Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Sheri L. Miller-Williams, Dissertation Proposal Defense, PPT.

1. The Impact of Atypical Principal
Preparation Programs
on School Accountability Ratings and Student
Achievement Results in High-Poverty Schools
Dissertation Proposal
March 31, 2011
Sheri L. Miller-Williams, Doctoral Student
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Dissertation Chair

2. Committee Members
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD, Chair
Donald R. Collins, PhD
Carl Gardiner, Ed.D
Clement E. Glenn, PhD
Solomon Osho, PhD

3. The U.S. Education Dilemma
“Although the U.S. has some of the best public schools in
the world, it also has too many far weaker than those found
in other advanced countries. Most of these are segregated
schools which cannot get and hold highly qualified teachers
and administrators, do not offer good preparation for
college, and often fail to graduate even half of their
students”.
Orfield and Lee (2007)

4. K-12 Reality: A National Perspective
Introduction to the Problem

5. The Average Minority School
• According to Orfield and Lee (2007), on average, segregated
minority schools are inferior in terms of the quality of their
teachers, the character of the curriculum, the level of
competition, average test scores, and graduation rates.
– Many of these segregated black and Latino schools have now been
sanctioned for not meeting the requirements of No Child Left
Behind and segregated high poverty schools account for most of
the “dropout factories” at the center of the nation’s dropout crisis.
(pp. 4-5)
• This does not mean that desegregation solves all problems or
that it always works, or that segregated schools do not perform
well in rare circumstances (Orfield & Lee, 2007).

6. Dropout Factories
According to Orfield (2009):
– Schools in the U.S. are more segregated today than they have been in more
than four decades.
– Millions of non-white students are locked into “dropout factory” high schools,
where huge percentages do not graduate, and few are well prepared for college
or a future in the U.S. economy. (p. 26)
– Orfield and Lee (2005) suggest that poverty has long been one of the central
problems facing segregated schools. Segregation tends to be multidimensional.
Typically students face double segregation by race/ethnicity and by poverty.
These schools differ in teacher quality, course offerings, level of competition,
stability of enrollment, reputations, graduation rates and many other
dimensions. (p.3)

7. The Impact on School Quality
According to Orfield and Lee (2007):
• Poverty has long been one of the central problems facing segregated
schools.
• Segregation tends to be multidimensional.
• Few highly segregated minority schools have middle class student
bodies.
• Typically students face double segregation by race/ethnicity and by
poverty.
• These schools differ in teacher quality, course offerings, level of
competition, stability of enrollment, reputations, graduation rates and
many other dimensions. (p.17)

8. Segregation and
Education Outcomes for Students
• As the U.S. enters its last years in which it will have a
majority of white students, it is betting its future on
segregation (Orfield & Lee, 2007).
• “The data coming out of the No Child Left Behind tests
and the state accountability systems show clear
relationships between segregation and educational
outcomes, but this fact is rarely mentioned by policy
makers” (p.7).

9. No Child Left Behind: Gauging Growth
In a recent study entitled, “Gauging Growth: How to Judge No
Child Left Behind (2007), Fuller et al reveal that:
• Most states and the federal government have adopted policies
that have the effect of punishing schools and school staffs for
unequal results in re-segregated schools, which tend to have
concentrations of impoverished low-achieving students along with
inexperienced and sometimes unqualified teachers.
• The punishment and the narrowing of the curriculum that
accompanies excessive test pressure have not been effective and
there is evidence that it has made qualified teachers even more
eager to leave these schools. (pp. 268-277)

10. School Accountability and the
Landscape of Principal Leadership
• The onslaught of high stakes testing, accountability, and
public pressure to meet these high standards
necessitates the need for a different type of principal,
despite training programs that continue to prepare
principals for schools of yesterday.

11. The Impact of Principal Leadership
• The school leader has become the central ingredient to school
improvement. Hess and Kelly (2007), revealed that school principals
are the front-line managers, the small business executives, the team
leaders charged with leading their faculty to new levels of
effectiveness.
• The critical mass of research literature supports the concept that
effective leadership is significant to the successful creation of a well
balanced and healthy organization (Bruffee, 1999; Bolman & Deal,
1997; Furman, 2003; Schein, 2000; Yukl, 2006).

