Program Announcement: Education Leadership CFDA 84.305A

Program Officer:
Dr. Katina Stapleton
Katina.Stapleton@ed.gov
(202) 219-2154

Purpose

The Institute's Education Leadership research program addresses five goals: (1) exploring malleable factors¹ (e.g., skills of principals; management practices) that are associated with better student outcomes for students from kindergarten through high school, as well as mediators and moderators of the relations between these factors and student outcomes, for the purpose of identifying potential targets of intervention; (2) developing innovative programs and practices for the professional development, recruitment, or retention of education leaders that will result in improving the teaching and learning environment at the local level and, ultimately, student learning and achievement; (3) evaluating the efficacy of programs and practices for the professional development, recruitment, or retention of education leaders for improving the teaching and learning environment and, ultimately, student learning and achievement; (4) evaluating the impact of programs and practices for the professional development, recruitment, or retention of education leaders that are implemented at scale and intended for improving the teaching and learning environment and through it, student learning and achievement; and (5) developing and validating new assessments of the quality of education leaders, or validating existing assessments of education leaders against measures of student achievement from kindergarten through high school.

Long-term outcomes of the Education Leadership program will be an array of tools and strategies (e.g., in-service programs, policies, assessments) that have been demonstrated to be effective for improving and assessing the performance of education leaders (e.g., principals, superintendents) in ways that are linked to increases in student achievement. By "professional development" the Institute refers to in-service training for current education leaders.

Background

Through the Education Leadership research program, the Institute supports research to improve the quality of leadership and administration at the local level (e.g., building, district, region) in order to enhance the teaching and learning environment for students and thereby improve student outcomes. This program is intended to support research on innovative approaches to the recruitment and retention of education leaders, as well as the development and evaluation of professional development programs for education leaders. Innovative approaches to recruitment of education leaders include alternative pathways to school leadership that are designed to eliminate barriers that keep talented potential school leaders from joining the profession, and to provide the preparation and support necessary for these leaders to effectively function in today's complex education environment.

Although existing research suggests that by establishing conditions that support and strengthen teaching and learning, education leaders may have an indirect effect on student achievement, little rigorous research has addressed this topic. A recent meta-analysis suggests that there may be specific leadership practices that are associated with higher student achievement (Waters, Marzano, and McNulty 2003). Much, however, is unknown about the causal impact of leadership practices on the teaching and learning environment and, subsequently, on student learning. Some researchers have suggested that conventional principal preparation programs are misaligned with the skill-sets and knowledge actually needed by principals on a day-to-day basis (e.g., Hess and Kelly 2005). However, there has been little systematic empirical research examining the full range of skills and knowledge (e.g., in areas such as finance, instruction, assessment, and accountability) needed by principals, and their relation to the quality of the teaching and learning environment and, in turn, to student achievement. Nor is there much research examining how these needed skills and knowledge might vary according to school context (teacher turnover, poverty status, parental involvement, political and policy environments). Little systematic research has been conducted to determine the effects on student learning of making different choices in leadership-related strategies or investments at the state or district level (e.g., recruitment or performance incentives, principal placements, leadership evaluations). Limited research exists on whether and how district-level leaders (e.g., superintendents, school boards) influence student learning; most empirical research on education leadership has focused on principals. Moreover, we know little about how variations in leadership roles and functions across schools or districts are associated with student achievement, or about the differential leadership needs of schools with differing management structures (e.g., schools operating under site-based management or reconstitution). The types of projects that are appropriate for this program are illustrated by, but not limited to, the examples provided below.

Through the Education Leadership research program, the Institute encourages the development of innovative in-service professional development for education leaders that draws on lessons learned from professional development in other fields (e.g., business administration, public administration, organizational psychology, public health). By way of illustration, an applicant might use existing research in organizational management to propose that performance on a set of specific practices would distinguish between highly effective and less effective principals.

The Institute invites proposals to develop assessments to measure the performance of principals and other building or district-level leaders, and validate such measures against student performance. The Institute's concern is to provide practitioners with instruments that will be useful for giving feedback that enables leaders to identify the specific actions they need to take to improve their performance and ultimately the outcomes of the students for whom they are responsible. These actions would be operationalized at a relatively specific level. For example, an overarching category might be "providing a vision for the school" and include subcategories such as, developing goals and strategies for attaining goals; communicating vision to staff, students, parents, and community; monitoring progress; and initiating corrective actions. Items for each subcategory (e.g., monitoring progress) would address specific practices or behaviors that are used to meet the objective of that subcategory (e.g., has an established schedule for assessing progress on each goal, regularly communicates progress on each goal to staff). For a Goal Five measurement project, the applicant could propose to develop this instrument and then validate it against relevant school and student outcomes. The Institute recognizes that the critical skills that principals (or other leaders) need to exercise to improve their school's overall student performance may differ depending on the school's starting point (e.g., skills for transforming chronically low-performing schools may be different from maintaining steady progress for schools that are making adequate yearly progress) and that instruments may be nuanced by such conditions.

In general, the Institute does not provide funding for the development (Goal Two) or evaluation (Goals Three and Four) of pre-service leadership training programs. However, the Institute does intend for the Education Leadership research program to produce a body of knowledge that will guide the development of pre-service leadership training. For example, researchers who are interested in pre-service leadership training could conduct research utilizing current leaders in order to identify those leadership skills, knowledge, and practices that are most strongly associated with better student outcomes and to develop and/or evaluate in-service professional development interventions that are intended to improve the skills and knowledge of education leaders in ways that are associated with better student outcomes. Researchers who can identify and train current principals, for example, in ways that lead to better school outcomes can use this information to inform pre-service leadership training programs.

Although the Institute does not generally support research on pre-service leadership programs, the Institute will support research on alternative certification pathways (and their components). By "alternative certification pathways" the Institute means relatively short programs that are intended to provide intensive training to professionals and have them leading schools within 18 to 24 months. Such programs lend themselves to rigorous research, in part, because the effects of the programs can be evaluated against school and student outcomes within the time period for an award (e.g., Goal Three Efficacy awards are for a maximum of four years).

References

Hess, F.M. and Kelly, A. P. (2005, May) Learning to Lead? What Gets Taught in Principal Preparation Programs (PEPG 05-02). Cambridge, MA: Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University.

Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. A. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.