interactions between the two. Additionally, I observed, taped, and took notes of a conference between the principal and the curriculum specialist concerning strategies to help this teacher improve. This data were helpful from the perspective of viewing the process first hand. wanted to differentiate between description of the interviews and interpretation of them. Therefore, in chapter 97

PAGE 111

four I describe what happened. Then in chapter five, I have analyzed the data for patterns that appear. Data Analysis As I read and reread the transcripts, I developed a start list of codes (Appendix B). Categories were developed from the literature on the role of the principal in improving teacher I effectiveness. I added to, deleted, and revised this list. I then I I went through each transcript and coded each line that fell into I I I I i the various codes. This process then lead to determining categories and sub-categories. After all the interviews were coded, data collection was analyzed in the following manner. Data were examined for reoccurring themes or variables across the teacher interviews, and then compared to see if any of these same themes or variables surfaced in the principal interviews. The matching variables were collated with those that arose from the principal leadership research. began analyzing the data right away, without waiting until all the interviews were completed, so that initial assertions arising from the first interviews could be explored in subsequent interviews. Themes were drawn from the literature and the inductive method of discovering emergent patterns, themes, and categories which arose from the data 98

PAGE 112

:I I :I I were used. Initial categories included the teacher/principal relationship, teacher supervision, skill assistance, reflective thinking, staff development, selection of mentors and coaches, team building, empowerment, culture and teacher support, feedback, and school improvement. I identified key phrases used by the study participants. By representing respondents in their own words and reporting the actual data used for interpretation, I tried to avoid making inferences that were not directly supported by the data. The purpose of this analysis is to see and report How people construe their world of experience from the way they talk about it (Frake, 1962: 74). I continued to look for patterns in the coded data, arriving at assertions or working hypotheses regarding what sorts of facilitative behaviors on the part of principals were identified by both the teachers and the principals as supporting growth. I checked with subsequent data to see whether these assertions were supported or needed to be modified. I represented the patterns as they emerged from the data, by using categories developed and articulated by the people studied as a method of organizing and presenting certain themes. checked for internal validity by using triangulation of qualitative data sources by (a) comparing the perspectives of 99

PAGE 113

. I I l I I I people from different points of view--teacher views and principal views, (b) comparing observational data with interview data, and (c) checking for consistency of both the teacher and principal views with my view as the researcher. Different kinds of data captured different things. I looked for consistencies in overall patterns of data from different sources, while at the same time identifying the differences and reasonable explanations for them in the data. I studied and interpreted when and why differences existed (Yin, 1984). Reoccurring themes, key phrases and words were noted, as were alternative explanations and consideration for why certain cases did not fall into the main patterns Since the primary rationale for the investigation was understanding, internal validity was viewed as truth value (Guba and Lincoln, 1989). In other words do the findings capture what was really there? Validity needs to be assessed in terms of interpreting my experience, rather than in terms of reality (Merriam, 1988). The case study worker constantly attempts to capture and portray the world as it appears to the people in it. In a sense for the case study worker what seems true is more important than what is true. For the case study worker the internal judgments made by those he studies, or who are close 100

PAGE 114

I : I I I i' to the situation, are often more significant than the judgments of outsiders (Yin, 1994). Reliability refers to the extent to which one's findings can be replicated. Guba and Lincoln (1989) make a case for sidestepping reliability in favor of internal validity: Since it is impossible to have internal validity without reliability, a 1 demonstration of internal validity amounts to a simultaneous I 1 demonstration of reliability {p. 120). Despite this linkage, I : I will demonstrate consistency in my findings by describing in I detail how the study was conducted and how the findings were derived from the data. I 1 Cross-Case Analysis i I i I I I I I I I I developed a checklist matrix of variables of the coaching process. (See Table 5.1 in chapter 5). The table examines the conditions from the principal and corresponding teachers perspectives. This aided in evaluating if teachers and principals identified the same variables important in the principal coaching of teacher improvement. After exhausting all the variables, I narrowed these into themes or patterns prevailing in the four principal case studies of the process of teacher improvement. I looked for reoccurring regularities. I determined convergence in figuring 101

PAGE 115

'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : I out what things fit together leading to a classification system for the data. These were sorted into categories of principal facilitative behaviors. The synthesized list of behaviors included a caring relationship, providing support and creating culture, empowering teachers, team building, mentoring and coaching, providing staff development opportunities, clearly articulating the school vision through a school wide initiative, and evaluation and supervision. These principal facilitative behaviors are explained in length in Chapter 5. Subsequently, this led to some generalizations about what constitutes the role of the principal in teacher improvement. The structure used for data examination is organized in four principal/teacher triads, as seen in Figure 3.1. By comparing the cases, I was able to establish the range of generality of a finding or explanation (Miles and Huberman, 1984). I could build abstractions across the cases, while ; I attempting to build a general explanation that fits each of the individual cases, even though the cases vary in their details (Yin, 1984, p. 108) I saw the processes and outcomes that occur across cases and came to understand how such processes are bent by specific local contextual variables" (Miles and Huberman, 1984, p. 151). Chapter 4 will describe four principal case studies which demonstrate how each principal worked with their novice 102

PAGE 116

: I I I I : I I I I : I I : I i I I I I teachers. Then, Chapter 5 will identify the facilitative behaviors common to each of the principals. 103

PAGE 117

. I I I I I I I I I I CHAPTER4 CASE STUDIES In this Chapter, descriptive case studies will be presented of four elementary school principals and the two teachers each supervised. The purpose of the case studies is to demonstrate how each principal worked with their novice teachers. Each case begins with an introduction to the triad, and a profile of the principal and the two teachers who worked with the principal. Four triad units are described In each triad prologue, I will identify the principal facilitative behaviors that emerged from the data. See Table 4.1 for Triad comparisons. Following this, I will give some I background information about each of the principals. Next, I will write interchangeably about the teacher and the principal and their relationship, including quotes which speak to the principal facilitative behaviors. Chapter five will then examine all the data and seek commonalities among the principals' coaching. 104

PAGE 118

, I I I I ., I I I I Triad One Principal One This principal is currently in her fifth year of the principalship. Her school is a large K-5 elementary school (over 500 students and 50 staff members) and includes a Principal and Assistant Principal. She never was a classroom teacher, however she was a school student counselor for five years. Interestingly, she was the counselor in the school where she is now principal. Her predecessor was a male, who embraced an autocratic form of leadership. He was the principal of this school for eighteen years. When he retired, the school staff rallied around the counselor and petitioned the superintendent and school board to hire her as the succeeding principal. Some of the qualities that this principal and her two teachers spoke about may be why she had such support from her peers during the hiring process. It became clear that she emphasizes relationships. She talked about demonstrating mutual respect, acting honestly, nurturing and showing genuine concern for teachers by counseling them, setting expectations, giving feedback, and modeling the behavior wanted. When 105

PAGE 119

. I I : j I : I I I I I I I I I I I '! :I I : I I I : I I asked what process she uses to coach her new teachers, her response was: 1 use a counseling approach in that I try to develop a helping relationship that begins by first having a positive relationship with the teacher by trying to get to know one another, to have the person feel comfortable, and to develop trust. I make sure that I can provide for their individual needs as far as their professional concerns and to make sure that they have what they need to be successful. (Principal, December 2, 1997) Teacher One Teacher one was new to this particular school this year, but she had taught two years in another state. She quickly identified the problem area she was experiencing as student misbehavior. The interview appeared to be a reflective insightful process for the subject. I say this because she would ponder the questions, frequently mention that she had not thought about this before, and then say, Now that you have me thinking about this, I realize some things that I had not before. The more she thought to answer my questions, the more clearly she seemed to see the entire situation. She shared her innermost feelings of frustration, impatience, and even some anger with students who acted inappropriately. She had several students in her class that caused disruptions for 106

PAGE 120

. I I I I all the students. Frequently their behavior triggered other students to act inappropriately. On many days she felt like an ineffective teacher. She referenced the support she received from her principal: She always gives me positive feedback or says, 'Karen, you're going to grow so much this year!' That makes me feel like she's listening and caring and she's supportive of what I'm doing. My principal's style is friendly and one of mutual respect. A comfort zone exists. Right off the bat she was coming to see me, trying to meet my needs, making me comfortable by asking, 'What do you need? How was your day?' and she's always told me as long as my kids are learning, then she's proud of what I'm accomplishing because I'm a first year teacher. (Teacher, December 9, 1997) This teacher continued by saying how she felt comfortable going to her principal with any concerns that she l might have. This reflects the principal's position of believing I that her teachers do let her know the problem areas they experience because of the trust she had established with them: I think they totally disclose what the issue is. I don't think they hide those things. I think that's a learned behavior over time. If they feel like they're threatened, then I don't think they would share with me any longer, but I try not to be threatening. (Principal, December 2, 1997) 107

PAGE 121

! l __ j In addition to trust, this principal stressed the importance of teamwork: 1 listen and give them suggestions personally what to do or 1 send them in another direction. I usually try to send them to another person, first. I like the teamwork concept where they need to rely on their team members within the building and their peers that have other expertise in the area. Then if that doesn't work out, then come to me. (Principal. December 2, 1997) Teacher one seemed to embrace this team concept by sharing that the teacher next to her was someone she valued as a resource, coach, and sounding board. Further she utilized team members, special teachers, and the assistant principal. She even involved the behavioral specialist and counselor: My personal philosophy is that as far as going and saying to the principal, rm losing control over this child, thats a last resort. I've tried everything else. I've gone to the behavior specialist, I've talked to the counselor, I've tried to sign him up for self esteem classes, or how to get along with friends, first. Those are all the steps that I've taken. I need to feel like I've exhausted everything and I can't do anymore. (Teacher, December 9, 1997) This principal felt that her charge was to increase student achievement. She needed to have high expectations of her teachers in order to raise student abilities. Therefore, a 108

PAGE 122

. I ; I I I I i I I fundamental support strategy this principal uses is a school wide literacy initiative. Staff meetings were centered around literacy development. She states the expectations and models lessons for the teachers. This principal strongly feels that principal preparedness for staff development meetings shows teachers that she expects the same of them when they are in the classroom. The principal shared: One of the expectations I had in our building was to raise literacy scores. My expectation was that teachers would work on bringing those up. Test scores were just an indication that our children were performing at such a low rate. So my expectation was that they would work, start being innovative, and change their instructional styles and leam how to teach the reading and writing better. And I feel that's been taking place. (Principal, December 9, 1997) Teacher one referred to how the school wide literacy initiative had even helped her with student behavior. She had learned specific strategies which helped students with behavior problems to focus better. As the principal spoke specifically to the problem of classroom misbehavior identified by teacher one, she elaborated on how she lets the struggling beginning teacher know there are problems: Honesty, I try to first give feedback on things I have actually observed and have documented and say this is 109

PAGE 123

I I I I I I I what you need to do something about. I try to be gentle with new teachers. It's very difficult for them being at the top of their class in college and then to come to a work place and suddenly feel like they're not doing well. At the same time they do need to know they're making some errors. 1 approach it by telling them that this is for you to grow. You have a long career and profession ahead of you and you need to be learning and growing each year. (Teacher, December 9, 1997) As her teachers grew they gained confidence. She referred to the process of building the struggling teachers' self-concept. She felt their self concept had grown in the areas in which they had experienced success, explaining that was limited for beginning teachers: The areas in which they have been successful is where they gain confidence and are more willing to try those same things again. For example, working with a child with a problem. When they have found success in that, then they are more apt to go back and try that again. Without success, or if I haven't helped them be successful, then they will wind up not trying again, feeling that they cannot do it and they will not attempt it. (Principal, December 2, 1997) She went on to say that her new teachers lack self confidence around their profession and their personal life, because they are so young they haven't experienced the world enough to become the individual that they will eventually be. She said 110

PAGE 124

i I that their needs center around the principal acting as a parent to them by nurturing them, caring for them, and helping them with what they need. Teachers share personal things with her, which she considers part of the leadership position, "To provide leadership in the profession is certainly expected, but just providing leadership in life is also a very critical piece." : 1 The principal noted that as her teachers' needs were met, i I their skills improved and they experienced some successes. I i I I This principal spoke to the connection of the combination of the feeling of success linked with empowerment: People become empowered as they try things and they are successful at them. They feel they can make decisions based on their success. When people are empowered they feel they can make decisions, but I don't think they've had enough experience yet to say they're totally empowered. As they leam about the culture of the building and what the expectations of their team and of the entire buildings', and feel confident that they know more--they will become more empowered. (Principal, February 5, 1998) When I interviewed the teacher three months later she said things had improved greatly with students' misbehavior. She felt the children had made significant progress in both their behavior and their academics. She felt she had been more positive in the way she dealt with the children. She 1 1 1

PAGE 125

reinforced the good behavior, and ignored the bad attention getting behaviors. She also felt that she has successfully built a partnership with the parents of her children, so they became supportive of her. Parents made weekly visits to check in during classtime to see how things were going. The children were making better choices and were self-managing more often than before. They were also able to attend to learning because they were doing a better job of controlling their behaviors. The teacher commented that she was still working on consistency of enforcing behavioral expectations, which she admitted was difficult for her. This is an area in which she wants to continue to improve. She shared that she was not nearly as tired or frustrated as she had been earlier in the year. Additionally, she was proud to tell me that she now believes she has made a difference in her children's lives, particularly with one. This was meaningful to her because she could not say that before, but now she could. She further wants to be sure that this positive difference affects all her children. She believes that because she kept trying and acted in more patient ways, the situation did improve. She said her self-concept has really grown as the result of her success with her most challenging student: 112

PAGE 126

I I ; I I : i I I I I : I I I I I I I I I I I I Wow, I actually was able to do something to help him improve his behavior, it can work. Initially, I was skeptical because I thought this was never going to work, me being patient with him, but it does work. It builds your self-confidence because you think 'If I can do that, what else can I do with him.' I'll tell you how confident I'm feeling, I'm moving up to fifth grade next year. (March 1' 1998) When I asked her how she was feeling about herself as a teacher now, she was eager to share with me how excited she was about learning something new everyday. She said she was definitely feeling more confident but recognized she had a long way to go in her growth process: I'm excited to come back next year and say 0. K. this is where I grew last year, and this is where I need to grow this year' and see the growth. If you can always look back and see where you have grown and look ahead and see where you need to go, you become a better teacher. (Teacher, March 1 1998) This teachers principal made similar comments when I last interviewed her on March 13, 1998. She had seen significant growth, as a result of the teacher improving her relationship with parents and not giving up on behavioral issues. The principal had observed that students' behavior had greatly improved, and noted that students were doing much better in the literacy area since fewer disruptions occurred. 113

PAGE 127

Teacher Two Teacher two was a first year teacher who graduated the previous May. The principal stated that this teacher had some student behavioral issues earlier in the year, but had been improving. When I interviewed teacher two she talked about 1 pupil interaction, standards, and after some time identified the real problem as student behavior. This teacher initially had some hesitancy with relating her perspective. It seemed that the interview questions required her to reflect on things she may not have thought about before. The teacher had been having ongoing problems for four months, and felt like she needed to find resources to help her without engaging the principal. This teacher wanted to have more success with student behavior even though she admitted exhausting almost all resources. Her principal told the teacher that if the problems continued, to let her know. However, the teacher felt like she needed to take care of the problem and go to the principal only if all else failed. Teacher two spoke to the support she received from her principal during the first week of school: Before school had started, when I was setting up my room, she came in and asked 'How's it going? Is everything going all right? Do you need any help?' I 114

PAGE 128

thought, wow to have a principal come in and say, 'Do you need any help or any ideas?' That's when it started. From that first week. (Teacher, December 2, 1997) As the teacher remembered some of the difficulty she experienced, she discussed a boy whose behaviors were creating problems. She told how her principal had been involved in supporting her with this child by visiting the classroom and suggesting other staff who might be able to help her. The principal additionally offered to help in dealing with the child's parents. This teacher believes that the principal's support is one of the reasons that her first year has been so successful and smooth. She expressed that she felt comfortable going to her principal and letting her know what was happening in the : / classroom. She claimed this comfort was due to the trust and I ; I ; I mutual respect which had been built. She said the principal visited at least once a week, even walking through or stopping and working with the students: That makes a big impact. To have her in the classroom helps, just knowing she's here and if I need her I can go to her. It was very comfortable; one key word, just supportive. When I was having problems with the first child, she was the first one I went to. But on the second one, I need to exhaust and use some other resources. I do need to do some on my own, and figure out how I can work on this. If I can't, then I will go to her. Although I 115