12. Literature Review

13. Rationale for the Study
A recent four-year study by Arthur Levine, president of Teachers College Columbia
University, raised the stakes in this debate by harshly assessing the quality of
educational administration programs.
– Based on a survey of practicing principals and education school deans, chairs,
faculty, and alumni, as well as case studies of 25 school leadership programs,
Levine concluded that "the majority of educational administration programs
range from inadequate to appalling, even at some of the country's leading
universities.”
– The study found that the typical course of studies required of principal
candidates was largely disconnected from the realities of school management.
The Chronicle of Higher Education, Arthur Levine, 2005

14. Rationale for the Study
– Nearly two-thirds of principals felt that typical graduate leadership
programs "are out of touch" with today's school realities.
– By reputation, principal-preparation programs are not highly effective.
– 69 percent of principals and 80 percent of superintendents believed
that typical leadership programs "are out of touch with the realities of
what it takes to run today's school district Over 85 percent of both
groups believed that overhauling preparation programs would help
improve leaders. Transforming Principal Preparation.
Schools Can’t Wait: Accelerating the Redesign of University Principal Preparation
Programs (SREB, 2006, p. 18),

15. Rationale for the Study
• Texas principal turnover is on the rise.
• From 1995–98, 47.3% of all principals left their schools or the field.
• Turnover was highest at the high school level, with 58.6% of principals leaving.
• From 2004–07, principal turnover at all levels increased nearly 5% (to 52. 2%).
Again, high school principals were most likely to leave their jobs (60.7%).
Implications from the UCEA/The Revolving Door of the
Principalship. March 2008

16. Rationale for the Study
• Highly skilled school leaders are not born — nor are they fully forged
in the instructional setting of the school classroom. Neither do they
emerge fully prepared to lead from traditional graduate programs in
school administration.
• Most likely, effective new principals who have been rigorously
prepared and deliberately mentored in well-designed programs that
immerse them in real-world leadership experiences where they are
challenged to excel will be the most successful
Southern Regional Educational Board, 2007

17. The Emergence of Atypical Principal Preparation Programs
A few things stand out about the ways new providers are
educating school administrators through atypical types of principal
preparation programming:
• These programs tend to give more emphasis to on-the-job
preparation than university-based programs do.
• They seem to favor mentoring over book learning.
• Their formal curricula seem to be more pragmatic, geared to the
specific knowledge and skills required by school principals and
superintendents at different career stages.
• The programs appear to be as concerned with supporting practicing
administrators as they are with preparing them for the job.
Levine (2005)

18. Significance of the Study
• The researcher believes that through this study a strong
and positive impact will be made on the quality of
principals in the greater Houston area and larger body of
K-12 education.
• The study will bring forth recommendations around
principal development and how training and preparation
of school leaders can impact achievement outcomes for
students, and thus impact urban educational reform as a
whole.

19. Theoretical Framework

20. Theoretical Framework
• The theoretical foundation for this study is largely based on the need for a
new model of leadership development which will accommodate the ever
changing complexion of today’s most challenging schools. This study is
framed through the lens of research around educational leadership.
• As a result of an expansive literature review, five main components
surfaced as recurring themes among current trends in leadership. These
components consist of: a) increased accountability; b) need for effective
leadership; c) organizational effectiveness; d) leader as a change agent;
and e) development of school culture.
• This study will be primarily driven by Transformational Leadership Theory
to support the notion of school reform through the actions of the principal
as school leader. The two theorists most associated with its modern
incarnation in America are Bass and Burns.

21. Theoretical Framework
Increased Accountability
Organizational Effectiveness
Need for Effective Leadership
Leader as Change Agent
Development of School Culture
Improvement in Accountability
Ratings and Student Achievement
Results
Transformational Leadership
Leadership Descriptors
 Causes change in individuals and social systems.
 Creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the
end goal of developing followers into leaders.
 Enhances the motivation, morale and performance of his
followers through a variety of mechanisms.
 The leader transforms and motivates followers through his or
her idealized influence (referred to as charisma), intellectual
stimulation and individual consideration).
 In addition, the leader encourages followers to come up with
new and unique ways to challenge the status quo and to alter the
environment to support being successful.

