Principals’ perceptions from within

Abstract

This study explores leadership in high-need schools where social and economic issues collide with learning, preventing students and their families from receiving the level of education they deserve. Two Latina principals in primary schools identified as high-need schools answer these questions: (a) “How can high-need schools be defined?”; (b) “Would a school inevitably be a high-need school in a high-need area?”; and (c) “In what ways do you see your leadership as influencing your specific school?” The views of these principals carry larger implications for the promotion of Latinos as the fastest-growing school-age group in the US. They defined their leadership as a moral craft, as one that prepares adults on campus to support families and students in urban high-need areas. At an international and cross-comparative level, considerations of socio-economic issues, and unaddressed academic, emotional, and physical issues, were regarded as needs to be met before focusing on students’ academic success.

Keywords

High-need schools Latina/o leadership principal leadership

Introduction

Richard Spradling, the 2012 International School Superintendent of the Year, once reflected that a common goal voiced by parents around the world is to have a school that cares for their children. Parents know when schools are high-need schools, and so do school leaders.

Around the world, the economy and the role of schooling are intertwined, influencing the quality of education. Common concerns, especially in urban areas, include the fact that “taking children into school does not guarantee the quality of education they receive, and increasing enrolment must be accompanied by substantial developments in teacher training and supply, curriculum reform, quality assurance and resource provision” (Foskett and Lumby, 2003: 158). Foskett and Lumby list these important factors as elements that school leaders may consider in the improvement of schools.

From a leadership perspective, high-need schools in urban areas may be those situated within contexts of economic and social disadvantage. Even though teachers may make an effort to focus their teaching on subject matters only, some scholars gather that schools in high-need areas can often be considered within contexts of “poverty, wide economic, social, and linguistic disparity, and high mobility” (Barnett and Stevenson, forthcoming: 1). Scholars also focus on leadership as a way to impact these schools. Significant work has been developed, for example, on school turnaround (Duke, 2012, 2013; Leithwood et al., 2010; Murphy and Meyers, 2008), as well as school reform, effectiveness, improvement, and change (Hallinger, 2003; Harris, 2006; Heck, 2006; Heck and Hallinger, 2010; Jackson, 2000; Nicolaidou and Ainscow, 2005; Reynolds et al., 2000). All these studies indicate the importance of understanding leadership in high-need schools.

Rationale and significance

Along with a group of scholars from the International School Leadership Development Network (ISLDN)—a collaborative international research initiative sponsored by the British Educational Leadership Management and Administration Society (BELMAS) and the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA)—we have been focusing on educational leadership as a means to create social justice and support for high-need schools in a broad range of national and international contexts. One of the significant considerations in the ISLDN research is developing a global understanding of how leadership in high-need schools can be defined.

In a public presentation about this work, a scholar in the audience questioned whether the focus of this research could be stemming from a Eurocentric perspective. It was a significant question, showing the importance of this inquiry as representing multiple accounts of leadership in high-need schools. Indeed, those presenting recognized that “those leading schools in urban contexts face many common issues, but that individual leaders in urban schools face a particular set of circumstances that are unique to [each] school” (Barnett and Stevenson, forthcoming: 6). When considering issues of poverty, economic inequalities, social and linguistic disparity, and the high mobility of students, it is important to consider the cultural diversity in which these schools operate not from a deficit perspective, but from culturally diverse forms of leadership. Therefore, we considered the ISLDN framework, which includes socio-cultural dimensions, school community, school context, and socio-political discourse at a macro–micro level (Barnett and Stevenson, forthcoming), as contributing to a definition of high-need schools from a culturally rich US perspective.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore leadership in high-need schools where social and economic issues collide with learning, preventing students and their families from receiving the level of education that they deserve in schools that care. Principals in these schools not only focus on academic achievement, but may also address how their scope of leadership can promote students out of socio-economic traps (Skrla et al., 2009). We begin with a brief context about the schools that these principals lead, followed by their reflections on high-need schools. Aimed at informing school leaders and practitioners, especially at the primary level in urban areas, these principals provide a portrait of the day-to-day struggles of principals, teachers, and students in leading high-need schools.

Methods: Context and socio-cultural dimensions

Two Latina primary school principals in schools identified as high-need schools dialogue in this article, prompted by professors of educational leadership. These principals were selected to participate in this study due to their experience with students who are English learners and come from low socio-economic backgrounds. Both of the women have years of experience of educational leadership with such populations and have personal missions to improve conditions and educational outcomes for these students. Questions for the participants included: (a) “From a principal standpoint, how can high-need schools be defined?”; (b) “In your perception, would a school inevitably be a high-need school if the area is a high-need area?”; and (c) “In what ways do you see your leadership as influencing your specific school?”