PAGE 129

II i I I i don't feel uncomfortable going to her at any time if I needed to. (Teacher, December 2, 1997) This teacher's principal encourages her teachers to reflect on their teaching and classroom management procedures as a means to improve. As the teacher shared her reflections with me, she discussed the strategies she had used to improve student behavior. These included developing a behavior contract, going to the behavior specialist, trying a plan where the student is able to receive positive rewards, and eating lunch or checking out a book together. She said that worked for a while and then he regressed and it was no longer successful. He sat right beside the teacher to do his work, but 1 she felt this was difficult because there were 20 other : I students who also needed her attention. Realistically she j couldn't always be with him. Therefore, she sought the help of the reading teacher who tried one-on-one instruction with him. Two times a week he read and wrote with the personal attention of this additional resource. He was able to complete work in this setting. Another resource the teacher employed was the Title 1 teacher who read with him as well. The teacher explained: My last resort is putting him in a child study for behavior, for the disrespect, the defiance, just being 116 ------'.--'-----.--

PAGE 130

I I I :I I I distracted. He's a capable boy, but not able to do it. I've tried calling the parents. It's been a daily call, letter, a note to them. They've also written back and they've come in. The behavioral specialist and I conferenced with the parents. (Teacher, December 2, 1997) The teacher spoke about feeling frustrated while working with this student. She talked about being pushed to her limit of tolerance. At this point, she would have him go to the classroom next door for a time to be away from her. She did this so she would not become angry: I stop and I say, 'Okay, this is not good.' It was hard to go home and feel like you were doing a good job. Although you have 20 other students in your classroom that you're not having much trouble with--1 felt like if I wasn't reaching this one child who really needs me and is really needy, what kind of a teacher am I going to be? And what kind of teacher am I? What kind of a teacher can't find the solution to figuring this out. I'm not sure that there is a solution, but those are the feelings that I went through. So you do, as a teacher, question yourself. If you're a teacher that comes back and thinks and re evaluates what you're doing with any child, that's going to help you keep growing. I feel like I'm a good teacher and that I am reaching the students, but there's so much more to go for and evaluate. (Teacher, December 2, 1997) These two stories clearly reveal that this principal immediately established relationships with both of these teachers. She was clear in her expectations and modeled the 117

PAGE 131

I I I I I I : I I I ; I 1 I I I I :I : I : I : I : I behavior she wanted replicated. She gently gave each teacher honest feedback from the perspective of how much they were going to grow and how that could happen. She encouraged team problem solving and gave the teachers the belief that they were capable of handling the problems, while at the same time provided the support for them to fall back on, if needed. Triad Two Principal Two The second principal participant had been a principal for four years. She had been both a classroom teacher and a gifted and talented specialist and coordinator. I can personally speak to her characteristics because we worked side by side, as teachers, for five years. She is extremely energetic, sets exceptionally high standards for herself and those who work with her, she is very clear on her priorities, holds herself accountable tor doing the right thing for children, and is straight forward in the way she faces and solves problems. She describes herself as a real driver-. People who work with this person have tremendous professional growth. The principal talks about her expectations: I work others hard, .. most teachers can only stay with me for two years. I have a reputation of expecting a 118

PAGE 132

great deal from teachers, which can be intimidating. Because I require much of my teachers they need to take a break from me, go somewhere else for awhile where they can have a rest, and then join me when they are ready to work hard again. (Principal, December 15, 1997) Due to her ambition, competence, and energetic nature, she was selected, as a first year principal, to head a K-5 elementary school with a high risk population. Student scores r I 1 were incredibly low, the staff needed to improve, and she was I I I I :I I I I charged to make a positive impact. She was so effective that four years later, she was chosen to open a brand new school. She is currently on special assignment to plan for that school. With this kind of a record in such a short period of time, she became an interesting subject. Both of the teacher participants that worked with this principal are historical cases. They spent two years with her. When she was given the special assignment of planning for the new school, they both chose to leave their school and are currently teaching in two separate schools. Another interesting note is that both are going to apply to teach in the new school this principal will be opening. Teacher Three This participant demonstrated both uniqueness and special qualities. Her first year of teaching was a non-119

PAGE 133

I I I I I : I : I I I I I I contracted position that was hired mid-year. She volunteered to teach full time, because it was the right thing to do for children. For her, classroom management and meeting the needs of the diverse level of students were the problem areas. She felt her principal was like a mentor to her. She frequently referred to her principal "pushing" her. When asked to describe her relationship with her principal, she said, n one word a gift". This teacher shared that her principal had an open door policy, was always there for her, listened to her, welcomed her, and wanted her to succeed. She further described the relationship as one of "bonding and closeness. She commented that the school wide initiative was instrumental to her success. She felt that her principal met her needs. At the same time, the principal guided, even pushed her to improve. One of her most difficult tasks was meeting the wide range of learner needs: Being a first-year teacher you come in and you have no idea what to expect, and student teaching doesn't prepare you for that. My major focus for the first couple of weeks was needing to let them know who was going to be in charge and yet still have the closeness that I wanted to have with them. Kids were also in drastically varied levels. I had kids that were Kindergarten level and it was a fourth grade class, and then I had kids that were gifted. So that part was very difficult for me. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) 120

PAGE 134

I i I She went on to explain that her team had given her 'I support in dealing with these different levels. They had helped her develop a system to manage children's behavior. She i utilized them as a constant resource in a variety of areas. I ; I :I I I :I When asked about the school wide literacy initiative and the support she received to improve in that area, the teacher noted: I was very fortunate to be in a school where they were doing some renovation as far as teaching was concerned. My principal had a grant for Goals 2000 money and used that money to train teachers in reading instruction; this was the major focus of the school. They hired Dr. Swaby to train all of the teachers. I was a first-year teacher and Dr. Swaby was there showing me exactly what I needed to do and my principal was saying, 'Okay, I'm encouraging you to do this. That piece was wonderful because I had those two resources to show me and guide me as far as what I needed to be doing in the classroom to meet all of the needs of the students, not only the kids who were gifted but the kids who still needed remediation. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) This coincided very closely with what the principal was i I trying to accomplish. She utilized staff development as a tool for teacher improvement. The principal explained that she used dialogue combined with time for teachers to reflect on and discuss issues. Equally important, she assisted teachers in locating helpful human resources: 121

PAGE 135

I It is important not to think you have all the answers, but to be a starting point and a grounding point, and then to show them what else is out there. It's kind of like when I worked with the G!T kids. I had a lot of ideas but I didn't have it all. I had to be the resource to get them to go out and look for it. So many times I would either recommend teachers they could talk to or I would call on their behalf and say, 'Would you be willing to chat with this person?' Sometimes I would buy a substitute and allow the teacher to go and visit a mentor teacher or to spend time with them. (Principal, December 15, 1997) The principal took advantage of other resources, such as the gifted and talented teacher, who she asked to talk about the enrichment piece. Her goal was to be the bridge to further teacher resources. Additionally, she brought teachers books and research. A portion of each staff meeting was always dedicated to the reading piece, by expounding on what the I reading consultant used. She felt like she had been :I successful in linking teachers to advantageous resources: I Interestingly enough, both of these gals are now getting their masters with the reading consultant in reading. So apparently, there was some connection there. Something happened that they felt kinship to and wanted. (Principal, December 15, 1997) Combined with staff development, this principal believed in specific individual teacher coaching. She listed areas that 122

PAGE 136

I I she saw as strengths and then areas that needed improvement. She gave specific recommendations for how to address the areas which needed work. She made it a point to stress teachers' strengths. If she saw that there was a particular teacher that had a real strength in science, she looked at the area of weakness through the stronger capabilities of the teacher: It might be reading and I would say, 'Let's look at what you're doing in science. Is there a way that you can tie some of it in with reading?' Just to kind of give them some positive along with the needed areas of improvement. And typically, for beginning teachers, the lists for improvement are long and it's difficult because you have to pinpoint five or six. That's probably my most difficult task is really saying, 'Okay, what does she really need to start with? Lefs not overwhelm this person. Let's focus on this'. (Principal, December 15, 1997) This principal realized the importance of periodic checkpoints with her teachers: There are interval checks where verbally, 'How is this going? Did you try that? Did that work?' If the teacher says that it isn't working, we'll go back to conference. So for me the best way to communicate is through verbal conference and then put that in writing. Part of what I discovered, is that beginning teachers are pretty intimidated by principals. I would go through these discussions and they'd either be writing so much that they couldn't process, or they would not be writing at all because they were just so nervous, waiting for the other 123

PAGE 137

shoe to drop. What I found is that the written evaluation piece followed the conference, then that gave them a chance to kind of think, 'Okay, here's what she said.' Then we use that for the second time. We look at, 'Okay, how are we coming with this?' So it's almost a map for them to go back to. (Principal, December 15, 1997) The principal commented on seizing the moment with her teachers and also redirecting them to the appropriate resource: I use a lot of teachable moments. If I see something that is either really fantastic or maybe just an adjustment needs to be made, I try to do that during that moment. Because if I wait, there will be another crisis or another thing that will come. So I use a lot of notes. That also is a way to communicate. Teachers tend to learn best from people they can relate to and who are within their domain. As principal, I would do everything I could to support some resourcing, whether it be a mentor teacher, observing another teacher, or pairing them up with a teammate that could model some of this. (Principal, December 15, 1997) The teacher participant felt her growth process was largely due to her relationship with her principal. She explained that she had a mentor specifically in her grade level, however her principal was more like a mentor to her, because she was always there. She had an open door policy where she could visit her principal whenever she needed to: 124

PAGE 138

. I I I I could go in, sit down, and put my feet up. She was there to listen to me complain or brag about what had happened that day. The support was fabulous! If I needed something or I had a concern or I was feeling overwhelmed with the day, then I could share with her. I can't say enough positive things about it because she was just so welcoming and wanted me to succeed at this and saw that even though I didnt have any experience I was still going to make it as a teacher, and she pushed me in that direction. She had a willingness to see beyond the fact that I was so naive and immature. She kept pushing me and saying, This is where youre meant to be. I know this about you: She was able to see things in me that I had no idea were there. That helped the bonding and the closeness to happen for us. {Teacher, December 18, 1997) The teacher elaborated by relating several occasions where the principal removed a student from the classroom due to inappropriate behavior, and how the teacher felt completely supported. She spoke to the principaJs visibility in the classroom by periodically checking to see how things were going and making sure everything was going well. When she visited she would see if the teacher needed anything including materials, and she would give the teacher ideas about what she needed to do. The teacher explained, Nshe guided me as far as, This is the person you need to talk to. Everyone in the school was like a family unit. This teacher was aware that in the beginning she was totally overwhelmed by the job, not knowing if she was giving 125

PAGE 139

I I I I the children what they needed in order to be successful. She felt insecure, unprepared, and unsure if she was doing the right thing. She questioned if what she had teamed in college had really prepared her for what she needed to do for this group of children, and decided it hadn't. She believed, what prepares you to be a teacher is to be a teacher. You need to dive in and just do it: She saw her role similarly to the way she described her relationship with her principal in that, t knew I had given them a gift as far as being able to push them on . I knew that they were going to get it (December 18, 1997). n By the end of the first school year it was much easier for her to see that student growth was happening and she had accomplished her goals. She shared that she felt empowered by being able to be my own self as a teacher, designing her own classroom set up, her organization on how she wanted to run her classroom, her teaching of the academic areas, and her voice in organizational decisions. She recognized the area she still wants additional help in as reaching the needs of the gifted students. This was difficult for her and is an area in which she still struggles. Therefore, she is currently getting her Master's Degree focusing on talented and gifted education so that she can benefit children who excel. 126

PAGE 140

: I I I I I I I I I : I The principal's recollection of the process aligns closely with the teachers': Both teachers started out as novices, with all the insecurities of instruction, behavior management, working with staff, the principal, parents, and learning to bond with kids. It was doubly hard for them because this was a very tough school and they had heard all the stories about the behaviors. Then I have a reputation for being pretty demanding and having high expectations. That's something I don't apologize for, but that's also something that intimidates people when they start to work in my building. (Principal, December 15, 1997) Reflecting on the growth of these teachers, the principal remarked, By the time they were done, they were pretty assertive people. That tends to happen with teachers that I supervise. They tend to become probably as assertive, if not more assertive than I am, because it's something that I really encourage in them. I saw them grow in their profession. They both became tremendously skilled in the reading piece. I also saw a lot of growth in terms of holding their own with staff; they believed in their opinion and in their strategies and were able to stand up for that. There's something that's really special about beginning teachers. I used to teach first grade and I remember that from September to June you saw little babies become people! They grew. That's the feeling that I have about beginning teachers. It's very special. (Principal, December 15, 1997) 127

PAGE 141

: I I The principal found that somewhere in the course of her interactions with teachers she identified leadership potential within certain teachers: Some teachers fall more under followership, others fall under leadership. One of these teachers was very depictive of the followership and the team effort and whatever she could do to support the team. The other was too, however she was also very verbal, assertive, and took the leadership role in many situations that were going on during the reconstitution periods at the school. It was just amazing to watch because she's a young teacher. The empowerment piece came through! {Principal, December 15, 1997) Teacher Four This teacher had been a bilingual teacher in Texas for one year prior to working with Principal Two. She remembers when she was first hired by the principal and told some of her teacher friends who responded: Oh my gosh, you went on an interview and she hired you? She's just wonderful but, everybody I've talked to who works for her says, 'You better work and you better work really hard, be really motivated.' That really got me going; if you're in a building with somebody who's such a leader and does so much, you feel like you have to go along with doing things and keeping current and really working as hard as you can to help to do your job the best you can. I was a bit overwhelmed, but I was confident and I also felt really comfortable asking for what I needed. 128

PAGE 142

. I I I I I I I I i She always made time for that, too. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) She clearly identified her problem areas. As with all the other teachers I interviewed, student misbehavior was an issue. However, the major issue for her was the planning for the wide variety of student levels without having a teammate. As she thought back to the first week of school she remembered how students tried to figure out the teacher to see what they could get away with and how she ended up having some behavioral problems that she had to keep working on all year: I couldn't believe some of the things that little third graders would say or do. I knew I had to do a lot of redirecting of behavior. I had to devise a plan to make sure that they were held accountable. The planning went okay, although, I didn't have a teammate, so I was on my own doing a new grade in a new school. This was the biggest struggle. I really didn't have anyone to share ideas with, so that was the hardest part. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) This teacher shared that her principal was instrumental in providing her with support, suggestions, praise, and nurturing her. She was amazed at the principal's energy level. She commented about the high expectations of the principal, her fast pace, and how hard she worked her teachers, but how 129

PAGE 143

I I I i I I I much they learned. I found it interesting that even though the subject felt her principal was a real driver, she felt very comfortable asking for help and having her visit the classroom. She explained, My principal was just go, go, go, ninety miles an hour, all the time. When you came into her office it was down to business, but joking around, at the appropriate times. She was busy but there was always time for you. When she visited the class, she gave me ideas that worked when she taught. I tried it and it worked for me, too. If I had a question or a concern or when I got observed, my principal always gave me helpful feedback. My principal had a an old teammate from another school who taught third grade. She told me, 'Call her, I've talked to her about you and she'll help you out,' and she did. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) One time when the principal observed this teacher during reading, she wrote her a note giving an example how she, in her teaching career, had done her reading groups and seat work. This made sense to the teacher. She tried the suggestion which made teaching reading easier for her. She appreciated her principal's follow up. Every day the principal visited the classroom, even if it was merely a walk through. While in the classroom she would observe challenging students. She gave suggestions. Some of them were as simple as, 'I suggest keeping pencils at your reading table so if the kids need them doing a worksheet, they don't have to bring them from their 130