22. Purpose of the Study

23. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative causal-comparative study is to
investigate the differences between the impact of atypical and
traditional principal preparation on school accountability ratings
and student achievement results in the Greater Houston area
high-poverty schools.

24. Purpose of the Study
The study will include an analysis of school accountability
ratings and student achievement results at a select group of
high-poverty schools to compare overall school and student
performance of a comparison group of traditionally trained
principals versus atypically trained principals.

25. Purpose of the Study
• In this study, the researcher seeks to identify differences that exists
between the type of principal preparation and to analyze quantitative
data.
• For the purposes of this research study, the researcher seeks to
compare the means (sets of scores) from two independent or different
groups.
• The comparison groups will consist of those who have participated in
atypical or traditional principal preparation programs.

26. Research Questions & Null Hypotheses

27. Research Questions
Research and information gained from a synthesis of related literature
helped to formulate research questions to guide this study. The
researcher attempts to find answers to the following research questions:
1. Are there differences in school accountability ratings in high-poverty
schools in the Greater Houston area where principal training and
preparation programs differ (atypical vs. traditional)?
2. Are there differences in student achievement outcomes in high-
poverty schools in the Greater Houston area where principal
training and preparation programs differ (atypical vs. traditional)?

28. Research Hypotheses
In order to answer the research questions, the researcher has developed the
following null hypotheses:
(H01): There will be no statistically significant difference in school accountability
ratings of high-poverty schools in the Greater Houston area having principals who
went through atypical principal preparation and those high-poverty schools with
principals receiving atypical principal preparation.
(H02): There will be no statistically significant difference in student achievement
outcomes of high-poverty schools in the Greater Houston area having
principals who went through atypical principal preparation and those high-poverty
schools with principals receiving traditional principal preparation.

29. Variables

30. Variables
• There is one independent variable with two levels:
– X1= atypical principal preparation, and
– X2= traditional principal preparation.
• For each research question, the researcher has one dependent
variable:
– School Accountability Ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable,
and Unacceptable), and
– Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) student
achievement scores in mathematics and reading.

31. Subjects of the Study

32. Subjects of the Study
• The approximate number of schools matched to the principals in the
Greater Houston area in the quantitative data set is 100.
• The number of students housed in the schools matched to the principals
in the quantitative data set is approximately 70,000 (100 schools with
approximately 700 students enrolled= 70,000).

33. Target Population and Sample
• Five districts in the Greater Houston area will be targeted to participate in
the study. These districts include:
• Houston ISD,
• Aldine ISD,
• Alief ISD,
• Cy-Fair ISD; and
• Humble ISD.
• All elementary, middle and high schools within these five districts will be
included as part of the target population.
• The selected districts are all located in Harris County, have at least 30,000
students, and at least 30% of its students classified as economically
disadvantaged.

34. Sampling Procedures

35. Sampling Procedures
• For this study the researcher will employ a two-fold sampling strategy:
criterion sampling and the snowballing sampling technique. A
sample size of 100 principals/schools will be selected for the study.
• A criterion sampling approach will be utilized to select 100
principals/school to participate in the study.
• The sample population will consist of 20 principals/schools selected from
each of the five targeted districts.
• Within this sample, a combination of 10 atypically trained and 10
traditionally trained principals will be included for each district represented
in the study.
• The sample will include 50 atypically trained and 50 traditionally trained
principals and the schools they lead.

