We collected data from 691 teachers from 139 schools in Michigan to validate the instrument titled Data-informed Decision-making on High-impact Strategies, designed based on Marzano's (2003) 11 high-impact strategies. Results of confirmatory factor analysis strongly supported the 11-factor model as the most valid approach to measure teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ data-informed decision-making on high-impact strategies for the improvement of student achievement. According to Marzano's (2003) framework, the 11 factors fall into three categories of higher-order principal leadership concerning schools, teachers, and students. The higher-order-factor model came quite close to the 11-factor model in terms of model-data-fit so that the instrument could be used with satisfactory construct validity in the research of higher-order principal leadership. The scale property analysis showed favorable results for the 11-factor model and the higher-order-factor model. Implications of the results are discussed.

We examined the path of influence from principals' data-informed decision-making to school process and then to student achievement, by adopting the model of 'mediated-effects with antecedent effects'. With samples of principals and teachers from Michigan, we used two different approaches to measure principals' engagement in data-informed decision-making. Results of structural equation modelling revealed that teachers are in a better position than principals to (a) provide measures of principals' engagement in data-informed decision-making because teacher measures of this leadership of principals accurately predicted almost all aspects of school process and (b) predict the indirect effects of principal leadership on student achievement via school process (or the direct effects of school process on student achievement). Policy implications were discussed such as the best source for measuring principals' data-informed decision-making, and the path of influence from principals' leadership to school process and to student achievement.

In this study, the authors connect 3 streams of literature to develop an instrument for measuring the degree to which principals engage in data-informed decision making on high-impact strategies that are empirically associated with higher student achievement. The 3 literature streams are (a) the importance of data-informed decision making, (b) the role of principals in school effectiveness, and (c) high-impact strategies for raising student achievement. The authors used Marzano's (2003) 11 high-impact strategies as a framework to develop items and collected data from 256 principals in Michigan to test the reliability (internal consistency) and (construct and factorial) validities of the instrument. The instrument, "Data-Informed Decision-Making on High-Impact Strategies: An Inventory for Principals," demonstrates good psychometric properties. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

In response to the vast amounts of data associated with the accountability movement and the rhetoric of data-informed decision-making, we interviewed 16 principals to find out what streams of data they used and what decisions they made by using the data. We found that: (a) student achievement data are predominantly used to the extent of neglecting other streams of data such as student and community background data and school process data; (b) student achievement data are used more for accountability purposes—for assessing “of” rather than “for” the learning; (c) different streams of data are rarely used together to derive rich meaning for decision-making; and (d) school districts differ in the extent to which their principals use data to improve curriculum and instruction. The study pointed both to the challenges and to the opportunities of making data-informed decisions to improve our schools.

Based on their experience of direct work with 16 principals in a midwest state in the USA, collaborative work with the state department of education and the major state-level professional associations and universities in the same state, and other state-level initiatives across the USA, the authors discuss eight critical issues concerning data-informed decision-making: (a) an overemphasis on achievement data based on standardized tests, (b) data 'of' learning vs 'for' learning, (c) the need to intersect student achievement data with other streams of data, (d) the need to improve the technological infrastructure for data analysis in school districts, (e) the politics of data, (f) the role of university teacher education and administrator preparation programs in the movement of data-informed decision-making, (g) the function and role of data in the educational process, and (h) the limitations of data-informed decision-making in improving the educational system.

There has been a shortage of qualified applicants for principalship positions in the USA. We conducted a study to inquire into the factors influencing the application for principalship as perceived by teachers, principals, and superintendents. Analysing the data collected from 198 teachers, 306 principals, and 370 superintendents via factor analysis, ANOVA and post‐hoc comparison, rank order correlation, and discriminant function analysis, we found: (a) that a variety of factors influence the application for principalship; (b) that there are differences among teachers, principals, and superintendents in their perceptions; (c) that the factors are more related to ‘extrinsic rewards’ than ‘intrinsic rewards’; and (d) that teachers need to know more about what the principalship entails. The findings lead to a discussion about policy implications such as: (a) addressing the principalship shortage as a multi‐faceted policy issue; (b) redefining the principalship; (c) balancing the perspectives when developing policy to address principalship shortage; and (d) strengthening the leadership preparation programs for those teachers who aspire to be principals.

This article reports how secondary principals perceive the status of the accountability movement and their professional job responsibilities in the context of accountability. The data were collected frm a nationally representative sample of secondary principals during the Schools and Staffing Survey 1999-2000. Respondents reported that there were specific incentives or corrective measures for meeting performance goals, that numerous responsibilities were added to their traditional roles, that they paid substantial attention to instructional leadership, and that management tasks still occupied more time and energy than leadership initiatives.