PAGE 144

:I :I I desks. Other examples were suggesting differentiating the seat work so all students were working at their appropriate levels. The principal never suggested anything which the teacher felt was unreasonable. Sometimes the suggestions I 1 were to continue doing things, which the teacher liked because I : I : I I I I I I I I I it felt like positive feedback. On post observation reports the principal would describe everything she saw and then say, 'Now, is there anything that you'd like to share with me?' This teacher remembered a time when she really needed to talk with her principal and the ways her principal encouraged positive thinking: The most important thing was my principal saying, 'My door is always open.' I knew if I had a problem with a student, or a parent called and was angry. or I needed to have something taken care of, I could say, 'I really need to talk to you,' and she'd say, 'Come on in: I remember one time she was going to a meeting and I said, 'I have got to talk to you about this, and she said, 'Come in, and I said, 'You'll be late,' and she said, 'They'll wait.' That was really important to me. That and the fact that I felt like could really talk and not wait for her to talk to me. I'd ask her questions or if I was having a bad day, I'd say, 'Gosh, I'm having a bad day'. I could just be honest with her. She'd give you little things in your mailbox, pins, cards, cookies, and little notes. She's still sending me things, 'keep up the good work' or 'hang in there'--those are important. She was always trying to do things to help us stay and think positive. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) 131

PAGE 145

, I I : i I : I i ; I ., As this teacher reflected upon how her process of improvement went over time, she felt comfortable and empowered: I felt really empowered by the changes I saw in my students. Some, initially, were just so angry and couldn't do anything. Then they started to really work, care, and try to please me. Even the quality of their work improved as they knew what I expected. I was empowered by being asked to go to some trainings and to do some things by my principal. I always had a say. I was on the Dream Team. It was a restructuring committee and whoever wanted to could be on it. We worked closely with the principal. She let us know about things and wanted our input; we always gave it, and I think she listened. That was nice; it was more of a partnership and listening and sharing. That was another way that I felt empowered about what I could do. The trust and the respect that went both ways was empowering. We were really involved in all kinds of decision making. I leamed so much from her and it just amazed me the energy that this woman had. I thought 'if she can be doing all this, then I can be doing more than I am now. She was motivating. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) This principal has been very effective in teacher improvement, however if she found that intensive coaching, team support, and district resources did not ensure the improvement she expected in teachers. she utilized the 132

PAGE 146

evaluation path which lead to teacher remediation plans and possible career counseling out of the teaching field. She explained her rationale in the following manner: I think that we're fooling ourselves if we think that because a teacher doesn't affectively harm kids or is not positive with kids that it's okay. Children are still losing. What they're losing is their learning ability. We can't afford to do that. We can't afford to have a child lose a year because they were in second grade and there were not the kinds of thing happening that the child both needed and deserved. (Principal, December 15, 1997) Hearing the stories that these teachers shared, painted a picture of a principal that clearly had high expectations of herself and teachers. She did indeed "push her teachers to I grow, while at the same time providing the training and resources needed for their success. She gave honest feedback I and made suggestions about what they specifically needed to do to improve. Her teachers felt encouraged, supported and empowered by her. She demonstrated the nurture, care, extra reinforcement, and incentives that made them feel competent and important. Both teachers were motivated to work hard for this principal, so much so that they want to work for her in the upcoming school year at the school which the principal will be opening. 133

PAGE 147

. I I I : I I : i I I I I i I I I I : I I I I This triad was unique from the others. Each participant, the principal and two teacher, spoke to the more student focused conditions. These teachers practiced under a principal who stressed and modeled high expectations. We know from effective schools research the importance of high expectations for student achievement. In this case study of principal two and her teachers, the consistency between the principal and the teachers on the importance of excellent instruction and student achievement was precisely aligned. In all three interviews, this focus was foremost and commonly spoken about. These conditions were not addressed by any other teachers, and only two other principals, resulting in this triad looking very different than the rest. Triad Three Principal Three This principal was the most experienced of all whom interviewed. She started her teaching career as a special education teacher. worked with her as her assistant principal in a school with a high at-risk student population. She had been a principal for thirteen years in three different schools. Her most recent assignment was the restructuring of a high risk population school. This middle sized K-5 134

PAGE 148

:I I :I elementary school was reconstituted in the fall of 1997, as part of the restructuring movement. It is in a low socioeconomic neighborhood where both parents work two jobs in order to maintain their living and one which was so unsafe that no teacher was allowed to stay after it became dark. : I She was specifically selected for this position due to her 'I familiarity with this population and her demonstration of 1 expertise in improved student achievement. She shared with me that even though this was an old building with the same I I I I I I I neighborhood children, that it was very much like opening a new school from the perspective of hiring all new staff, creating the vision and student expectations, initiating a school focus and an implementation plan, and setting policies and procedures. She let me know that the charge she was given was to increase student achievement of typically low achieving students and to improve the school climate, safety of the environment, and student behavior. She had only hired two new teachers, the remainder were experienced. This principal puts the emphasis on finding something praiseworthy that teachers had done well. She utilizes human district resources in the improvement process of teachers. She wants to see teachers succeed and tries to do so by meeting their individual needs. 135

PAGE 149

i ; I I I She utilizes the evaluation process as a vehicle for teacher improvement. She is politically savvy, clearly understands climate and morale issues, and is capable of reading her teachers well. A quality she has is how astute she is in knowing what happens in her classrooms. She constantly asks teachers what they need in order to be successful. This principal was extremely busy, but gave me her full attention. She was frank in responses and willing to help with this study. Teacher Fiye This teacher had been a reading teacher for half of a school year in another state. This was her first classroom and full year position. The participant took quite a bit of time to get to her undertying problem. Discipline, classroom management, misbehavior, student focusing, and student attention span were all secondary issues. This teacher, as noted through body posture and facial expressions became much more comfortable as the interview progressed. She exhibited confidence in her abilities. She seemed to be quite : I capable of individual problem solving. She appreciated her fellow teachers, but did not rely on them. It was about 20 minutes into the interview before the number one issue surfaced. The real concern for this teacher was one of lack of 136

PAGE 150

i I : I I : i I I I I I I I : I : I security and personal trust, combined with teacher well being and safety. As she talked about a theft experience, which took place in her classroom, she seemed to tense up and display her anger by the tone of her voice and her body posture. What really caused her concern were the events which were out of her control, specifically the theft of her purse. I found it interesting that she seemed to have truly bonded with most of her fellow teachers. She shared that the staff had become her family. After her theft, she actually moved in with a teacher for a month until her next paycheck. We focused on her secondary areas of concern, because these were ones where she had some control. This teacher thought back to the beginning of the year and recalled it feeling hectic because many of the students had behavioral difficulties. There had been classroom management problems. It was hard for this teacher to keep students on task and focused. The principal had prepared staff that student misbehavior would be an issue. Staff had much discussion before the school year started about how this school was going to operate and some of the situations that could arise. As the year progressed, the principal encouraged open communication about what was happening and how staff was feeling. The teacher recognized that the principal was trying to create 137

PAGE 151

I a team in which, from the beginning, everyone felt like they were jointly engaged in this new endeavor. The teacher felt that things were going as they should, and were progressing normally. Because these were needy children, creating a routine worked best for her and her students. She commented that all teachers were experiencing the same problems, so they were able to brainstorm ideas together. Therefore, she did not feel alone in the situation. She referenced constantly being able to talk with one another. When I interviewed the principal, she expressed that the focal points were student achievement in terms of literacy, reading, math, and then secondarily working on the overall learning climate, the safety of the environment, and student behavior. She explained that her involvement with teachers in the beginning was centered around the fact that they were part of an entirely new staff at this building. Sometimes it was hard for her to think of these two new teachers as first year teachers. This occurred because teachers that had taught for many years seemed like and were functioning like first year teachers because they were all working together in a new building--new staff, new custodians, new secretarieseveryone was new. There were a lot of logistical things that they were still sorting through and/or determining a process 138

PAGE 152

I I : I I I I I : I I I i I I ; I ' I i for, as well the whole curriculum and the responsibility of the academics in the building. The principal emphasized: It's not a matter of saying, 'Okay, you can buddy up with the teacher across the hall because she knows how to work the AV system,' because nobody knows it in this building. We're having to create it all over again. (Principal, December 16, 1997) The teacher revealed that her team became her family, and that she did not feel a need to go to her principal for help, however, her principal provided her with assistance: The principal and I have a professional relationship, yet she's a very approachable person and I feel that she's always going to be there if I need something and I'm completely comfortable having her come into the room. Because I'm a new teacher, I've had two observations this fall. She would offer feedback on things I was doing well and then she would make suggestions about things I might want to try. She always asked me, 'Is there anything you need? What can we get for you?' (Teacher, December 15, 1997) This principal had commented on trying to gauge both new teachers level of awareness and the importance of finding something praiseworthy that they were responsible for, whether it be the lesson itself and/or the demonstration, or the effecting of grouping. As I observed this principal's interactions with one teacher, I noticed that she would ask a 139

PAGE 153

I I : I I I I : i : I I I : I I lead question, 'Did you notice' or 'What did you think when ... .' to help her assess the degree to which the teacher felt the lesson could have been improved by virtue of student behavior. Next, she had some practical suggestions, such as, instead of having one object for a group of four to interact with, spend the extra time and energy it takes to have an object for every child to manipulate which should result in improved behavior. In another instance, It was simply a matter of five children, four books. Two kids were really not into sharing and as a result, didn't volunteer, didn't stay on task, didn't really become part of the group because they were struggling with who has the book and what page are we on? One child's hand was covering the other child's page and it really got into this strange behavior. So in that instance, it was simply a matter of, 'Tell me when you need something and I will try to get it for you. All you needed to help improve this lesson, in part, was another text book. One other text book would have made a big difference.' (Principal, December 16, 1997) The principal saw her job as asking questions, sharing perceptions, commenting on the observation, offering some strategies, and suggesting more resources. She added that neither teacher was very assertive around their material needs: 140

PAGE 154

I : I : i :I I think part of it is an effort to be sensitive to what school resources we have and feeling like 'I shouldn't ask for this because I know somebody who doesn1 have this and in comparison my request isn't as important'. I'm constantly, in both cases, trying to say to them, Tell me what you need. Let me know what you need: I ask and ask and ask. So far, one teacher has requested something that you or I honestly would have gone to Target and bought and not even bothered, let alone waiting to receive. (Principal, December 16, 1997) The issue of lack of teacher security came up in a discussion the teacher and I had about group decision making. She shared that ev.eryone had a voice in all major issues. She said the door was always open for teachers to discuss any issues that either were not addressed in the group, or not completely addressed. She continued that one of these issues was teacher and building security. I inquired if she meant job security or within the building. She went on to say building and neighborhood security. She added that two teachers had experienced problems with theft of their purses from their classroom during parent activities, saying ... those things have had to be addressed and we don1 know if they're being handled as well as they could be. II She expressed that she had not anticipated that happening, and now that it has she, didn't really know what to do. She felt both the principal and the custodial staff need to work together on the problem. She 141

PAGE 155

:I I I I :I I I .I I I I I I : j I linked this with the fear of not being able to stay at school after dark and said: You're never really comfortable with fear, but, I had adjusted to it, until the theft happened to me. Then I thought, This isn't right'. It took more time because I lost the trust I had gained with my students. Then the other incident occurred during our music performance at night. So then we thought, well maybe we can't have these activities at night. That takes away from the students. So it's a touchy issue right now. I still definitely want to be here longer than a year because love the people I am working with. If I didn't have that kind of support, then it would be different. (Teacher, December 15, 1997) In addition to feeling good about her fellow staff members, she has felt good about her teaching capabilities. She, however, does recall: The only time that my self concept started not feeling like it should was when I had to change reading methods. We were required to use specific strategies and take on different methods for this student population. I had to completely re-learn how to teach reading in this new way. At that time, I felt like I wasn't a good teacher. I had to train myself to teach in this certain way when I was so used to the other method. It's what our school had decided to use. At first I was in disagreement, but now I really feel it's the best thing for the kids. Things are going well. I can introduce them to so many different things when they come to school in the school day, that's very empowering. (Teacher, December 15, 1997) 142

PAGE 156

Teacher Six I 1 This teacher had been a school secretary for a number of ./ years and had decided to go back to school to become a teacher. ; I She lived out of the state and had a telephone interview to :I acquire her current position. This is her first year of teaching. 'I Out of all the teacher participants, she is the one most 'I I I :I I I I I I critically in need of improvement. In the beginning of the year, it appeared that one particular child was creating much of the difficulties. However, the principal noticed that after the big problem child left, the entire class still was out of control. This teacher had a hard time being accountable for student behavior. The principal identified the core issue as lack of classroom management which impeded student learning: After this boy moved, I was unable to see what I had hoped was her best with the remainder of the class. What I saw was that oftentimes her difficulty in dealing with the class could have and probably did trigger a lot of his acting out. I say this because he was always on the edge and her inability to cope with what the rest of the class was doing would result in him choosing to make a really poor decision. I saw behaviors that kids typically demonstrated that I didn1 think any teacher should accept. I talked to her about children sitting with their feet inside their desk. I mean, real blatant kinds of student behaviors, calling out versus raising a hand, getting up and sharpening a pencil in the middle of discourse. So I talked to her generally about some 143

PAGE 157

. I I I I I I : I ; I I I I I I j i I I I I :I i I I structure. What I found from those generalities was that she was still struggling. That wasn't enough. She needed real specifics. (Principal, December 16, 1997) At this point, the principal elicited the help of the social worker. She became a supportive resource who spent much time talking with the teacher. Anytime the principal was near the classroom, even if by virtue of observing another teacher, she would make it a point of doing a spot check to see how things were going. She shared her observations: Overall, I have to say that she's still struggling with how to maintain control of the class. The class oftentimes runs away from her. Then the whole day is spent trying to get it back under control. There are a lot of kids who are engaging in some behaviors that I think anyone else would have nipped in the bud a long time ago. (Principal, February 2, 1998) Interestingly, when I spoke with the teacher she identified the problem area as a .. restless class. She discussed students home life and lack of motivation as if to excuse misbehavior. It almost seemed like she was somewhat oblivious to the problem. She mentioned that she was supported by her principal. She felt safe in talking with her. : 1 She shared that her principal gave her suggestions and good feedback from the observations. She liked the fact that the principal dealt with the behavioral problems, so she would not 144

PAGE 158

I i : I I I I I I have to. She expressed that her self-concept in the beginning of the school year was not very good. She talked about problems she still is having: These children are very restless, so I keep trying different ways to keep them in their chairs working with the group and mainly how can I get them to work with the group more. If somebody says something, bumps them, or does something that they don't like they're really quick to flare up. They still have trouble with social skills even working in groups of three and four. I feel frustration because they are aggressive kids. They have a tendency of being verbal or sometimes even a little physical. We've been working on it. It's gotten better, but theylre still there at the end of second quarter doing this. (Teacher, December 16, 1997) The principal told me she was amazed that it was December and the children in this class were still not under control. She didn't want to come off alarmed to the teacher, but at the same time, she told her as another resource, she would like her to utilize the reading supervisor for direct support. The reading supervisor was someone who had a firm understanding of content. She was capable of evaluating the content that was being delivered and also had the advantage of an observer who could give the teacher constructive support around behavior management. I was present when the principal had this conversation with the district supervisor: 145

PAGE 159

.I I I I I I I . let's shift from the content to the behaviors, because otherwise it doesn't matter what content you present. I was alarmed and I had to caution myself not to say, 'My God, your class is a disaster. And where can we start?' I honestly said to her that one of the things I felt like she needed to do was to literally, when she feels that the class is not listening, just stop! I mean, stop the music. I think that's hard for her to do. I'll have to come back and hopefully catch her doing that and reinforce that. All new teachers want to please, they seek approval, they want to gain some sense of comfort with what they've learned and they want it to work. When they're feeling like they're not coming through, they still want to know that we perceive them to be capable. (Principal, December 16, 1997) The principal also called on the school wide initiative consultant, teammates, and other teachers within the building to assist this teacher. She frequently does awalk throughsa capitalizing on some aspect of learning that she thought was going well, in order to reinforce it. She would follow this with a note so the teacher would be clear on what she, as the principal, valued. The teacher definitely felt supported. She explained that her principal had been good. She felt her principal had noticed that the class was developmentally young and commented: I feel real supported by my principal. Since this one huge behavioral student has left, I've had another real 146