36. Sampling Graphic
Five Greater Houston School DistrictsFive Greater Houston School Districts
20 Principals/Schools from Each District20 Principals/Schools from Each District
10 Traditionally10 Traditionally
Trained & 10Trained & 10
Atypically TrainedAtypically Trained
Sample Includes 50 Traditionally Trained Principals and 50 AtypicallySample Includes 50 Traditionally Trained Principals and 50 Atypically
Trained PrincipalsTrained Principals
10 Traditionally10 Traditionally
Trained & 10Trained & 10
Atypically TrainedAtypically Trained
10 Traditionally10 Traditionally
Trained & 10Trained & 10
Atypically TrainedAtypically Trained
10 Traditionally10 Traditionally
Trained & 10Trained & 10
Atypically TrainedAtypically Trained
10 Traditionally10 Traditionally
Trained & 10Trained & 10
Atypically TrainedAtypically Trained

37. Criterion Sampling Technique
• Criterion sampling involves selecting cases that meet some predetermined criterion of
importance.
• Using this technique, the researcher will identify criteria and select principals/schools that meet
a pre-determined set of characteristics.
• Principals/schools included in the study must meet the following criterion to be selected as part
of the study:
– (1) participants are active principals of K-12 schools,
– (2) participants must be employed in one of the five targeted districts,
– (3) participants have been in the role of principal at the selected school for two full
academic years beginning in 2008-2009 and ending in 2009-2010,
– (4) participants must have at least 3-10 years of principal experience.
– (5) schools must participate in the Texas Education Agency state assessment system,
and
– (6) schools must be identified as having 80% or higher free and reduced lunch,

38. Snowball Sampling Procedures
• Within the study, the researcher will utilize the snowballing technique to
locate people meeting specific criteria that the researcher would not have
been able to identify.
• Snowball sampling is a method used to obtain research and knowledge, from
extended associations or through previous acquaintances.
• The advantage of this technique is the ability for the researcher to use those
in the field with knowledge of others who meet the criteria identified for
participation in the study. This technique will ensure that sampling group is
consistent.
• Within this sampling process, an individual or a group receives information
from different places through a mutual intermediary.
• Snowball sampling is a useful tool for building networks and increasing the
number of participants.

39. Research Design & Statistical
Analysis

40. Research Design
• Descriptive statistics will be used to compile demographic data on all participating
principals/schools included in the study. The statistical analysis portion of the study will
rely solely on quantitative instruments.
• A quantitative causal-comparative design will be used to determine the cause for or
the consequences of differences between participants in the study.
• The basic causal-comparative design involves selecting two or more groups that differ
on a particular variable of interest and comparing them on another variable (Fraenkel
& Wallen, 2009).
• The value of using this type of design is the ability for the researcher to identify
possible causes of observed variations in behavior patterns (Fraenkel & Wallen,
2009).
• Utilizing this methodology, the researcher will be able to investigate the effects of the
independent variable after it has been implemented or has already occurred.

41. Instrumentation
• A School Leadership Demographic Survey created by the researcher will be
utilized to analyze the target population and narrow the sample based on identified
criteria.
• The survey will be comprised of nine sections:
– school name,
– grade level,
– economically disadvantaged percentage,
– years of experience as a building principal,
– total years as principal of the current school,
– total years of administrative experience,
– ethnicity,
– gender; and
– type of principal training.
The purpose of this survey is to narrow the total population down to a
sample size based on the criteria identified for the study.

42. School Leadership Demographic Survey
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE IMPACT OF ATYPICAL PRINCIPAL PREPARATION PROGRAMS ON SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN HIGH-POVERTY SCHOOLS
THE SCHOOL LEADERSHIP DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY (APPENDIX 1)
Section I: School Demographics
School Name __________________________________
Enrollment __________________________________
Grade Level K-5 5-6 6-8 9-12
Years of Principal Experience 1-3 4-6 7-9 10 or more
Economically Disadvantaged % __________________________________
Section II: Principal Demographics
Ethnicity M F
Gender W AA H O
Years of Admin Experience 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 20+
Note: Administrative experience in any supervisory position not defined as the principalship.
Section III: Principal Preparation
Note: Please select the type of principal development program you participated in defined by the descriptions below.
__________ Traditional Principal Preparation (Completion of Master’s Degree and principal certification attained prior to assuming
principalship.
__________ Atypical Principal Preparation (Completion of Master’s Degree, principal certification and an extended training program
which includes field residency or clinical internship with a mentor principal or coaching from a master principal.