The data are communicated through dialogic narratives with minimal intervention so as to provide practitioners and scholars with a first-hand account (not re-storied) of their experiences in promoting students in these schools. This method originates from Bakhtin’s theories of the cultural and social context of language (Kotsopoulos, 2010), which asserts that human experiences come into cognition through language, generating socially constructed and situated meaning. We consider that research is not value-free when interpreted by scholars, and research is actually co-created with the participants (Russell and Kelly, 2002). This qualitative methodological approach promotes the potential of reflecting practical, theoretical, methodological, and political implications (Benham, 1997). Offering the principals an opportunity to reflect on their practice supports the use of this methodological approach. First-hand accounts are valuable in the sense that the dialogues are not filtered. Rather, this approach has been widely used by researchers of color to explore the representation of minority ethnic leaders (Benham, 1997; Dunlap and Schmuck, 1995; Grady and Connell, 1993; Schmuck et al., 1981; Shakeshaft, 1989).

In the US, Latina/o¹ students represent the fastest-growing school-age population when compared to other ethnic groups. Presently, in the US, 52 million are Latinos, which corresponds to one in eight people (Murakami et al., 2013; US Census Bureau, 2010), making Latinos the largest ethnic group in the country. Ms Aguilar and Ms Benavidez (pseudonyms) are primary school principals in Texas, where from a total of 4,900,000 school-age students, 70% are students of color. Fifty percent of children in the state are Latinos. In Ms Aguilar’s school, Elma Primary, 98% of the children are Latinos, 95% are economically disadvantaged, 76% are at risk of dropping out, and 44% have limited English proficiency. The mission at Elma Primary, according to the principal, is for “students to develop the skills necessary to achieve social, emotional, and academic success with the support of a fair, collaborative, actively involved, responsible team of administrators, parents, and teachers.” The school sits in a quiet and traditional neighborhood near the downtown metropolitan area. Most of the teachers are Latinas/os (78%). The median household income in the school neighborhood is US$31,000 (as compared to the country’s median income of US$50,000 according to the 2011 US Census), and 23% of neighborhood families live below the poverty line.

Ms Benavidez is a principal at Park Primary, where 100% of students are Latinos, and 100% are economically disadvantaged, with 72% of students considered at risk of dropping out, and 27% having limited English proficiency. The mission of Park Primary, according to the principal is to have “parents, faculty, and staff work[ing] harmoniously to provide quality instruction to empower all students through learning. All students will be prepared intellectually, emotionally, and physically to meet the changes and challenges of the future.” The school sits in a traditional and quiet neighborhood west of the downtown area. Most of the teachers at Park Primary are Latinas/os (85%). The median household income in the neighborhood is US$34,000, with 27% of families living below the poverty line. Ms Benavidez states that at Park Primary, they “open doors, fulfill dreams, and offer a world-class education” (personal communication). What follows are their perceptions of leadership in high-need schools.

Defining high-need schools

When asking the principals “How can high-need schools can be defined?,” we recognized as scholars and practitioners that perceptions of such schools carry broader implications beyond the scope of student performance alone, relating to non-traditional perceptions of schooling, such as political, economic, and social issues (Spring, 2002). The principals communicated some of these concerns when defining high-need schools:

As a principal, I define a high-need school as a school who serves students who live in poverty, with non-traditional family structures. The area surrounding a high-need school does not usually offer programs engaging the families’ needs. In high-need schools, students performing below grade level show low success rates on standardized assessments. (Ms Benavidez)

I define high-needs schools as institutions where students come with issues, concerns, academic, economic, social, emotional, physical deficits that have not been met and have not been addressed. For example, students can come with emotional baggage, or physical concerns. Students can come academically low, walking in the door in a state of poverty. Those are all issues we understand that as a leader at a campus level, we need to deal with before we can delve into the academics. We may not solve issues, but at least we work towards getting some answers or directions for the families. (Ms Aguilar)

Both principals acknowledged how economic and social issues influence their leadership tasks, needing to be addressed before addressing academic achievement. Chenoweth and Theokas (2013), looking at successful principals in high-poverty schools, similarly recognized the hard reality between high-income schools with high-achieving students and low-income schools with low-achieving students. At a global level, high-need schools in the US present similar characteristics of low performance among students when considering issues of poverty. It shows that the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act’s goal to reach high academic standards and proficiency for all students by the 2013/2014 school year is a challenge for high-need schools. In their accounts, both principals understand that poverty plays a role in students’ emotional well-being and academic progress. Thus, they view their role as school leaders as being to work in tandem with families to help improve educational outcomes for students.