PAGE 160

I : I behavior problem child, I mean, real severe. The principal has just been real supportive as far as dealing with him so that I can get on with my class, giving me suggestions. When she's come in to observe, she's given me very good feedback and I feel safe talking to her. That's nice because you don't always get that as a teacher with an administrator. Our principal says whatever you need, I'll help you with and let me know. Just a real open door policy that I like. I felt like when sent him, he was dealt with appropriately and from her I got backing. It wasn't like why did you send him for this, this wasn't important enough' or 'Why didn't you send him sooner?' It was always about what happened and how do we deal with it? She would deal with the parent on these issues. (Teacher, December 16, 1997) The principal offered support to the teacher, but at the same time was trying to move her to be more accountable for her own students. I was able to observe a conference between the teacher and the principal following a lesson the principal had observed. In the conference the principal asked leading questions of the teacher like, what went well? What do you think could have gone better? What would you need for it to go better? What did you think about your groupings? If you could go back and regroup, what would you do different? She pointed out one portion of the lesson where the teacher had groups of four with a remainder of two. The two students were very productive, very much on task, very cooperative, and had a positive leaming experience. She asked the teacher to 147

PAGE 161

:I :I I :I I I .I I I I I I reflect on the difference between those two children, what she saw and heard, and got in terms of product, versus the others. The teacher was able to draw the conclusion Maybe I just need to start with groups of two. The principal responded, nExactly, let's start with two, then when you see that the kids can handle it and you're getting what you want, then add another child and build up to four. You just can't start with four." The principal also asked her to consider literally how she arranged her room in terms of where the children are sitting, where she is, where her desk is, and her mobility. She asked her to consider even the structure of the student rows, and reminded her there is space in the room for fourteen desks to literally have little islands of one. She told her, where you see evidence that kids are cooperating and can be successful, then start pulling the desks side by side, but not until then. Don't automatically start with that." She asked her to take a I look at other physical arrangements in other classrooms. She encouraged her to be open with other teachers and ask them questions and to spend time with her team. She additionally, tried to reinforce the concept that instructional supervisors can do more than provide materials. She explained they can be a resource for lesson delivery and classroom management, and suggested she use the reading supervisor in that fashion. She 148

PAGE 162

I : I : I I I I I : spent quite some time stressing not moving forward until her children perform to a standard that she has set, and only when she has good performance, move them on, but not until then. She reminded her not to continue just because she tried that lesson and it's time to flip to the next page. She let her know that she, as the teacher, is the guage of when and how children should move and it's not just a time factor. After the teacher had left, the principal and I chatted. She let me know that the next step was going to be putting an effective teacher in with her to model teaching, show her, and demonstrate for her how to take a situation and reshape the students' behavior. At this time, the principal felt that just pointing things out to her was no longer enough. She said, "She needs a coach so she can see what it looks like and practice good teaching." I interviewed both the teacher and principal three months later. The principal followed up with her intuition and had several experienced teachers do some team teaching with the teacher, so that the struggling teacher could see good teaching being modeled. These mentors had worked with the teacher and class for over two months. The principal had very recently observed the teacher teach a lesson by herself. She was pleased to see improvement in student behavior and responsiveness to teaching and teacher expectations and 149

PAGE 163

; instruction. The principal felt that this intensive modeling : 1 helped the teacher to see what her students were truly capable 1 of doing. : I I When I spoke with the teacher, she seemed grateful to have the assistance of other teachers. She told me that initially she thought things were better because two teachers were available to students. However, as time passed she noticed some difference in teacher styles and expectations". She felt she had learned new approaches.. which improved the classroom climate. She admitted that she now feels more in control of the students and instruction. Like the previous principals, this subject was aware of the developmental nature of beginning teachers. She was careful to build relationships which were supportive and to point out and build on the teachers strengths. She encouraged the team concept and collaboration of the entire staff. She led a school wide initiative of improved literacy, as a primary piece of good instruction. She utilized both building and district human resources in the improvement process. The one teacher case was more difficult than the other in the i I improvement process. Despite this, the principal kept ' searching for ways to reach and develop the teacher. It was clear from the way she talked about her that she liked her, 150

PAGE 164

cared about her, and wanted her to succeed. She had not given up on the teacher. Triad Four Principal Four have known this principal for eleven years. First as a : I fellow classroom teacher, then as his assistant principal. In both roles, he was well liked and had a laid back style. This subject is extremely relaxed, gentle, and as self-described informal... He puts the emphasis on being friends with teachers, and sees himself as the go between for teachers. He talked about his belief that teachers should have fun with their students. He has an interesting viewpoint on change. He commented that if teachers didnt see the need for change or a new program, maybe there was no need for a change. No school wide initiative was taking place at this school. As we i :I talked about the teacher improvement process, he shared he uses the district evaluation process as a vehicle. His first assignment as principal was for one year at a small school in the district in which he currently is working. This was his seventh year of his second principal assignment. This took place in a middle class neighborhood school. The K-5 elementary school student population is around 550. Staff 151

PAGE 165

I I I members typically remain at this school for lengthy periods. This principal had only a few new teachers in his career at this site. One such teacher was a male who had a business career and then decided he wanted to switch careers to teach. He did his intemship and one full year of teaching at this school. The second subject was a female who taught in the building for several years, and left when she had a baby. Both of these participants are historical cases. Teacher Seven This teacher did both observations and student teaching with this group of children prior to taking over the class mid year for a teacher who left for health reasons. As he thought back to his first official weeks of teaching, he commented, The major issues I had to deal with were a little boy who had central auditory processing problems and trying to get him diagnosed. Plus I had a little girl who had never been diagnosed for ADHD. We had to go through the steps to get her what she needed. In the class of 29, I had all different kinds of personalities and not enough time to deal with all of them. After we got the children diagnosed and did studies on them, we were able to get them the proper kind of assistance. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) This teacher had decided on teaching as a second career so was not as young as most of the other new teachers in this 152

PAGE 166

study. He had been in a teacher education program where he : I had completed his Masters Degree before he began his teaching I I : i j I I : I : I : I I I I I I I I I I I I : I : I I career. Another factor which he felt was important was having children of his own. He felt this allowed him to see .. the other side of the picture... He reflected on how things went during those beginning weeks: I felt that I was right where I was supposed to be. I knew that I was going to have anxieties and problems and I figured out this was all part of the learning process and flew with it. I didn't have any problem with classroom management. I learned from my mentor teacher pretty well. I watched him work and he showed me a really good way to do it. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) In talking about the process he used to help the particular children which needed extra support systems, he said he relied heavily on his college professors and college supervisor. He spoke about being fortunate because there was one supervisor for every five college students. Therefore, his supervisor was available to frequently assist with any issues. This began with the student teaching experience and continued as he took over the class. Other resources he used consisted of his mentor, who was the person whose class he took over, the grade level team, and the school psychologist. He found the principal to be very supportive and open to any questions that he might ask of him. He spoke of his principal: 153

PAGE 167

I I I I I : I He never secluded himself from me or pushed himself on me He let me leam some things on my own and then he would help me when I needed it. Looking back on it, I could see things I did wrong then, that he could see too. He wouldn't come in and directly say, 'You need to do this, this and this.' He would find a round about way to let me think about what I was doing and let me fix it on my own without-he's a smart guy-without me knowing he was doing it. He let me sink or swim. His hand was real close if I needed to get pulled out. (Teacher, January 1' 1998) When I asked him if he went to the principal with these student concems, he explained, He was busy enough handling the things he needed to and I felt that I could handle this. I wouldn't have had any problems going to him, but I don't want to ask every little question of the general in charge. I will ask somebody close to me first so I don't overwhelm him and make him uneasy about my ability to make my own choices. I'd been in a situation where I was people's bosses, so I understood what it was like to be a principal. When I would have a new employee I'd hate to have one who couldn't think for himself. I didn't want to be that kind of employee to my principal. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) Since he neither sought help nor was asked if he needed help, I asked him to elaborate on the relationship he had with his principal. He shared that he had an excellent relationship 154

PAGE 168

I I I I I : i I :I I I I I I I I ll I I I with him. He felt he could say anything to him, tell him any joke, play practical jokes on him, and generally had a good time with him. He was both comfortable with him and confident in him: Confident in that he would support me, which he did. Confident that he wouldn't just be looming over the top of me at anytime, that he would be protective and supportive, not contradictive. I was comfortable, his presence was assuring to me. I felt some equality there, not that he was in a higher position and I was in a lower position; we're both people. I felt friendship. I just liked him. He easy going, overly polite. He was a great listener. He would talk to you--just a real good communicator. I realized how important it was to have a good principal. {Teacher, January 1, 1998) I was curious if he received feedback from the principal. The teacher related that feedback came in the form of storytelling. He didn't know if the stories were real or made up: He would tell stories about, 'Well, I remember back when I was doing this and such.' He would touch on the problem, whatever it might be, and offer a solution that way. He wouldn't even tell you how he solved it. He just told what had happened and he left some of the blanks open for you to fill in. It was nice. He was smart. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) 155

PAGE 169

I I :I I I I He went on to say that his current principal is much more direct. That she is more clear on what needs to be done. I asked him in which setting he had professionally grown the most. He thought for a moment and replied, where I am now." He responded this way because she had specific priorities which she helped teachers meet through staff development. He added that his first principal was, ... throwing me in the fire and letting me go at it. I'd hate to be 21 years old and do that. It was nice to have a little maturity and be able to understand how a lot of things work. I understand that's the way that you do learn. I don't think I would have understood that as well at 21. I'd have been much more frustrated and who knows what would have happened then. (Teacher, January 1' 1998) Due to this understanding, the teacher utilized a variety of human resources and was able to secure the additional support that these two children required to succeed. This did 1 take place independent of the principal's direct involvement. However, the principal was responsible for establishing a culture of support. As the teacher reflected on his process of development, he mentioned that he thought having more maturity was a plus, because it has a way of putting things in perspective. Despite this, he had days where he thought he was the best teacher in the world. Then on other days he 156

PAGE 170

; I I I I I I : I I : I i : I I : I I I I I I : I : I I j I thought he was just saying things and nothing was being leamed. This fluctuated with him thinking that some days teaching was an easy job and then other days he wondered why he chose to be a teacher. He explained that he now understands that it's supposed to be like that, and he knows every day won't be perfect. He has up and down days, just as his students do. He shared how he leams to improve: You learn the hard way, learn by failing, and leam how to get yourself out of the problems that you created. Just by doing. I also knew that I wasn't going to do anything stupid. I wasn't going to go way outside the limits and really put my principal in a situation that he couldn't help me. I knew there were limits and I knew how far I could push those limits. I felt safe there. All kinds of different things are influencing students and it's not just you. So, I do the best that I can every day. I know that I'm not going to reach every kid every day and that's not okay, but that's the way things are. I work hard and I do whatever it takes to try to get through whatever barriers are there. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) On most days this teacher felt like he was in control of his students' leaming. He disclosed that he had much freedom. He explained that he felt like he could do what he wanted to, at any time. If he wanted to try new things that tested the boundaries of the normal second grader developmentally, he could. He tried new things when he was being observed by the i I principal, and told me, 157

PAGE 171

Some of them flopped, I knew that he knew I was trying new things and I was a hard worker and that I could fail in front of him and he wouldn't hold that against me. Just the opposite. He felt that it was nice to see somebody not doing the same old stuff and trying to test the boundaries a little bit. You've got to feel that empowerment to make a difference in somebody's life. That's what it's all about. (Teacher, January 1, 1998) This teacher came to his first teaching position from a different perspective and place in life than the other teacher participants in this study. Even though his problems were not of the same magnitude as some of the others, his principal recognized the type of support he needed. He viewed coaching this teacher as simply giving him somebody to talk to, to bounce ideas off, and to be reassuring to him. The principal wanted to be a support to him by pointing out, 'Look at what you've accomplished today; look at what you've accomplished with this group of children or this particular child,' or 'Look at the support that you have from parents.' The principal saw skills in this teacher that he himself did not realize he had. The principal recalled that initially the teacher may have tried to do too much in a short period of time. Because this was one of his first real forays into teaching, he expected the students to be able to move a little faster than they were moving, and he thought it was his fault that they weren't. The principal 158

PAGE 172

emphasized that is when the coach serves as the listener, the support, and the person who reassures them that, 'It's going okay. Just keep doing what you're doing.' I like to do things in what seems like an informal way, to sit in the teacher's class at the end of the day when they're not stressed by a lot of work and spend some time talking with them. You have to give feedback especially if you see a positive change. It's really up to us, as principals, to let folks know right away that, 'Gee, we talked about this. I see you tried it. How do you feel it worked?' I think that's important to give the teacher a chance to respond, too. Not say, 'This is what I saw,' but 'How do you feel things are going?' With this gentleman, it was sitting down as a friend and giving him an opportunity to talk, not a lot of formal time to write anything down, but just making sure that you're there, that you give them a chance to talk to you. (Principal, December 18, 1997) Teacher Eight This teacher had some fairly severe classroom management problems. She was a brand new teacher. The principal said that they became involved with the evaluation process right from the beginning. He explained that this was an easy task to sit down and start rather formally and then be able to get informal: We like to consider ourselves professional people. As one professional to another it's a difficult thing to say, 'Here's an area where I see you need some help or an area where you are struggling.' But that also comes as part of 159

PAGE 173

a supervisory job and I think if you are a pretty decent supervisor you can bring those things up in a very tactful way. That's what I try and do and that's what I tried to do with her. It became much easier when she said, 'Oh, I know I am having those problems. What advice can you give me? How can you help me out?' She was part of being a big help in that. It was more than just individual students. When we both were able to see it wasn't just Jimmy, or Johnny, or Susie, it was the way certain things were being done in the classroom, it helped us both out. (Principal, December 18, 1997) This principal utilized formal and informal observations, walk throughsu, .. pop in visits, and enlisting the support of her teammates. He offered to help her find a mentor in the district or some other well-experienced seasoned teacher. He saw himself as the resource for teachers. He told me he would never tell any teacher that he was the expert in either classroom management or any sort of skill that they could use in the classroom. However, he felt strongly that one of the jobs of a principal is to be the go-between, help you find somebody who could support you--either support you in the classroom or could help you with some of those skills, or a new idea, maybe." He claims coaching becomes finding someone that teachers can talk to and help them. In the case of the young lady that was having classroom management problems, he said that once she realized that nobody was viewing this as something terrible or negative thing, that she 160

PAGE 174

was very open and asking everyone for some help or advice on how to handle situations. This principal said, I'd like to think that the building principal has some bearing on how people see things". When I interviewed the teacher, she confirmed what her principal had noted. At first she thought some individual children were causing many discipline problems, but as she talked with her principal she realized that much of the problem was how she handled the children. She said, My principal is so laid back, but he has a real knack of getting you to see things about yourself that you never looked at before. He reminds me of the old 'Father Knows Best reruns. He is gentle and wise. He doesn't get mad, but he teaches you lessons through stories. At first I didn't get it. He would tell these stories about himself and a problem he had. He never said how he solved it, or even if he did solve it. I used to think, This is stupid, it didn't give me any answers. Then one day I realized, 'Oh, I am suppose to come up with the answer!' Looking back, I think he probably made the stories up, but it was a good way to get me to do some soul searching. He never acted like he knew all the answers, sometimes he didn't seem like he knew much. I think that was one of his strategies, too The one thing he would always do was to hook you up with someone that could help. (Teacher, January 7, 1998) The principal talked about how smart this teacher was. He spoke to the process of leading teachers. He commented on her rapid growth with classroom management saying, .. It is 161

