118 PREPARATION OF SCHOOL LEADERS
taught, but only if the student has “a base willingness of spirit” to be open to new
dispositions.
One respondent described a heavy focus on dispositions in her course, the entry course of
the preparation program. She described using a wide variety of activities to create trust and
build a sense of community among the students and with her. She used debate, consensus
building, reflective writing and discussions, and the requirement of a single-page educational
platform focused on the ISLLC standards as a means to promote student reflection on their
own, unique sets of dispositions. As with the previously cited respondent, she clarified that
she does not teach dispositions, but rather educates (pulls from) students about them.
Similarly, another respondent described her opening course in the preparation program as
being heavily grounded in dispositions. She estimated that over the past eight years, 15% to
20% of the students in that course failed or were counseled out of continuing in the program,
largely on the basis of dispositions.
The most frequently cited situation in which dispositions were addressed in the curriculum
was in field-based internships. Most respondents indicated that the field-based mentors were
expected to model the ISLLC dispositions and to inform the university supervisor if the
intern’s actions during the internship violated these dispositions. Many respondents indicated
that the assessment rubrics for their internships were based on the ELCC or ISLLC standards,
including the dispositions. As one respondent noted, during the internships dispositions are
modeled by the field-based mentors, rather than taught; however, this occurs only if the
mentor is competent. One respondent discussed a situation in which five students were
suspended from participating in the internship on the grounds of failure to demonstrate the
expected dispositions. Eventually, all were reinstated, although one subsequently chose to
leave the field of school administration.
One theme that emerged from many of the interviews was that there exists a murky
confusion between professional dispositions, e.g., ISLLC or ELCC, and dispositional
expectations faculty hold for students, e.g., punctuality, attendance, preparation for class, and
academic honesty. Quite a few respondents reported on situations in which students were
disciplined, counseled, or removed from the program for failure to demonstrate these student
dispositions; very few indicated such actions based on the professional dispositions.
Interestingly, one respondent stated: “if the student doesn’t exhibit professionalism and
integrity in our program, how can we certify him to become a school administrator?”
As mentioned in the previous section, faculty at one university instituted a course almost
specifically devoted to teaching dispositions. However, most of the other participants’
programs did not contain courses focused on dispositions. Generally, dispositions are
integrated with the skills and knowledge base related to each course’s content focus. The
general consensus was that if students entered the program with basic dispositions similar to
those advocated in the ISLLC standards, or by the specific university, teaching dispositions in
the program would help to make students better reflective practitioners concerning the
dispositions. However, as one participant noted, “it is not likely that graduate students will
extinguish previous dispositions and gain new ones.”
Several respondents discussed the situation that many of their graduates do not move into
a school leadership position upon graduation from the preparation program. They noted that,
all too often, these graduates exited the program with an appropriate set of dispositions, only
to be re-socialized into the culture of their school and/or district. This culture often did not
coincide with the dispositions taught in the principal preparation program.