Would a school inevitably be a high-need school in a high-need area?

Barnett and Stevenson (forthcoming) indicated that the biggest danger of the socio-economic effects of poverty is having “deficit-thinking” leaders and educators. Under a deficit-thinking view, students fall into an equity trap (McKenzie, 2001; Skrla et al., 2009), where teachers and leaders are unable to have an asset view of students. The principals were asked if a school situated in a high-need area of poverty would inevitably be a high-need school:

There is evidence of schools or districts under Title I support [receiving governmental support for improving underprivileged students] with students that perform well academically and great support within these communities. I don’t believe that just because a school is in a high-need area it means that the school is going to struggle, or will fail. I think that adults that know how to use district/campus-level resources are key to make a school successful—but they must have a desire and passion to help students. Resources can encourage educators with a strong leader and team of individuals to stay and produce an effective campus, and generate parental involvement. (Ms Aguilar)

The school can demonstrate great academic success and students can have excellent attendance in high-need schools. This success can be reached—but it will be done with a group of teachers and staff that will need to work extra hard to motivate students to succeed on a consistent basis. The biggest challenge in a high-needs school is retaining teachers in key discipline areas that will provide continuity to the development of students. (Ms Benavidez)

Both principals have different perspectives when it comes to whether a high-need community automatically defines a high-need school. While it may appear that the two principals are contradicting each other, researchers who study high-need schools in high-need communities also have differing opinions about how high-need schools are defined. While the principals focused their answers on student achievement, according to the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, a high-need school can be defined by community characteristics (Picus et al., 2005). For example, according to the law, a school could be characterized as a high-need school if it is located in an area where at least 30% of students come from families with incomes below the poverty line. Other characteristics of high-need schools are associated with teachers and teaching. For instance, the number of unfilled teaching positions in a school, the number of teachers teaching outside of their licensure area, the high turnover of teachers, and teachers teaching without certification or licensure, all contribute to the relationship between high-need communities and high-need schools. Both principals do, however, agree that there is evidence of high student achievement in high-need schools located in high-need communities.

Even though this question highlights the importance of leaders in high-need schools to show passion for areas that are economically challenged, and to reveal any instances of deficit thinking, the principals added other issues, which are more comprehensive and deep in a political sense. The principals refer to resources (to encourage educators) and funding (to work extra hard), which are often limited in high-need schools. Schools are inequitably funded in the US, and it is important to highlight this characteristic in international comparisons of the quality of education across countries. Comparisons have to be put into perspective within the country’s cost of living, but these comparisons can be made within the country and within the same city. For example, while Elma Primary has an operating budget of US$3,500,000, with US$4500 per student (with 95% of its students being economically disadvantaged and 44% having limited English proficiency), a high-performing school in the same city, less than 20 miles away (32 kilometers), has double the operating budget and money available per student (even though only 26% are economically disadvantaged and 10% have limited English proficiency) (Texas Education Agency, 2012). Hence, deficit views may not be necessarily situated at a campus level, but in a systemic agreement to fund schools based on neighborhood income. Ms Benavidez perceives teachers as having to work “extra hard” in these schools. Teachers and principals at both Elma and Park earn 10–15% less a year than in the aforementioned affluent district, where teaches may not have to work to the same extent to obtain the desired results.

How can principals’ leadership influence high-need schools?

Based on socio-cultural dimensions, school community, and school-specific contexts, principals were encouraged to reflect on their leadership as influencing their specific schools. Both principals focused on community responsibility and teacher/staff cohesion as important factors in their leadership. They perceived these elements as directly influencing educational expectations and standards in the schools:

I believe that the leadership in a high-needs school is critical in retaining excellent staff and motivate them to continue learning to serve the students, parents, and community. Your leadership has to be one of pride, high expectations, and positive motivation. Students need to develop a relationship with you as a leader and see that you truly value them and expect them to succeed on a daily basis. The faculty and staff needs to be held accountable but, at the same time, the leader must offer them every opportunity to grow professionally, and to work collaboratively to impact instruction. (Ms Benavidez)