PAGE 175

fun to see people grow and she really did a lot of growing." He talked directly to the way this teacher empowered herself to the point of becoming a real leader for other staff members. He commented that she is now viewed as a very good teacher and could have "almost written her ticket" for where she could go. As she grew professionally, one of her goals was to assume a leadership role, because she saw that she had some skills in this area. In her last year with this principal, she started a Masters Program and took control of some of the groups within the school. Both of these teachers believe they are competent and do a good job with children. They also know that they daily learn new ways to better reach a variety of children. They both mentioned that the more student successes they had, the more their confidence grew, which in tum seemed to produce even more successes. They both said that the "discovery method" that their principal used with them actually helped to give them a "feeling of power". Their self-esteem was elevated because they felt they were able to figure things out themselves. The principal recalls, I've been really blessed to work with a Jot of tremendous teachers. We don't have a big turnover in our staff so I 162

PAGE 176

typically don't have a lot of brand new teachers to work with. Having the opportunity to have these two new teachers was exciting. Oh, the success that they sawjust a little day-to-day successes. They needed to realize that ninety-nine percent of the time that you're in the classroom you have to know that 'I'm doing a good job. I really am doing the best I can.' I think they both felt that way. I could see them both as they left as very competent and confident teachers. (Principal, December 18, 1997) This principal appeared to possess a wisdom that helped him to know what kind of coaching each of these teachers most needed. His approach to each was quite different, very much like teacher strategies for different student needs. He shared his philosophy with me: You've got to have a lot of energy; lead by example, do a lot of research, be prepared. Be willing to give people a lot of latitude to try things. Don't be the person that says, 'Well, I tried that five years ago. That's not going to work.' Give them lots of opportunities. With young teachers, give them support, the materials they need, other people that they can go to, that they can visit, that they can use as mentors. Let them know that if they have a problem please tell you about it. You might be able to help them from your experience; or maybe you know somebody else who has gone through that same problem that you can connect them with to talk to. It's fun working with young people who are starting out and very enthusiastic--sometimes a little naive, but that's all right, too. It is our job to never squelch that enthusiasm. Let them know that you appreciate that enthusiasm that 163

PAGE 177

they bring to their job, too. (Principal, December 18, 1997) As I conclude the case study of this principal I want to mention his views on change: I do a lot of thinking about if we're going to do something--our life is all about change and if we're going to make a change is it a needed change? Is it a change for the better? Is it going to be good for kids? Is it going to increase our student achievement? If I could look upon all of those things and say yes to each one of those, then I become a salesperson and I think I'm a fairly decent salesperson, too. I think there is the persuasive side of you that has to come through; and if you have good reasons for what you're doing, if you can sell your product or you're idea, I think you can lead people pretty well. (Principal, December 18, 1997) 164

PAGE 178

CHAPTERS THE ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL IN FACILITATING THE IMPROVEMENT OF STRUGGLING BEGINNING TEACHERS This study was designed to answer the following questions: 1 How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent understand their process of improvement, and the role of the principal in that process? 2. How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? 3. In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the principal/teacher relationship during the transition process? In answering these questions, information can be gained on how principals can facilitate teacher improvement. The analysis of the stories told in the interviews and the observation of the teacher/principal interactions is the task of this chapter. Through the four case portraits, I have shown examples of what these principals do. Now, I will identify the behaviors which are common to all, caring, providing support and 165

PAGE 179

creating supportive culture, team building, empowering teachers, providing mentoring and coaching, and supervision and evaluation. I will begin to interpret the thick, rich, perceptions within the telling quotes from the interviews described in the previous chapter. This chapter is subdivided by the three research questions; the data intended to support conclusions for a specific question are part of a each particular section. Research Question 1 : How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent understand their process of improvement and the role of the principal in that process? A commonality for seven of the eight teachers was that college did not prepare them for teaching. They made comments like the following they don't teach you this kind of stuff in school, didn't know if what I had learned in college had really prepared me for what I needed to do for this group," I felt I got a really good education in college on how to teach reading, but then when I was at that school, all those neat things that we had in college didn't really work, "As a first year teacher you have no idea how much work it's going to be. When you student teach, you didn't have to do the work you had to do just a small portion of the work, and "I think a lot of it could be the University's fault--why new teachers might feel 166

PAGE 180

this way. Because we read a lot. We hear a lot. I've done the whole class all through college, but you don't know how to apply it. n Seven of the eight teachers began by feeling unprepared, uncertain, and frustrated. These teachers were all relatively young, in their early twenties. Their lack of experience may well have been a contributing factor to these feelings. The eighth teacher was older, midthirties, and had had a previous career. He did not feel nearly as uncertain or ill-prepared. He had also completed his master's program prior to teaching. I note these common feelings of inadequacy because they help define how each teacher saw the process of improvement linked with what was needed from the principal. Each participant spoke about the benefit of principal support, support from the perspective of the principal asking what they needed from day one. They all mentioned how the principal would come to their room to see how things were going and to check to see if they had the supplies they needed. This was translated by the new teachers to mean that the principal really cared about them. All, including the more mature teacher, mentioned that they knew their principal was there for them--that the principal wanted them to succeed--and would listen to the complaints and the opportunities to brag. Principals' availability and visibility was important to all the 167

PAGE 181

participants because it made them feel as if their needs were being met. Teachers related things about their principals being smart, giving them good suggestions to try, having high expectations, having high energy levels, and being helpful and encouraging. A new direction which was not addressed in the research is the principal's ability to meet the teacher's needs. The encouragement and nurturing component became instrumental for every participant. Teachers wanted and needed the honest, yet gentle, feedback which the principals provided. From what the teachers said, this feedback was always presented in positive, motivating, reassuring ways which pushed the teachers to excel. Because the principals in this study made concerted efforts to develop relationships with the teachers, both mutual respect and trust were benchmarks which opened the door to sharing information and having two-way conversations. Interestingly, all teachers felt they could take risks and learn from their mistakes, and all believed their principal would be there supporting them. Most of the principals kept reminding the teachers of their past and future growth. As long as the teachers knew they were improving, they felt confident they would continue to improve. Teachers felt that the principals, by recognizing their strengths and pointing out the things they did well, helped to raise their self-concept. All the teachers were very 168

PAGE 182

much aware that they had many areas to improve in and learn about. However, they were also able to look objectively at where they had begun, how they had improved, and where they needed to go with confidence that they could get there. In addition to personal support, teachers said the principals supported them through the culture of team building. The teachers mentioned how their principal connected them with either mentors, grade-level team members, other teachers within the building or district, special teachers or supervisors, or building-initiative consultants. For one teacher, the principal modeled the use of additional resources so well that later in the year when the teacher experienced similar problems with a specific student, the teacher let me know that she would exhaust all other resources before getting the principal involved. This seemed to be a theme for all the teachers as an indicator of their improvement process. They embraced the concept of team support and additional resource help and no longer relied on as much direct assistance from the principals. These teacher-learned behaviors embrace the significance of team building and mentoring and coaching. As teachers evolved through the improvement process, they seemed to understand their responsibility more clearly. Each teacher told about going home and reflecting on how to do things better. One teacher remembered this experience: 169

PAGE 183

You find what works. You find all the things that don't work, and then you just keep changing, until it does work. I'll make mistakes . not even mistakes, you just learn . . at this school we're given the opportunity to make choices. I can teach however I want, which is really nice. .. I mean we make the decisions, and we do it all. It's a group consensus all the time. .. It's nice being able to make decisions and being a part of the decision making. It's nice that people want to hear what I have to say. . I really, really enjoy that because it gives us power. (Teacher, January 7, 1998) Each of the teacher participants talked about the importance of how it felt to have the power to make classroom and curricular decisions. Another teacher stated, vou feel you have the power to do something and the power to change something, I mean especially in the field of education, you know, you've got to feel the empowerment to make a difference in somebody's life. That's what it is all about. A further subject said: Academically we follow the standards ... but how I go about incorporating them is my choice .... because I can introduce them [students] to so many different things when they come to school in the school day. That's very empowering. (Teacher, December 18, 1997) The ability to have choices and freedom to make curricular and instructional decisions was extremely 170

PAGE 184

important to the teachers. They liked it when they felt their voice was listened to and heard in organizational decisions. The teachers who felt the most empowered seemed to feel that they could make the most difference for children. Some of the teachers said they even had choices in some staff development opportunities. One teacher relates, "there's always new and better methods, and with the support we have we're able to go to a lot of conferences." Most of the teachers talked about these development opportunities and how they did enhance their professional growth. The teachers in this study exemplified the importance of the tenets of empowerment. Six of the teachers frequently discussed the school wide initiatives which focused on student literacy. They actually had ongoing instruction, peer tutoring, consultant training and mentoring to ensure their growth and improvement. Those teachers involved in the school-wide initiatives felt their instruction had improved as a result of this training and the follow-up support. School-wide initiatives have only recently been researched, however early results indicate positive student outcomes (Block, Everton, and Gusky, 1995). Teacher mentors were used in connection with both the school-wide initiative and new teacher training. Teachers believed these mentors were helpful in providing them with feedback and suggestions. This finding is in keeping with 171

PAGE 185

earlier research on mentors and coaches(Bennet, Bennet, and Stevahn, 1991 ). However, more times than not the self selected rather than the assigned mentors became the most valuable human resources for the teachers questioned. Teachers viewed supervision and evaluation as helpful from the perspective that they liked the visibility of the principal in their classroom. In all cases the evaluation process seemed to help drive many of the classroom visits. All teachers felt that the principals had good information to share with them. Principals had different styles. Several asked reflective questions, giving few suggestions. Others shared what they had observed, giving many suggestions. The approach taken did not seem to make any difference. What seemed to matter was the time spent together discussing the needs of the teacher. The principals in this study seemed to be intuitive in identifying what their teachers needed to feel successful and accomplished as they developed and improved. In summary, the most salient factors for teachers seem to be the following: the teacher/principal relationship (caring) principal encouragement, reassurance, and nurturing principal verbal acknowledgment of teacher growth principal response to individual teacher needs principal support through the culture of team building 172

PAGE 186

principal facilitation of teacher empowerment principal providing mentoring and coaching principal providing staff development opportunities principal providing vision through school-wide initiative principal providing supervision and evaluation Research Question 2: How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? From interviewing the principals, it became clear that they viewed the coaching process similarly in regard to the factors that teachers described as important to their improvement. All the principals totally understood the significance of being the nurturer to these young teachers. I heard real compassion as each principal talked about the new teachers' insecurities, the problems they faced, and how they, as principals, had some very definite plans to help these struggling teachers improve and become successful. Embedded within these plans was a large amount of communication. All four principals made sure they visited each teacher's classroom frequently, several times a week. They made sure they asked the teacher how things were going and what was needed. All four made sure to let teachers know that if they had any problems to come talk to them and that if they couldn't 173

PAGE 187

help them, they would find someone who could. They let the teachers know that they expected them to grow professionally this year, and when the teachers did show growth, they pointed it out to them. The principals commented on how this helped to reinforce their expectations with the novice teacher. All principals spoke to the need they recognized in these struggling novice teachers for reassurance and encouragement. They felt they must catch the teachers doing something well and mention that to the teacher. In doing this, they were building trust by demonstrating that they valued what the teacher was doing and took time to acknowledge their good work. All these elements helped the principals build a relationship with the teachers. Principals wanted the teachers to know that they cared about them and supported them. One principal talked about the importance of providing support around both professional and personal issues. She stressed, To provide leadership in the profession is certainly expected, but just providing leadership in life is also a very critical piece. a All the principals in this study wanted to be sure that their teachers had both the materials they needed and well qualified human resources to confer with. Principals kept asking the teachers what materials they needed. In several 174

PAGE 188

cases the teachers did not ask for materials, so the principal identified and provided the materials, encouraging the teachers to be sure to ask for the things they need in order to be more productive with students. In addition to appropriate materials, every principal talked about providing support to the teachers through a well qualified colleague. If the best person to help them was not in the school, they frequently contacted another district employee who had expertise in the area where the teacher needed improvement. This directly matches what the teachers viewed as important, having the principals meet their needs. This concept of meeting teacher needs was not previously mentioned in the research, and therefore, is a new component in teacher improvement. All of the principals talked about the role of building level teams. They encouraged the teachers to utilize grade level peers as a sounding board for ideas and for questions that arose. They also made sure that teachers became familiar with support staff--special education teachers, Title teachers, reading teachers, behavioral specialists, and school wide initiative consultants. As one principal described the process, so, I think coaching sometimes becomes can you find somebody that they can talk to and that can help them out? As the struggling teachers felt some successes, the principals noted that the teachers exhibited behaviors which 175

PAGE 189

demonstrated a feeling of empowerment. As a principal reflected, I think people become empowered as they try things and they are successful at them. And then they feel that they can make decisions based on their success. And when people are empowered then they can make those kinds of decisions. (Principal, December 2, 1997) Principals in this study were aware of the need for teacher empowerment; however, it appeared that the teachers in this study put a higher value on empowerment than did the principals. I say this because the teachers spoke more passionately about the importance of being empowered. In reviewing the teacher excerpts, it seems that teacher perception of teacher choice and decision making was critical to making a positive difference for students. The principals did not seem to realize the possible potential within the empowerment notion. Principals seemed to feel that if teachers gained skills, strategies, and methods to increase student learning, then teachers would experience more success. Hence, the earlier principal's reference to empowerment following success seems typical. These principals did a number of things to create improved skills, strategies, and methods in struggling teachers. Earlier discussion referenced human and material 176

PAGE 190

resources. Staff development activities can be helpful for improving teacher skills. Staff development can take the form of workshops, conferences, and district or building initiatives. In most recent years, principals have seen impressive results from school-wide initiatives. School-wide initiatives target one specific area of focus. Typically all staff are involved in group and individual professional growth experiences. Continuous training takes place throughout one or multiple school years. Teachers have coaches in the form of specialized consultants and peers. At some point, some teachers become teacher leaders so that they can both coach and train new teachers. In this study, three of the schools had a school-wide literacy focus. All three principals believed that the training and coaching that their struggling teachers received definitely improved the teachers instruction and student learning. These principals talked about the growth the teachers made in the area of reading. Two teachers, the historical cases, went on to receive their masters degrees in the area of reading as a result of their interest being piqued by the literacy initiative. These two teachers are currently both highly effective teachers, being particularly strong in reading instruction. All of the principals viewed the evaluation process as an avenue to provide supervision. They spoke to the formal and 177

PAGE 191

informal observations as a part of the process. In addition to the observations, the evaluation system allowed for dialogue and written documentation of the observations and conversations. One principal talked about how the written piece was really helpful for these teachers because they could go back and reread what was seen and needed to be improved. Again, a variety of principal styles prevailed in the way principals structured the evaluation. Most started informally, then moved to the formal. However, one did just the opposite. The style, once again, did not appear to be a critical factor. The intent, which in these four case studies was to help the teacher to improve by providing the necessary support for success, was the determining factor. My study revealed that highly effective instructional leaders are successfully able to marry the two concepts, as verified by teachers and principals. In an effort to examine if teachers and principals view the coaching process in the same way, a checklist matrix, Table 5.1, looks at specific conditions in the process, which were extrapolated from the interviews and observations. The table shows each principal followed by her respective teachers and illustrates whether the condition was present from the principal and teacher perspectives. If the condition was verbally stated in the interview, it is designated with an S; if the condition was not stated but implied, it is represented 178