43. Instrumentation
• Other than contact with the principals/schools to issue and retrieve the
confidential survey used only to aid in the identification of the criterion-
based sample population, there will be no other involvement of human
subjects.
• The dominant instrumentation for the study will be the Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) data from the 2008-2009
and 2009-2010 school years gathered from the Academic Excellence
Indicator System (AEIS) report published by the Texas Education
Agency (TEA) each year.

44. Instrumentation
• The Texas Education Agency’s AEIS report and TAKS scores for 2008-
2009 and 2009-2010 will be used to measure the impact of principal
leadership on school accountability ratings and student achievement
results for atypically trained principals versus traditionally trained
principals.
• To compare school accountability ratings, the AEIS report will be
accessed and will include two academic years of rankings classified as:
Exemplary (E), Recognized (R), Acceptable (A) or Unacceptable (U) for
each principal/school included in the study.
• Student achievement results will also be measured by the percentage
of growth in mathematics and reading for two academic years (2008-
2009 and 2009-2010) for each principal/school included in the study.

45. Statistical Analysis
The following steps will be used in the statistical analysis portion of the study:
• Step 1: Administer School Leadership Survey to establish a pool of 100
principals/schools for the study. Assign a number to surveys as they are returned to
the researcher. Enter all demographic information into an Excel spreadsheet based on
the number assigned.
• Step 2: Identify and select participating principals/schools based on survey data, and
employ the criterion sampling approach to cross-reference survey data with the Texas
Education Agency’s AEIS data report to identify schools that meet the established
criteria. Highlight those schools meeting the criteria on the Excel spreadsheet to be
identified as meeting the criteria for the study.
• Step 3: Create final Excel database to include 100 schools from five targeted districts,
ensuring that the sample includes 50 traditionally trained and 50 atypically trained
principals.
• Step 4: Access and retrieve 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 extant AEIS reports from the
Texas Education Agency website. For each school year, access the reading,
mathematics and school accountability rating for each school. Enter this information
into the Excel spreadsheet.

46. Statistical Analysis
Step 5: Disaggregate the data by differences in reading, mathematics and school accountability ratings for
each school.
Step 6: The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 13.0) will be utilized to analyze the data.
Frequencies and percentages will be calculated and represented graphically. The Independent Samples
T-Test will be used to measure differences in the comparison groups.
Step 7: The researcher will construct frequency polygons and then calculate the mean and standard
deviation of each group if the variable is quantitative.
Step 8: Generalizations regarding the study will be made to the cohort of public schools that principal
2008-2009 2009-2010
Reading Reading
Mathematics Mathematics
School Accountability
Ratings
School Accountability
Ratings
Traditionally Trained Principals
Atypically Trained Principals

47. References
Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of
knowledge (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.
Fuller, B., et. al. (2007) “Gauging Growth: How to Judge No Child Left Behind?” Educational
Researcher. 36.5. pp. 268-278. Sage Publications. Web.
Hess, F.M., & Kelly, A.P. (2007), Learning to lead: What gets taught in principal preparation
programs. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 244-74.
Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. The Chronicle of Higher Education. pp. 11, 12, 22, 24,
29, 51, and 52.
Orfield, G., & Lee, C. (2007). Historic reversals: Accelerating resegregation, and the need for new
integration strategies. (A report of the Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles).
UCLA. Los Angeles, CA. Retrieved from http://news.yahoo.com/s/
Orfield, G. (2009). Reviving the goal of an integrated society: A 21st century challenge. Public
Agenda Website. Retrieved from
http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/factfiles_detail.cfm?issue_type=higher_education&list6

48. References
Southern Regional Educational Board. (2006). In schools can’t wait: Accelerating the redesign of
university principal preparation program. Retrieved from http://www.sreb.org
University Council for Educational Administration. (2008). Implications from UCEA: The revolving door
of the principalship. Retrieved from
http://www.edb.utexas.edu/ucea/home/ucea/www/pdf/ImplicationsMar2008.pdf