I see my leadership as really influencing the adults, meaning all faculty, staff, and the community. If I can influence the community, and if I can influence the faculty and staff, they, in turn, will affect what goes on in the classroom. Open communication, being very visible in the community, making sure that community members and parents feel welcome, doing things outside of campus are priorities. For example, going into the community, knocking on doors, and having the parents truly understand that you care about their child’s academic performance. In the state of Texas, school districts receive a certain dollar amount for each student’s average daily attendance [ADA]. If students are not present after 10:00, the school district does not receive funding for the day for that child. However, regardless of what time of the morning, I will still make a home visit after 10:00 to find that child and encourage the parents to bring them to school. I have even put the child along with the parents into my own vehicle and driven them to campus, drop off the child, and go back and drop off the parents. I do this, because I know in my heart that students are going to gain much more in the two to three hours that are left in the school day than if they were at home. It also sets an example for the teachers, and your influence as a model leader. I cannot ask teachers to do something that I would not do myself. So, when I talk to teachers about making home visits, it is because I do them myself. When teachers see that, and they know that that’s the type of leader you are and that you’re also right there with them, supporting parents, or analyzing data, they are going to be more open to conduct the same type of support and generating groups of educators that care about their students. Teachers also need to see that they have a huge influence in what they do—and how they conduct themselves as professionals. It really influences what happens in the classroom. (Ms Aguilar)

Principals referred to values and morale. Extraordinary leaders are often regarded for their passion, as Sergiovanni (1999) once recognized. It relates to Notman’s (2008) values-based model of leadership, where leaders can effect change by leading with moral authority and idea structures—something leaders believe in and feel passionate about—which are a person’s source of authority (Brandt, 1995). Both principals attested to leadership as being a moral craft (Sergiovanni, 1992), moving beyond descriptions of technical functions to achieve goals, and, instead, leading by infusing character in day-to-day operations, such as preparing teachers to be professionals, analyzing data, or meeting attendance requirements. While Ms Benavidez stated that faculty members must be held accountable for their work, she concluded by stating that teachers must also receive support in this endeavor. Both women leaders described the importance of working collaboratively with parents, teachers, and staff and the importance of leading by example.

Conclusion

The principals in this study defined leadership in high-need primary schools in urban areas as that which prepares adults on campus to support families and students. At an international and cross-comparative level, these principals exemplify how leadership must consider addressing socio-economic issues, and how unaddressed academic, emotional, and physical issues collide with learning. The views of these principals carry larger implications for the promotion of Latinas/os in the country, since they were similarly Latinas. Ms Aguilar said:

As a Latina leader, I work for restorative justice because we had a difficult road growing up, and in our education. We will never forget the struggles that we had within our families. Now, as a principal, I feel the pain and the struggles that the families are going through. So, when the parent calls you and says “My car is broken in the driveway, I need to get my child to school,” I’ll put them in my car and I’m going to bring them to school. Some parents do not have money to have their children’s uniform, some do not have money for electricity and their children cannot do homework.

Ms Benavidez added:

We are blessed to work in a country that offers us the opportunity to change the status of children from one generation to the next. This is a country where you can be born into poverty and in one generation, change the future of a child and the future children of that child. The key is education. The healing that is needed is to succeed in education. Once a child of poverty earns his college degree, the restorative process begins for future generations.

Foskett and Lumby (2003: 153) acknowledge that:

management and leadership have both contemporary and future dimensions. Managing the ‘here and now’ is a major challenge, but a key element of the task is to move the institution on, to align it with what society will demand of education and training in the future. The direction of the future and the capacity and desire to change it varies considerably across the world.

It is our goal that other school leaders will be inspired to reflect on their roles in high-need schools through the dialogues of these principals. We encourage all educational leaders to augment their efforts to create equitable learning environments for all students. Around the world, leadership adaptations to meet the needs of students are made, and are validated in the schools we included here. As we stated at the beginning, parents know when schools are high-need schools, and so do school leaders.

Footnotes

Note

References

Barnett

Stevenson

(Forthcoming) International perspectives in urban educational leadership. In: Khalifa MA, Grant-Overton C and Arnold N (eds.), Handbook of urban school leadership. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Benham

MKP

(1997) Silences and serenades: The journeys of three ethnic minority women school leaders. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 28 (2): 280–307.

Brandt

(1995) On rethinking leadership: A conversation with Tom Sergiovanni. In: Sergiovanni

(ed.) Rethinking Leadership: A Collection of Articles. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, pp. vii–xiii.

Chenoweth

Theokas

(2013) How high-poverty schools are getting it done. Educational Leadership 70 (7): 56–59.

Dimmock

Stevenson

Bignold

. (2005) Effective Leadership in Multi-Ethnic Schools. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.

Duke

(2012) Tinkering and turnarounds: Understanding the contemporary campaign to improve low-performing schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 17: 9–24.

