Strategies for Transforming the Daily Work of Principals: A Study of Present Habits and Opportunities for Change 267LITERATURE REVIEW
Leadership Influence on Student Achievement
The effects of leadership on student achievement come from three distinct sources of
research (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004). These include qualitative case
studies, large-scale quantitative studies of overall leadership effects, and large scale
quantitative studies of specific leadership practices. Each method points to varying degrees of
direct and indirect influence on student achievement. Waters et al. (2003) conducted a meta
analysis of leadership studies over a period of 30 years and identified 21 leadership
responsibilities that contribute to improved student achievement. They reported that an
improvement of one standard deviation in these practices by a school principal can bring
about as much as a ten percent increase in student test results. Nettles (2007) reported that
certain types of leadership practices have produced a direct impact on student learning, but
also cautioned that they account for a small proportion of the total student achievement
variability. Goldring, Porter, Murphy, Elliot, and Cravens (2007) developed a leadership
assessment system that focused solely on the core components and key processes that were
associated with student achievement. The components included high standards for student
learning, rigorous curriculum, quality instruction, a culture of learning and professional
behavior, connections to external communities, and systemic performance accountability.
The assessment measured these components against key leadership processes of planning,
implementing, supporting, advocating, communicating and monitoring.
How Principals Spend Their Time
School principals are faced with ever changing and expanding role responsibilities that
consume their daily work and contribute to a complex set of expectations (Rayfield &
Diamantes, 2004; Sergiovanni, 2001; Blendinger, Ariratana, & Jones, 2000). In a 2001 study
conducted by the Milken Family Foundation, in collaboration with the National Association
of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), 3,359 high school principals were interviewed
regarding their work expectations and practices. The majority of principals reported that their
daily time was consumed by parent issues, community-related tasks, discipline, and facilities
management. Little of their time was left for instructional leadership. In a 2006 survey of 33
elementary principals from five urban areas, Adamowski, Therriault, & Cavanna (2007)
reported that three-fifths of those serving in district operated schools, “Felt somewhat
constrained in their ability to raise achievement” (p.17). In a study of 21 school principals,
Shellinger (2005) concluded that the traditional structure of the school principalship does not
allow for adequate time for instructional leadership.
Strategies to Shift the Daily Work of Principals
In response to the need to find greater time for principals to engage in instructional
leadership practices, a variety of approaches have been implemented. Zeitoun and Newton
(2002) identified six models that involve splitting the responsibilities of the principal with one
or more professionals in order to free up time for effective leadership practices. Other
approaches focused on strategies that included managing meetings, establishing priorities,
delegating, handling interruptions, scheduling contacts and managing paperwork (Johnson,
1999). In their preliminary study of exemplary pre-service and in-service principal programs,