PAGE 192

Table 5.1 Checklist Matrix of Variables ofthe Coaching Process Condition Pl Tl T2 P2 T3 T-1 P3 T5 T6 P-1 17 T8 Relationship Building s s s s s s s s s s s s Provided Feedback! Share Information s s s s s s s s s s s s Praise s s s s s s s s s s s Provided For Teacher Needs s s s s s s s s s s s s Have What Needed To Be Successful s s s s s s s s s s s Approachable/ Open Door Policy s s s s s s 0 s s s s s Visibility s s s s s s s s s s s s Shows Caring s s s s s s s s s s s s Listens 0 s I s s s s s s s s s Reassures Teacher s s s s s s s 0 s s s Positive s s s s s s s 0 s s Motivating I s s s 0 0 s s s Encouraging s s s s s s 0 s s s Mutual Respect s s I s s I 0 s I I Resource To Other Resources s s s s s s s s s s s s Asks Questions s s s s s s s s 0 s s s Nurture s s s s s 0 0 s s s Team Building s s s s s s s s s s s s Give Suggestions s s s s s s s s s s s s Communication s s s s s s s 0 s s s High Expectations s s s s Bottom Lines/ State Priorities s s s s s s s s States Improvement Needed s s s s s s 0 Pushed to Excel s s s s 0 Honesty s s s s 0 Principal Competence s s s s s 0 0 s Model Behavior s s s S =Stated I=Imphed O=Observed Table 5 1 examines specific conditions which were from interviews about and observations of the principal/teacher coaching process. The table shows each principal followed by that principal's teachers, and designates if each condition was present from the principal and teacher perspectives Those conditions on the top half of the table were identified as signiffcantly important by both teachers and principals in the coaching process. Those at the lower pan of the table were less frequently identified as primary to the coaching interactions mentioned 179

PAGE 193

with an I. An 0 indicates the condition was observed directly in teacher/principal interactions by me, as the researcher. No symbol indicates that this condition was neither spoken about or observed. In analyzing this matrix, conditions which were present in the coaching process for all principals and teachersprimary conditions--were building a relationship, providing feedback and sharing information, providing for teacher needs, being approachable and having an open-door policy, being visibile, showing care for teachers, listening, being a resource for other human resources, asking teachers questions, encouraging team building, and giving suggestions. Secondary conditions, those prevalent for all but one or two subjects, were giving praise, providing what teachers need to be successful (materials and training), reassuring teachers, communicating, being positive, encouraging teachers, building mutual respect, and nurturing teachers. Those conditions present for two thirds of the subjects included the principal stating the bottom lines or priorities, the principal stating improvement needed by the teacher, honesty about improvement needed, and principal competence. Only one fourth of the participants referenced high expectations, a push to excel, and principal-modeled behavior. 180

PAGE 194

Several conclusions can be drawn from these data. The first is that teacher participants in this study attributed their growth at least to some degree to the coaching and support of their principal. Teachers, like children, are developmental in their growth. Beginning teachers typically are egocentric before they can move to focusing on what is always best for children. A hierarchy of teacher needs appears to exist. The first level is classroom management. This becomes the survival level. Without this level of accomplishment learning can not take place. After this is established, meeting students' varied needs occurs. More complex and complete learning strategies seem to develop at the next level. It makes sense for the majority of these teachers first to identify conditions which are reflective of the need to attend to their own concerns for support and self-preservation. It is important for teacher needs to be met. This is not to say that these primary and secondary conditions are not significant for all teachers; rather, the study points out that they take on a different level of urgency for the inexperienced teacher. Compare these conditions to the less frequently mentioned ones of the principal stating the bottom lines or priorities, stating improvement needed by the teacher, providing honest feedback, being comptent, having high expectations, pushing teachers to excel, and modeling behavior. 181

PAGE 195

In offering an explanation of why these conditions were mentioned to a lesser degree, it can be surmised that novice teachers, as clearly stated in the interviews, feel overwhelmed, unprepared, and frustrated due to this being the early part of their teaching career. It is natural for them to need to be praised, encouraged, nurtured, cared for, fulfilled in their needs, and given feedback. Effective interactions thus include principal visibility, principal approachability, listening, and communicating. Novice teachers require developmentally appropriate and differentiated high expectations in order to meet their needs. It does seem logical that beginning teachers would want to know the specific improvements needed. However, as most principals were keenly aware, those teachers who struggle know they have many things to improve upon. Therefore, to enhance their own self-concept and confidence, what they need to hear is what they do well. They need feedback linked with assurance and encouragement. Not until they start feeling competent and confident can they want or appreciate higher levels of teaching concepts. An analogy can be made to Maslows (1943) hierarchy. Until the basic survival and safety needs are met, teachers cannot move to more lofty aspirations. Therefore, it is imperative that principals be aware of and respond to the individual developmental needs of the novice 182

PAGE 196

struggling teachers before they try to move them to altruistic perspectives on teaching. It is interesting to note that of the one quarter of participants who spoke to the more student-focused : I conditions, two were principals and two were teacher I I 'I : i I I I : I I ; I historical cases. Another interesting fact is that both of these teacher historical cases practiced under the principal who stressed and modeled high expectations. We know from effective schools research the importance of high expectations for student achievement. In the case study of principal two and her teachers, the principal and the teachers were consistently aligned on the importance of excellent instruction and student achievement. In all three interviews, this focus was foremost and commonly spoken about which made this case study different from the rest. Research Question 3: In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching. what has been the nature of the prjncjpal/teacher relationship during the transition process? In each of these case studies, principals made a purposeful effort to develop both a professional and personal relationship with each of the teachers. This began with the first encounter. As one principal recalls, she started identifying her expectations in the interview process. Much 183

PAGE 197

i j : I I I I :I I I I I : I I ; I dialogue took place even before the first day of school. As soon as school did start, principals visited the classrooms frequently. They asked what the teachers needed and how they were doing. Through these acts they were developing trust and an environment of care. They were visible so they knew when the teachers did things well and were quick to point these out to the teachers. They watched for the days when the teachers needed to be reassured about their abilities and encouraged that indeed they would learn how to better deal with difficult issues. The principals modeled respectful behavior with students and staff, thereby promoting mutual respect. They established cultures which valued and encouraged team building and sharing information. They made sure that these teachers had what they needed to be successful in terms of materials, human resources, and training. Each principal became a leader to staff in both the professional and personal realm. It became quite apparent that the principal/teacher relationship was based on sincerity, when each principal talked about the joy they received from seeing the growth and success that each teacher had made. Even in the midst of the teachers' biggest struggles, the principals spoke positively about the teachers and shared how much they liked them. 184

PAGE 198

:I I I I I Principals in my study personify the research in Chapter 2, on relationship building as a key component of effective leadership and productivity. Table 5.2 is a cross-case data analysis which looks at the principal facilitative behaviors demonstrated by the principal subjects. These behaviors are grounded in the research literature about the role of the principal in the improvement of teachers and were comprised of conditions which arose out of this study. Through data coding and analysis, a long list of conditions evolved. To make the data more manageable and understandable, conditions were collapsed, combined, or dropped. The facilitative behavior of caring is a consolidation of the primary and secondary conditions of building relationships, being approachable and having an open door policy, being visible, being positive, listening, reassuring, praising, communicating, motivating, encouraging, nurturing, and : 1 treating teachers respectfully. The faciliatative behavior of providing support and creating a supportive culture includes the primary and secondary conditions of providing feedback and sharing information, providing for teacher needs, providing what teachers need to be successful, being a resource to other resources, asking questions, and giving suggestions. The conditions which were least frequently mentioned were 185

PAGE 199

: I I I I I i : I I I : I : I ; I Facilitative Behavior Caring Providing Suppon and Creating Supportive Culture Team Building Empowering Teachers Providing Mentoring and Coaching Providing Staff Development Oppommities Clearly Articulating Vision Through School Wide Initiative Supervision and Evaluation Table 5.2 Cross-Case Dara Analysis Principal Principal Principal One Two Three X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Principal Four X X X X X X Table 5.2 represents cross-case data analysis which looks at the pr!ncipal facilitative behaviors that were demonstraled by the four principal subjects. Consistency of facilitative behaviors was present wtth the exception of Principal Four in the areas of providing staff development opponunities and clearly articulating vision a school wide ininative. Altemarive explanations for this particular inconsistency are discussed in Chapter Five. 186

PAGE 200

I I I : I I :I dropped because they were not significant to the majority of the participants. Cross-case consistency of facilitative behaviors was present, with the exception of Principal Four, in the areas of providing staff development opportunities and clearly articulating vision through a school-wide initiative. Alternative explanations could be the difference in the historical level of student achievement and SES at this site. Elaborating on this conjecture, the author recognizes the fact that this school draws its student population from an upper middle-class neighborhood. Parents are well educated and actively involved in their children's learning process. Students have consistently scored well on standardized tests, even before the current principal arrived at the school. Combining this with the ulaid back personality of the principal and his beliefs about change which were expounded upon in Chapter 4, it can be surmised that he has adopted the theory, .. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. a However, without exception, certain behaviors appear to create a principal/teacher relationship strong enough to help the struggling teacher make a successful transition to a competent one. These behaviors consist of caring, providing support and creating a supportive culture, encouraging team 187

PAGE 201

I :I :I I :I :I i i .I I I I I I :I I :I building, empowering teachers, providing mentoring and coaching, and supplying supervision and evaluation. What does all of this tell us? First, both the teacher and the principal viewed the process of coaching for improvement in almost the same way. In most areas, teacher perspectives closely mirrored those of their principal. Second, basic conditions pertaining to teacher survival, assurances, and needs being met are of primary significance to novice struggling teachers. Third, the principal/teacher relationship is instrumental for the successful transition of the novice struggling teacher to the competent teacher. This relationship must be based minimally on principal facilitative behaviors of caring, providing support and creating a supportive culture, encouraging team building, empowering teachers, providing mentoring and coaching, and supplying supervision and evaluation. 188

PAGE 202

I I I I .I CHAPTERS SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS I :I I This study investigated how four principals facilitated the improvement process of novice struggling teachers. The research questions answered were: :I ; 1 1 How do teachers who have improved from struggling to i j competent teachers understand their process of improvement I I I I I and the role the principal played in that process? 2. How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? 3. In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what was the nature of the principal/teacher relationship? An exploratory qualitative study was conducted. A major part of the study was the development of case studies of the interactions between four principals and, for each, two past or current teachers. Of the eight teachers, four were historical cases. Interviews and principal/teacher interaction observations were employed to determine the process used in the transition of novice struggling teachers to competent, successful ones. 189

PAGE 203

1 Findings support the literature regarding the : I significance of the principal/teacher relationship and the 1 importance of teacher empowerment. New directions that emerged from the data were the need of novice teachers for hearing verbal acknowledgment of their growth and ongoing reassurances. The data suggest that the needs of individual I : I :I : I I I :I : I I I : I teachers must be met in order for teacher improvement to occur This study has supported and reinforced existing work on the importance of the principal/teacher relationship and has broadened understanding of the conditions which are particularly significant to the novice struggling teachers' process of improvement. Overview This final chapter provides a discussion of the results of this dissertation. The data collected during the study suggest patterns of conditions which promote teacher improvement. Interpretation of these findings results in recommendations for principals as they coach less competent novice teachers. Next, limitations of this study are presented with suggestions for further research. A summary and final reflection of what 190

PAGE 204

I have learned about principal supervision conclude the chapter. Findings Research Question 1: How do teachers who have improved from struggling to competent understand their process of improvement and the role of the principal? All but one teacher felt ill prepared for teaching. Therefore, they valued honest feedback from their principal, particularly if it was presented in a positive way that both reassured and motivated the teacher. This reinforces Ames work (1975) which suggests that teacher performance is influenced by the feedback and knowledge teachers receive about their own and student performance. However, a significant finding which emerged from my study and was not addressed in Ames's work was the need for teacher reassurance. As long as the teachers felt that their principals recognized their growth, the teachers believed they would continue to progress. Principals who articulated to their teachers that they observed growth were reassuring to the teachers. What I discovered through my study corroborates Blanchard's ( 1997) work which spoke to the importance of recognizing teacher improvement. All teachers were at least 191

PAGE 205

: I : I : I ; i I I I / : I I I I partially aware of their shortcomings. At the same time, they were able to see their own growth, realize where and how they had improved, and envision a fairly clear picture of where they both needed and wanted to go. Another finding that arose from my study was that beginning teachers transcend through a hierarchy of needs. This begins with the need for classroom management, shifts to meeting varied Ieamer abilities, and moves into more complex and complete teaching strategies. Teachers saw their improved teaching not only as a result of direct principal coaching but also as an outgrowth of the culture of the school. They were attuned to the significance of their principals role in fostering a team spirit among staff and how this spirit provided new teachers with support and collegiality. This finding supports what Mills and Pollak (1997) and Licklider (1997) found about how principals can build and maintain successful teams as a strategy for teacher improvement. As the teachers became more confident in their own abilities, they accepted more responsibility and accountability. At this point, they realized and appreciated the importance of decision-making power. Teachers verbalized that the time spent with the principal in discussions about having their needs met was instrumental 192

PAGE 206

! ; I I I I : I : i I I : I : i :I i I i I I I i I I :I : i I for them to feel successful in teaching. The relationships which were built, nurtured, and sustained appeared to be the most critical condition for teacher improvement. This concept is not new. It dates back to Mary Parker Follett's ideas in 1920. Relationship-based interactions continued to be stressed as primary by Bums (1978) and Rost (1991) just to name a few. More specifically in the teacher/principal relationship arena was Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy's (1993) work. Then in 1996, Marshall et al. studied administrators who operated from the ethic of care. My findings reinforce what these researchers have previously found to improve performance--the importance of establishing and sustaining positive interactive relationships. Research Question 2: How do principals who have successfully coached struggling beginning teachers perceive the coaching process? Each of the principals in this study was keenly aware of and acted on strong beliefs about promoting teacher success. They first and foremost clearly recognized the importance of building the relationship. They shared information with and provided feedback to the teachers. They made sure they were both visible and approachable, and they kept an open door. They showed the teachers that they cared about them 193

PAGE 207

i I I professionally and personally and that they were going to do everything possible to help the teacher succeed. They did this by listening to their teachers, reassuring them, praising them, encouraging them, nurturing them, giving them suggestions, and providing for teacher needs including making sure teachers had needed materials and human resources. These principal behaviors expand on what Carter and Cunningham (1997) discovered concerning the significance of educational leaders' responsibility to encourage and regularly praise their teachers. All the principals asked many questions of their teachers so they could determine teacher needs. Then, based on the needs, the principal became the resource for further resources--acquiring training, mentors, and workshops; stating priorities, improvement needed, and bottom lines; and enlisting team support. This finding, once again, takes Carter and Cunningham's (1997) work a step further. They spoke to the principal's role being that of acting as a bridge to moving educators where they need to go. However, they did not address the concept of assessing teacher needs. Finally, all principals used the evaluation process as a means of teacher improvement. This is interesting because my literature review suggests that coaches should not be evaluators (Bolton, 1973; Glathorn, 1997). Perhaps a better 194

PAGE 208

i I ; I I : I i I I : I ; I : I I way to approach this is that the evaluator should not be the only coach or mentor. Teachers do need collegial nonthreatening models to coach them. Each of the principals was quick to recognize and provide such mentors. However, in each case, principal subjects quite successfully coached and evaluated the novice teachers. It can be surmised that this is due, in large, to the principal/teacher relationship that had been built, nurtured, and maintained. Joyce and Showers (1988) and Bennett, Bennett, and Stevahn (1991) stress that supervision needs to be a cooperative, nonthreatening relationship of professional collaboration. The participants in my study showed that indeed this kind of collaborative supervision does work, thereby substantiating what the literature professes. Even though collaborative supervision has been studied, it has not been directly linked with the coaching process. The integration of these two components is uncharted territory, even in contemporary leadership models. Research Question 3: In cases of successful transition from struggling to competent teaching, what has been the nature of the principal/teacher relationship during the transition process? In probing the nature of these principal/teacher relationships, six facilitative behaviors were common to all 195

PAGE 209

: I :I I I ; I I I I i I i I I : I : I I I cases. Caring, providing support and creating a supportive culture, engaging in team building, empowering teachers, and providing supervision and evaluation were essential behaviors to the relationship. Two additional facilitative behaviors were important for three fourths of the participants, providing staff development opportunities and clearly articulating the vision through a school-wide initiative. The principals' facilitative behaviors of teacher empowerment, staff development, and school-wide initiatives appear to be linked together from the perspective of the teacher's active role in participating in the direction and focus that each individual school takes. The importance of this interconnectedness supports the work of Block, Everton, and Gus key ( 1995). In most instances, principals and teachers placed equal value on the principal facilitative behaviors. However, I was surprised that the one behavior that was significantly more important to teachers than principals, in my study, was teacher empowerment. These teachers' perceptions on teacher choice and decision making were critical to making a positive difference for students. This finding does support Boleman and Deal ( 1994) when they say that only recently have administrators realized the benefit created through facilitating the empowerment and self-efficacy of teachers. 196