Duke

(2013) A bold approach to developing leaders for low-performing schools. Paper presented at the annual conference of the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society, Edinburgh, Scotland.

Duke

Landahl

(2011) Raising test scores was the easy part: A case study of the third year of school turnaround. International Studies in Educational Administration 39 (3): 91–114.

Dunlap

Schmuck

(1995) Women Leading in Education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

10.

Foskett

Lumby

(2003) Leading and Managing Education: International Dimensions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

11.

Grady

O’Connell

(1993) Women in K-12 educational administration: A synthesis of dissertation research. Journal of School Leadership 3 (4): 449–460.

12.

Hallinger

(2003) Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education 33: 329–352.

13.

Harris

(2006) Leading change in schools in difficulty. Journal of Educational Change 7 (1/2): 9–18.

14.

Heck

(2006) Assessing school achievement progress. Comparing alternative approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly 42 (5): 667–699.

15.

Heck

Hallinger

(2010) Testing a longitudinal model of distributed leadership effects on school improvement. The Leadership Quarterly 21: 867–885.

16.

Hipp

Baran

(2013) Leadership for new schools: A glimmer of hope in urban schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

17.

Jackson

(2000) The school improvement journey: Perspectives on leadership. School Leadership & Management 20 (1): 61–78.

18.

Kotsopoulos

(2010) Dialogic inquiry. In: Mills

Durepos

Wiebe

(eds) Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 297–300.

19.

Kotter

(1996) Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

20.

Leithwood

Harris

Strauss

(2010) Leading School Turnaround. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

21.

Lumby

Crow

Pashiardis

(2008) International Handbook on the Preparation and Development of School Leaders. New York, NY: Routledge.

22.

Lumby

Walker

Bryant

. (2009) Research on leadership preparation in a global context. In: Young

Crow

Ogawa

et al. (eds) Handbook of Research on the Education of School Leaders. New York, NY: Routledge.

23.

McKenzie

. (2001) White teachers' perceptions about their students of color and themselves as White educators. Dissertation Abstracts International 62(12):401–14.

24.

Murakami

Valle

Mendez-Morse

(2013) Latina/o learners and academic success: Si se puede. In: Tillman

Scheurich

(eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Leadership for Equity and Diversity. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis, pp. 134–175.

25.

Murphy

Meyers

(2008) Turning Around Failing Schools: Leadership Lessons from the Organizational Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

26.

Nicolaidou

Ainscow

(2005) Understanding failing schools: Perspectives from the inside. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 16: 229–248.

27.

Notman

(2008) Leading from within: A values-based model of principal self-development. Leading & Managing 14 (1): 1–15.

28.

O’Toole

(1995) Leading Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

29.

Picus

Marion

SF,

Calvo

. (2005) Understanding the relationship between student achievement and the quality of educational facilities: Evidence from Wyoming. Peabody Journal of Education 80 (3): 71–95.

30.

Reynolds

Teddlie

Hopkins

. (2000) Linking school effectiveness and school improvement. In: Teddlie

Reynolds

(eds) The International Handbook of School Effectiveness Research. London: Falmer Press, pp. 206–231.

31.

Rincones

(2012) International perspectives on “high-need schools”: Implications for leadership preparation and development. Paper presented at the annual convention of the University Council for Educational Administration, Denver, CO, USA.

32.

Russell

Kelly

(2002) Research as interacting dialogic processes: Implications for reflexivity. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 3(3): art. 18. Available at: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0203181

33.

Schmuck

Charters

Carlson

(1981) Educational Policy and Management: Sex Differentials. New York, NY: Academic Press.

34.

Sergiovanni

(1992) Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

35.

Sergiovanni

(1999) Rethinking leadership. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight.

36.

Shakeshaft

(1989) Women in Educational Administration. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

37.

Skrla

McKenzie

Scheurich

(2009) Using Equity Audits to Create Equitable and Excellent Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

38.

Spring

(2002) Conflict of Interests: The Politics of American Education (4th edn). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

39.

Stevenson

Barnett

(2013) International Perspectives in Urban Educational Leadership for the Handbook of Urban School Leadership.

40.

Texas Education Agency (2012) Academic Excellence Indicator System. Available at: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2012/ (accessed 26 November 2013).

41.

US Census Bureau (2010) The Hispanic population: 2010. Census brief. Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-04.pdf (accessed October 2013).

42.

Valencia

(ed) (1997) The Evolution of Deficit Thinking: Educational Thought and Practice. London: The Falmer Press.

43.

Walker

Dimmock

(2000) Mapping the way ahead: Leading educational leadership into a globalised world. School Leadership & Management 20 (2): 227–233.