The as staff development model provides a comprehensive framework for faculty and staff training. The research-based model focuses on a number of interrelated concepts designed to generate shared responsibility among faculty, staff and administration. The as model involves ongoing support, modeling, and accountability. The model was used to develop two nationally recognized programs, Student Assistance for At Risk individuals (SAFARI) and the technology program in the Westfield Washington Schools, Westfield, Indiana. Program developers also received a National Award for Excellence, for the as model from the National Council of States on Inservice Education, in November, 1993. An evaluation component has been added to the model since initial development in 1989. Staff development is one of the last, best hopes for educational improvement. Politicians and reformers continue to devise new solutions to the purported educational decline. While some of these innovations are beneficial, the reality is improvement and change remain closely related to human resource development. Those who seek to improve education must first focus on enhancing teacher and administrator skills. This is best accomplished through planned, coordinated, ongoing staff development. Unfortunately, staff development has not always materialized into the changes desired by school officials (Williams, 1979; Wood & Thompson, 1980; Thompson & Cooley, 1986; Clark, & Astuto, 1994; Maurer & Davidson, 1998). Many of the reforms of the 1980s and 1990s failed to produce the intended results (Clark & Astuto, 1994). Legislated improvement efforts espoused by politicians generally focused on singular solutions with little coordination or movement towards systematic change affecting the entire organization (David, 1991). Sarason (1990) suggested that the failure of reform was related to power relationships between teachers and administrators. These relationships cannot be transformed by focusing on symptoms or isolated issues. Educational organizations must be reengineered to develop human resources and build trust, credibility, and collaboration. Traditional management schemes should redistribute power with emphasis directed towards participatoiy management (Champy, 1995). Many politicians, business leaders, parents, and community leaders see schools as simplistic institutions easily transformed into effective learning organizations. The truth is schools are complex institutions mired in a culture that embraces confo rmity, order, and routine (Deal, 1990). Gilly and Boughton (1996) suggested that efforts to improve productivity have been characterized by a number of ongoing innovations or fads that failed due to educational malpractice. According to Gilly and Boughton (1996) managers actually contribute to organizational dysfunction by supporting people who do not understand management, do not possess human relations skills, or who promote the individual instead of the group. Accountability is also one of the shortcomings contributing to malpractice. In effective organizations, workers share responsibility and focus on problem-solving instead of projecting blame at one another (Kouzes & Posner 1993). The purpose of this article is to examine the Teachers as Trainers model, a site-based staff development program that emphasizes faculty and staff empowerment, accountability, responsibility, and ongoing support. A as staff development model was used to provide training for two nationally recognized programs in the Wesffield Washington Schools (Westfield, Indiana). In the first program, Student Assistance for At Risk Individuals (SAFARI), the district provided 2,400 hours of training for 110 employees over a four-year period. Later, the as model was refined and used to support a 2 million dollar technology platform, financed in part through a partnership with GTE North, Inc. …

The top 10 factors that influence teachers who are applying for an administrative position describe a complex list of “wants and needs” for this new generation of school leaders. A study strongly suggests that organizational relationships, more than any other factors, affect a teacher's willingness to seek an administrative position in a particular district.

By analysing survey data collected from 457 students in 29 school administration programmes across the United States, this study examines (a) the relative importance of factors related to deciding to enter and to potentially leave school administration and (b) the canonical correlation between reasons for entering and leaving administration. It is found that the respondents decided to enter administration primarily for self-actualization, esteem, and affiliation purposes. However, ‘hygiene’ factors, such as salary, would play an important role in staying in administration. It was also found there were statistically significant canonical correlations between reasons for entering and leaving administration. Implications for recruiting and retaining school administrators are discussed.

Using discriminant function analyses on survey data collected from 457 students in 29 education administration programs across the United States, the authors inquired into whether men and women decide to enter and possibly leave education administration for different reasons. There were statistically significant functions separating men and women in their reasons for entering and leaving education administration. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Executive Summary A national sample of 417 students from 29 U.S. colleges and universities was surveyed on the quality and impact of their educational leadership programs. The results indicated that the participants were positive about the quality of the programs and that they developed a more comprehensive understanding of educational goals and schooling functions after entering the programs. However, the participants indicated that the programs should be changed to accommodate their preference for skill- and practice-oriented courses, and that it is still possible for someone who knows education to be a reasonably good administrator without going through a leadership program. Challenges for educators of school leaders were discussed in the light of the findings.

(1998). Twelve Strategies for Implementing a Major Technology Initiative in Your School District. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas: Vol. 71, No. 6, pp. 350-354.