PAGE 210

Perhaps this realization has not totally been understood by even very effective principals. If indeed its importance is recognized and acted upon, future organizational and student advantages may be actualized. Implications These findings suggest that principals do affect teacher improvement. Teachers who feel that their principals meet their needs by caring about them, wanting them to succeed, encouraging and reassuring them, and giving them information, feedback, and suggestions were those who created relationships which prompted the teacher to become more competent. This study's findings suggest that, in order for novice teachers to improve, their own needs must be met. If principals can fulfill these needs, then teachers can move beyond what they need to understand better and provide what children need and must have in order to achieve. Further this study suggests that teachers will feel that they can contribute more to student learning if they feel they are empowered to make classroom, curricular, and student related decisions. 197

PAGE 211

Limitations of this Study The prior sections have provided a restatement of each of the research questions and a discussion of the findings and implications. The rest of this chapter provides the reader with the limitations of this study that must be considered, recommendations for principals and future researchers, and a summary and final reflection of what I have learned about principal supervision. I have not attempted to generalize results of this study but rather to present them in a form that may increase understanding about how the principal can facilitate the improvement of novice struggling teachers. The intent of this study was to interpret the impact of coaching behaviors. In this study, I have provided a description of thoughts, behaviors, situations, and perceptions. I have shown associations between conditions and principal facilitative behaviors and teacher improvement. This evidence was collected over time and scrutinized for consistent patterns and themes. Although conclusions I have reached are based on the data collected, there are, nonetheless, limitations. The first 198

PAGE 212

limitation is that of size. Four case studies of principals is a small sampling. The second limitation is time. This study lasted for one school year for the current subjects and up to three years for the historical cases. A longitudinal study over the course of more years might reveal additional information. The third limitation is that the primary source of data was interviews. Some observations of principal/teacher interactions occurred along with observations of principal or other resource people. However, a wider range of data sources such as video-taping and reflective journals could provide more triangulation. The last limitation is that all principals were nurturing; there is no contrast to see if a different style would result in the same or different results. Recommendations for Principals It is recommended that a principal begin establishing a relationship with a new teacher in the interview process by stating the school's focus and vision and the principal's expectations and priorities. This establishes a climate of talking honestly and sharing information. Once the teacher is hired, communication is essential. The principal needs to be visible and easily accessible for the 199

PAGE 213

teacher. Frequent classroom visitations need to occur, followed by questions pertaining to what the teacher needs in material and human resources. Teachers must hear feedback on needed improvement concerning what the principal has observed, coupled with words of encouragement and reassurance about what the teacher is doing well and her continued growth. It is critical that principals give suggestions to teachers while encouraging teacher reflection on their own teaching. Principals should be sure that the school's culture is one that supports and promotes the team concept. One in which the teacher has multiple coaches or mentors who are eager to help the beginning teacher succeed. It is highly recommended that principals facilitate their entire staff in identifying a needed school-wide initiative and then ensure the necessary training, time, and support to implement the initiative successfully. Principals need to give teachers many opportunities to feel empowered by encouraging their decision making and giving them choices pertaining to curricular, classroom, and student issues. The evaluation process should be used in conjunction with coaching as a tool to be used in the process of teacher improvement. 200

PAGE 214

Further, this studys findings suggest some implications for principal preparation. First, beginning principals will benefit from being steeped in facilitative relationship-based literature. This will help to promote a philosophical belief of collaboration and the concept of encouraging leadership among all school faculty. Second, it suggests a need for principal awareness on the concepts of (a) teacher needs being met, (b) teacher hierarchy of needs, (c) teacher reassurance, and (d) teacher empowerment. Recommendations for Future Researchers Researchers might consider these suggestions in planning future studies: 1 Conduct a larger study by increasing the number of principal participants. 2. Explore the idea of the school-wide initiative further, by doing a comparative study of principals who both do and do not have a specific focus to see if this indeed accelerates teacher improvement. 3. Conduct a study which utilizes more forms of data, such as video-tapes and reflection journals to provide more triangulation of data sources. 201

PAGE 215

4. Conduct a study of principal characteristics (the driving, motivating, always-initiating-new-ideas kind of principal versus the laid-back, status-quo type) to determine their effects on teacher improvement. 5. Conduct a study that explores the hierarchy of beginning teacher needs and if these needs are consistent for all novice teachers or do they vary? Conclusion Leaders, specifically principals, have the ability to elevate others to their highest potential (Burns, 1978). By establishing relationships that show caring and concern and by putting others needs first, students are the benefactors. Effective principals can facilitate the improvement of the novice struggling teacher to competent and effective. The literature expounds on the importance of the principal/teacher relationship. My findings magnified this concept. Ongoing reassurances and consistent verbalization of recognition of teacher growth were conditions which arose in my study that were not addressed in the literature. Much of the literature spoke to the importance of teacher empowerment. Teachers in my study confirmed this with a deeper understanding and belief than that held by the principal 202

PAGE 216

participants. Principals did not place as much weight on the ramifications of teacher empowerment as did the teachers. Final Reflections During this study I had the opportunity to do some action research in my own school. After each interview, I would reflect on the conversation. Then, the next day I would practice some of the behaviors that the teacher participants specified that they needed from their principal. I asked more questions, I visited classrooms daily, I gave ongoing feedback acknowledging the growth I had seen, and I reassured and encouraged much more than before. I closely watched to see what seemed to enhance relationships with teachers and encourage teacher improvement. My dissertation actually became a source of awareness, reflection, experimentation, practice, and professional growth. I had three fresh out of college" teachers this year. What an excellent time for me to learn how I could best facilitate their improvement. The knowledge I gained from both the research and my study became invaluable in my own growth and that of my teachers. The most exciting piece is the benefits our children have received. 203

PAGE 217

Contact Type: Visit _x_ Phone Site: Grant Contact Date: 1218/97 Today's Date: 12122197 Subject Type: Principal APPENDIX A Figure 3.10 Contact Summary Form 1. What were the main issues or themes that struck me from this contact? lnfonnallaid back style No schoolwide or building initiative Saw self as the go between for teachers Utilized the district evaluation process Not big on change 2. Summary of information I got (or did not get) from the interview guestions. This principal puts the emphasis on being friends with teachers. There was no reference to what was best for children or academic achievement. Mention was made that teachers should have fun with their kids. 3. Anything tbat struck me as salient. illuminating. or important in this contact. This principal had an interesting viewpoint on change. He commented that if teachers didn't see the need for change or a new program, maybe there was no need for a change. 4. Any non-verbal information that seemed important from this comact. This subject is extremely relaxed, gentle, and as self-decribed infonnal. 204

PAGE 218

5. What new or remaining target guestions do I have for the next contact with this site? None at this time. Any concerns? Yes. Because there was no school wide initiative and no reference to student achievement, it seemed to make sense that the principal was so laid back about teacher concerns. 205

PAGE 219

APPENDIXB Start List of Codes Identification of Problem IP 1 ,2 1 ,2 IP-CLM: Classroom Management IP-TS: Teaching Strategies IP-HRP: High Risk Population IP-LOST : Lack of Student Effort IP-BWI: Building Wide Initiative IP-IWC: Interaction With Children IP-SR: Student Rapport IP-SRES: Student Respect IP-MRES: Mutual Respect IP-TOT: Time On Task IP-ACDA: Academic achievement IP-MISB: Misbehavior IP-LC: Learning Climate IP-PC: Parent Communication IP-TE: Teacher Engagement IP-AMAS: Adjust and Modify As Teach IP-TNDGS: Teacher thought they were not doing a good job IP-SF: Student Focus IP-S/S: Security/Safety IP-CDL: Children's Different Levels Initial Resources I R IR-ORTP: Other Resourses Than Principal 1 ,2 3,4,5 IR-TM: Teammate IR-OTM: Other team members IR-ATSS: Another teacher same school IR-ATDS: Another teacher at a different school lA-M: Mentor 206

PAGE 220

IR-SSC: IR-SPT: IR-SBS: IR-SET: IP-VT: IR-Tr: IR-SW: IR-CP: I P-C: IR-0: IR-MNT: IR-RT: IR-GTT: IR-F: IR-ASPR: IR-PR: . School student counselor Special Teachers Student Behavioral SpeciaJist Special Education Teacher Veteran Teacher Trtle Teacher Social Worker Child Pshchiatrist Coach District Support Match New Teachers Together Reading Teacher Gifted and Talented Teacher Family Assistant Principal Principal Initial Interaction With Principal IIWP IIWP-NO: None IIWP-MIN: Minimal IIWP-AD: Advisor IIWP-COA: Coach IIWP-SH: Sought help from principal IIWP-USPR:Unsuportive principal relationship IIWP-SPR: Supportive principal relationship 1,2,3 6,7,8,9 Effort at Change EAC 1,2,3 10, 11,12,13 ST: Strategies EAC-ST-CTST: Change Teaching Strategies EAC-ST-CIM: Classroom Management Strategies EAC-ST-SWI: School wide Initiative EAC-ST-ADTR: Additional Training EAC-ST-INN: Innovation EAC-EVAS: Evaluation and Supervision EAC-FOBS: Fonnal Observations EAC-IOBS: lnfonnal Observations 207

PAGE 221

EAC-M: Mentoring EAC-C: Coaching EAC-TBLD: Team Building EAC-STDV: Staff Development EAC-GMV: Goals, Mission, and Vision EAC-TSR: Teacher Self Reflection EAC-WID: Writing It Down EAC-PSUP: Principal Support EAC-SI: Sellldea TR Transformation TR-CL: TR-ORG: Classroom changes Organizational changes Teacher Self-Concept TSC TSC-L: Teacher self-concept low TSCS-APP: Teacher self-concept appropriate TSC-H: Teacher self-concept high TSC-GCON: Gain self-confidence TSC-FSUC: Found Success TSC-TSR: Teacher Self Reflection TSC-LSC: Lack self-confidence TSC-SGP: Struggle Growth Producing TSc-GREC: Give Recognition TSC-CONW: Continued Work TSC-NGU: Not Giving Up TSC-PO: Positive Outcome 208 1,23 1 ,4,5, 10 1,2,3 2,12,13

PAGE 222

Teacher Empowerment TEMP 1 ,2,3 14 TEMP..CL: Classroom teacher empowerment TEMP-LCL: Lack of Classroom Teacher Empowerment TEMP-QRG: Organizational teacher empowerment TEMP-LORG:Lack Of Organizational Empowerment TEMP-LCOB:Leam Culture Of Building TEMP-MDBOS:Make decisions Based On Success TEMP-EOT: Expectations Of Team Process of Improvement PROIMP 1 ,2,3 1,4,5, 10,11 Principal Coaching Process PRCP 1 ,2,3 1,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 121,13,14 PRCP..C: Counseling Approach PRCP-RB: Relationship Building PRCP-BL: Bottom Unes PRCP-HE: High Expectations PRCP-SP: State Priorities PRCP-HACC:Hold Accountable PRCP-MB: Model Behavior PRCP-FD: Feedback PRCP-POS: Be Positive PRCP-SIN: State Improvement needed PRCP-TI: Teacher Interaction PRCP-TAP: Treat as Professional PRCP-PDM: Professional Decision Making PRCPTRST:Trust PRCP-PRA: Praise PRCP-PIN: Provide For Individual Needs PRCP-HWNS:Have what need to be successful PRCP-APP: Approachable PRCP-ODP: Open Door Policy PRCP-VIS: Visibility PRCP-BC: Building Culture PRCP-PLP: Provide Leadership In Profession PRCP-PLL: Provide Leadership In Ufe 209

PAGE 223

PRCP-CARET:Cares For Teachers PRCP-CARES:Cares For Students PRCP-1: Interaction PRCPTB: Team Building PRCP-L: Ustening PRCP-OH: Opportunity For Help PRCP-S: Suggestions PRCP-PUSH:Pushed To Excel! PRCP-MOT: Motivating PRCP-ENCOR:Encouraging PRCP-EH: Energetic PRCP-MR: Mutual Respect PRCP-R: Referral PRCP-SEX: State Expectations PRCP-HON: Honesty PRCP-Sl: Share lnfonnation PRCP-AQ: Ask Questions PRCP.CON: Conversation PRCP-NURT:Nuture PRCP-ETI: Expectations Through Interview PRCP-HTR: Help Teachers Reflect PRCP-PCOMP:Principal Competence PRCP-PREP:Prepared Principal PRCP-DOC: Documentation PRCP-TTR: Things To Read PRCP-RES: Reassure Teacher PRCP-NO: Notes PACP-VIDS:Videotape-self PACP-AUDS:Audiotape self PRCP-JOR: Joumaling PACP-WRKSH:Workshop PRCP-WMT:Walk The Talk PRCP-COMM:Communication PRCP-SW: Student Welfare PACP-EAP: Employee Assistance Program PRCP-JIJ: Job In Jeopardy PRCP.CO: Council Out PRCP.CC: Career Counseling 210

PAGE 224

T/PRATP: Teacher/Principal Relationship Associated with Transition Process 211

PAGE 225

References Ames, R. (1975). Teachers' attributions of responsibility: Some unexpected nondefensive effects. Journal of Educational Psychology .e.z. 668-676. Argyris, C., Putnam, P., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teacher sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman. Aspy, D. (1969). The effect of teachers' self concept upon student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International. (University Microfilms No. ED 031 300) Astin, H. S. (1994, October). Empowering and Collective Leadership. Address given at Marietta College, Badiali, B., and Levin. {April 1984). asupervisor's responses to the survey.n Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review. 191-21. Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, .3.,3., 344-358. Ban dura, A. ( 1981). Self-referent thought: A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. In J. Flavell & L. Ross (Eds.), Social cognitive development. Frontiers and possible future {pp. 200-239). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 212

PAGE 226

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist .3.1. (2), 122-147. Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving schools tom within. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Barth, R. S. (1987). School: A community of leaders. Paper presented at the Annual Spring Conference of the Georgia State University Principals' Institute Atlanta, GA. Bateman, W. (1991 ). The art of teaching and learning. San francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bateman, W. (1996). A survey of transition needs of students with behavior disorders in the Midwest. Pennsylvania: State of the Art Speeches. Bennet, B., Bennet, C. & Stevahn, L. (1991 ). Cooperative learning: Where heart meets mind. Toronto, Educational Connections. Berg, B. L. (1989). Qualitative research methods Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Berliner, D. C. (1976). Impediments to the study of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Teacher Education, 27 (76), 5-12. Berliner, D. (1986). Does culture affect reading comprehension? Instructor a6, (3), 28-29. Bertaux, D. (1981). Biography and society: The life history approach in the socjal sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. 213

PAGE 227

Bird, T. (1990). The school teacher's portfolio: An essay on possibilities. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Handbook of teacher evaluation: Elementary and secondary personnel (2nd ed.), 241-256. Blanchard, K. (1997). Shared leadership in the workplace: Thrieving on the true teamwork. The Second Annual Worldwide Lessons in Leadership. Block, J., Everson, S., & Guskey, T. (1995). School improvement programs: A handbook for educational leaders. New York; Scholastic Inc. Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn Bacon. Boleman, L. G., & Deal, T. D. (1994). Looking for leadership; Another search party's report. Educational Administration Quarterly, .aQ. (1 ). 77-96. Bolton, D. L. (1973). Selection and evaluation of teachers. Berkly, CA: McCutchan. Barich, G. D. (19n). The appraisal of teaching: Concepts and process. Boston: Addison-Westly Bowles, S. S. & Levin, H. M. (1968). The determinants of scholastic achievement An appraisal of some recent evidence. Journal of Hyman Resoyrces, 3, 393-400. Boyan, N. J., and Copeland, W. D. (1974). aA Training program for supervisors: Anatomy of an educational development. Joy mal of Educational research 2.8.. 1 00-116. Brandon, N. (1994). The six pillars of self-esteem. New York: Bantam. 214

PAGE 228

Bridge, A. G., Judd, C. M., & Moock, P. A. (1979). The determinants of educational outcomes: The impact of families. peers. teachers. and schools. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co. Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, !Q., 5-32. Brophy, J. E. (1985). Teacher-student interaction. In J. B. Dusek (Ed.), Teacher Expectancies. Hillsday, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Brophy, J. & Everston, C. (1976). Learning from Teaching: A Developmental Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Bruder, S. (1987). Before and after peer coaching. Educational (3), 54-57. Bunting, C. (1997). Personalizing development: Six suggestions for success Schools in the Middle 2. (5), 9-11. Bums, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Row. Carter, G., and Cunningham, W. (1997). The American superintendent: Leading in an age of pressure. San Francisco, Jossey Bass. Clark, C., & Lampert, M. (1986). The study of teacher thinking: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, .31. (5), 27-30. Cogan, M. L. (1973). Clinical sypervision. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. 215

PAGE 229

Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McParland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of edycatjonal opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Combs, A. W. (1965). The professional education of teachers: a percept-view of teacher preparation. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Costa, A. L. & Gannston, R. J. (1994). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools. MASS: Christopher Gordon Publishers, Inc. Cummings, T. (1978). Self-regulating work groups: A sociotechnical synthesis. Academy of Management Review. 625-634. Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974). The study of teaching. New York: University Press of America. Dunlap, D. M. & Goldman, P. (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Education Adminisration Oyanerly, 27 (1 ), 5-29. Dunst, R. (1991). Issues in empowerment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Childrens Mental Health and Service Policy Convention, February, 1991, Tampa, Florida. Drucker. P. (1989). Fortune 500 forum. The Second Annual Worldwide Lessons in Leadership. Edmonds, R. (1978). Effective schools. Educational Leadership. Edmonds, R. (1981 ). Characterjstjcs of schools that are instructjonally effective for all pupils. Association for Supervision and Instruction. 216

PAGE 230

Eisner, E. W. (1991 ). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York: Macmillan. Ekstrom, R. B. (1976). Teacher aptitudes. knowledge. attitudes. and cognitive style as predictors of teaching behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Gamer, 0., & Steinmetz, A. M. (1991 ). Doing Qualitative research: Circles within circles. Bristol, PA: Falmer. Fisher, C. W. (1978). A study of instructional time in grade 2 reading. Research in Education. 201-227. Fitts, W. H. (1972). The self-concept and performance. Nashville, TN: Dede Wallace Center. Fitzclarence, L. & Giroux, H. A. (1984). The paradox of power in educational theory and practice. Language Arts .21.. 462-477. Flanagan, J. C. (1941). Ana analysis of the results from the first annual edition of the national teachers examinations. Journal of Experimental Education, i, 231-250. Follett, M. P. (1920). The new state: group organization. the solution of popular government. London: Longmans, Green. Frake, A. (1962). Reporting analytical data. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting student outcomes from their perceptions of classroom psychosocial environment. American Educational Research Journal, 12., 498-518. 217

PAGE 231

Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness New York: The Seabury Press. Fullan, M., ans Miles, M. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn't. Phi Delta Kappan ll (10), 744-752. Glatthom, A. (1997). Differentiated superv1saon Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Glickman, C. D. (1990). Pushing school reform to a new edge: The seven ironies of school empowerment. Phi Delta Kappan. 72 (1), 68-75. Glickman, C. (1998). Revolutionizing America's schools. San Francisco, Jossey Bass. Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision. New York: Holt. Rinehart, and Winston. Goldsberry, L. (1986). Colleague consultation: Another case of fools in rush. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Good, T. L. & Brophy, J. E. (1969). Behaviorial expression of teacher attitudes. Journal of Educational (6), 617-624. Good, T. L., Grouws, D. A., & Ebmeier, H. (1983). Active mathematics teaching. New York: Longman. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw Hill. 218

PAGE 232

Greenwood, G. E., Olejnik, S. F., & Parkay, F. W. (1990). Relationships between four teacher efficacy belief patterns and selected teacher characteristics. Journal of Research and Development in 102-106. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newberry Park, CA: Sage. Gullatt, D. (1997). The parent factor. American School Board Journal. .!a! (1 ), 36-39. Guzman, N., & Earll, S. T. (1995). Resculpting our schools: a prescription for healing. Unpublished Manuscript. Hackman, J. (1986). The psychology of self-management in organizations. In M. S. Pollack and R. 0. Perloff (eds.). Psychology and Work: Productivity. Change. and Employment. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Hannum, J. W. (1974). Changing the evaluative self thoughts of two elementary teachers. (Research and Development Memorandum, No. 122). Stanford University, CA. Hanson, E. M. (1985). Educational administration and organizational behavior. Newton, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of intemersonel relations. New York: Wiley. Hilliard Ill, A. (1997). The structure of valid staff development. Journal of Staff Development .1a (2), 24-34. Hoppock, I. (1935). Psychological. physiologicaL and environmental factors. San Francisco: Jessey-Bass. Howard, K. (1986). The attribution dilemma: Toward a new strategy for psychotherapy research. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology. ( 1 ) 1 06-11 0. 219

PAGE 233

Howsam, A. B. (1963) ... Teacher evaluation: facts and folklore." National Elementary Principal !a.a. 7-17. Hughes, M. (1995). Achieving despite diversity: Why are some schools successful in spite of the obstacles they face? A study of characteristics of effective and less effective elementary schools in West Virginia using gualitative and Quantitative methods. Charlestown, WV: West Virginia Education Fund. Hughes, A. Ginnett, R., & Curphy, G. (1993). "Assessing Leadership and Measuring Its' Effects. Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. Hunt, J. (1987). Affective factors in dimensions of the teaching learning process. New York: Teachers College Press. Hunter, M. (1976). Ax improved instruction. El Segundo, CA: TIP Publications. laffaldano, M. & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Life history antecedents of indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2.1 (3), 276-297. Iwanicki, E. (1981). contact plans: A professional growth-oriented approach to evaluating teacher performance." Handbook of teacher evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. James, W. (1980). Principles of psychology (2 vols.) New York: Holt. Joyce, 8., & Showers, B. (1988). Student achievement through staff development. White Plains, NY: Longman. 220

PAGE 234

Kalaian, S. A. & Freeman, D. J. (1987). Relations between teacher candidates. self-confidence and orientations to teaching (Program Evaluation Series No. 16). East Lansing, Ml: College of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 300 366). Kaplan, D. (1997). A didactic example of multilevel structural equation modeling applicable to the study of organizations. Structural Eguasion Modeling. 4 (1), 1-24. Kohen, R. (1969). Physiological maturation and development of formal thought at adolescence. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Research. Kohen, R. (1992). Postural control. Journal of Autism and development disorders. 22 (3), 419-432. Kotter, L. (1988). Empirical findings and educational policies. Zejtschrift fur Padagogjk. (5), 657-671. Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kerman, S., Kimball, T., & Martin, M. (1980). Teacher expectations and student achievement: Coordinator manual. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan. Knight, C. S., & Knight, J. P. (1991 ). Rebyjdling a positive self image for mentor teachers (Position Paper). North Carolina. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 340 698) Krajewski, R. J., Martin, J. S., & Walden, J. C. (1983). The elementary school princjpalshjp: Leadership for the 19sos. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Kuykendall, C. (1992). From rage to hope: strategjes for reclaiming black and hjspanjc students. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service. 221

PAGE 235

Lawler, E. (1986). High Involvement-Management: Participative Strategies for Improving Organizational Performance. San Francisco: Jessey-Bass. Levin, H. M. (1971). How important is teacher experience? Integrated Education, .9,, 25-26. Lewis, P. (1992). Demand, supply, and adjustment in the teacher labour market. Australian Journal of Educatjon. 36. (3) 260-277. Lewis, P. (1994). The evaluation of training: An organizational culture approach. Journal of European lndustdal Training .1.8. (8), 25-32. Licklider, B. (1997). Breaking ranks: Changing the inservice institution. NASSP 9-22. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1984). Teachers. their world and their work: lmlpications for school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Lightfoot, S. (1986). On goodness of schools: Themes of empowerment. Peabody Joymal of (3), 9-28. Lins, L. (1946). The prediction of teacher efficiency. Journal of Expedmental Education, .LS.. 2-60. LuPone, 0. S. (1961). A comparison of provisionally certified and permanently certified elementary school teachers in selected school district in New York State. Journal of Educational Research, 53-63. Maddux, J. (1980). Self-efficacy. expectancy. and outcome expectancy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association, Washington, DC. 222

PAGE 236

Manz, C. & Sims, H. Jr. (1984). Searching for the "unleader: Organizational member views on leading self managed groups. Human Relations. 409-424. Marshall, C., Peterson, J., Rogers, D., & Steele, J. (1996). Caring as a career: An alternative perspective for educational administration. Education Administration Quarterly, 32 (2), 271-294. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, (4), 370-396. McCombs, B. (1997). Self-assessment and relection:Tools for promoting teacher changes toward learner-centered practices. NASSP Bulletin. 81. 1-14. Me Greal, T. (1983). Successful teacher evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum. McPike, L. (1995). What we can learn from Japanese teacher's manuals. American Educator .1J! (1), 14-15. Medway, F. J. & Rose, J. S. (1981 ). Measurement of Teacher's Beliefs in Their Control Over Student Outcome. Journal of Educational Research, 7 4 (3), 185-190. Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qyalitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mills, R. & Pollak, J. (1997). True collaboration: Building and maintaining successful teams. Schools in the Middle, 6 2832. 223

PAGE 237

Munson, P. J. (1991). Winning teachers. teaching winners. Santa Cruz, CA: Network Publications. Murphy, J. & Evertson, C. (1990). Restructuring schools: Capturing the phenomena. Paper presented ay the American Educational Research Association, Boston. Murray, D. R., Tinney, M., Lasseter,P., Atkins, D., & Puckett, M. (1993). On the road to empowerment: A comprehensive analysis of teacher involvement in decjsion making process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Clearwater Beach, Florida. Murray, D. R., Tinney, M., Atkins, D., & Puckett, M. (1992). Professional educators perceptions concerning the mentoring process in the Floyde County Schools: A synthesis. (Report MF01/PCOI). Rome, GA. Muth, R. (1997). Patterned inguir:y for educational administrators. University of Colorado, Denver. O'Hara, L. F. !989). Faculty self-esteem: the 4th governance paradigm (Paper presented). Washington, DC: Annual Convention of the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 306 971) Ohmae, K. (1997). Fortune 500 forum. The Second Annual Worldwide Lessons in Leadershjp. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qyalitative evaluation and research methods. Newberry, CA: Sage. 224

PAGE 238

Petty, M., McGee, G., & Cavender, J. (1984). A meta analysis of the relationships between individual job satisfaction and individual performance. Academy of management review. 9 (4), 712-721. Pfeifer, J. (1983). The effects of personality on success in student teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 228 199) Platt, L. (1997). Fortune 500 forum. The Second Annual Worldwide Lessons in Leadership. Reasoner, R. (1989). Building self-esteem: Implementation project summary. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the California State Conference on self esteem, San Jose, CA. Reeves, C. K., (1982). The relationship of teaching experience to areas of concern about teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Reyes, P. ( 1990). Individual work orientation and teacher outcomes. Journal of Educational Research. M (6), 327-335. Reyes, P. & Imber, M. (1992). Teachers' perceptions of the fairness of their workload and their commitment, job satisfaction, and morale: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of personal evaluatjon in education. (5), 291-302. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing. Roper, S. & Hoffman, D. (1986). Collegjal sypport for professional improvement. Eugene, Oreg.: Oregon School Study Council, University of Oregon. 225

PAGE 239

Rosenshine, B., & Bertiner, D. C. (1978). Academic engaged time. British Journal of Teacher Education, 4, 3-16. Rosenthal, A., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Rost, J. C. (1991 ). Leadership in the twenty-first century. Westport, CT: Praeger. Rotter, J. W. Generalized Expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs. 1966, rut. (1) 609. Rutter, M., Maugham, 8., Mortimtoe, P., Ouston, J., & Smith, A. (1979). Fifteen Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools and Their Effect on Children. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ryans, D. W. (1960). Characteristics of teachers. Washington, DC: American Council of Education. Sabers, D. S., Cushing, K. S., & Bertiner, D. C. (1991). Differences among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity, multidimensionality, and immediacy. American Educational Research Journal, .aa_ (1 ), 63-88. Sadker, D. & Sadker, M. (1985, January). Is the O.K. classroom O.K.? Phi Delta Kappan, 22,, 358-361. Sandelands, L. E., Brockner, J., & Glynn, M. A. (1988). If at first you don't succeed, try again: effects of persistenceperformance contingencies, ego-involvement, and self-esteem on task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1..3., 208216. Schmoker, M. (1997). Occupational knowledge and the inevitability of school improvement. Phi Delta Kappan .z.a. (7), 560-563. 226

PAGE 240

Schurr, S. (1996). Balancing act: Student-centered and subject-centered instruction. Schools in the Middle. 6 (1 ), 1115. Seagoe, M. V. (1949). The prediction of success in a graduate school of education. School and Society, 29,, 89-93. Seidman, I. E. (1991 ). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press. Senge, P. M. (1990). The leader's new work: building learning organizations. MIT: Sloan school of Management. Sergiovanni, T. (1982). Clinical supervision and teacher evaluation. Urbana Universiry of Illinois. Shea, J. A. (1955)}. The predictive value of various combinations of standardized tests and subtests for prognosis of teaching effjcjency. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press. Shields, J. J. & Richard, D. (1982). Teacher selection and retention: A review of the literature. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 219 340) Shinn, J. L. (1976). Teacher percertjons of ideal and actual supervisory proceedyres ysed by California elementary principals. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Oregon. Short, E. C. (1985). The concept of competence: Its use and misuse in education. Journal of Teacher Edycation, .a.6,, 2-6. Short, P. & Greer, J. (1989). Increasing teacher autonomy through governance: Effects on policy making and student oytcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. 227

PAGE 241

Smylie, M. & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1992). Teacher leaders and their principals: Exploring the development of new working relationships. Education Administration Quarterly, (2), 150-184. Smyth, W. April, 1983). Theory. research and practice in clinical supervision. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Houston. Sparks, G. & Bruder, S. (1987). How school-based per coaching improves collegiality and experimentation. Paper presented at the American Research Association, Washington, oc. Spradley, J. (1979). Why do we try to evaluate teaching? ADE Bulletin M. 43-45. Stooksberry, J. (1996). Using the kindergarten model in the intermediate grades. Clearing House .6..9. (6), 358-359. Students of Teaching to Teachers of Students: Teacher Induction Around the Pacific Rim, 1997. U. S. Decartment of education's Online Library at http://www.ed.gov./pubs/APEC/ Swaby, B. (1984). Effective skill instruction: teaching skills so that children learn. Clearing House. 51. (5), 220-223. Thacker, J. A. (1964). A stydy of the relationship between principals' estimates of teaching efficiency and scores on national teacher examinations academic averages and supervisors' estimates of potential of selected teachers in North Carolina (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, 1964). Dissertation Abstracts International, 2_6., 1462. 228

PAGE 242

Thomson, J. R. & Handley, H. M. (1990). Determination of reliability and validity for Myself as a Teacher Scale Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Thomson, J. R., & Handley, H. M. (1992). Relationship between teacher self-concept and teacher efficacy Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Weintraub, F. (1992). Gifted children: Making the year 2000 theirs. Challenges in Gifted Education: Developing Potential and Investing in Knowledge for the 21st Century. Virginia: Essay. Willis, M. (1995). We're family! Creating success in an African American public elementary school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta. Winkler, D. (1975). Educational achievement and school peer group composition. Journal of Human Resources, 1Q., 189205. Winter, S. (1971). The unalienated teacher. College (3) 268-276. Wittrock, M. C. {Ed.). (1986). Handbook of research on teaching, (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zimmerman, M. A. & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, perceived control, and psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, (5), 725-750. 229

PAGE 243

Zimmerman, R. (1973). Incentives: internal, external, central. Improving College and University Teaching. 21 (3), 202-206. 230