FAPEL FALL 2017 PRESENTATION

The Changing Leadership Landscape: Beginning on the Road of the Florida Atlantic University Principal Preparation Initiative Daniel Reyes-Guerra, PhD FAUPPI Project Director and Principal Investigator

The Wallace University Principal Preparation Initiative Each university required to engage in: Faculty professional learning communities Project Director professional learning communities State professional learning communities UPPI professional learning communities Program partnership with 3 districts Use a partner provider (FAU=University of Denver) for their 1st year of development Partner with their state’s DOE Finance the development of district Leadership Tracking Systems in each district Seven universities selected: Albany State University Florida Atlantic University North Carolina State University San Diego State University The University of Connecticut Virginia State University Western Kentucky University

FAUPPI Program Goals Curriculum: Develop three district-specific partnership programs leading to Principal Certification (Level 1 Educational Leadership and Level 2 Principal Leadership) Recruitment and Selection: Developing a rigorous and progressive system of recruitment and selection for each partnership program and for FAU’s non-specific program, thereby bringing into our programs the candidates who are have the dispositions and motivation to face today and tomorrow’s administrative challenges Job-Embedded Practice: Create experiential components that provide the “hands-on” learning necessary for school-based administrators to effectively meet leadership needs of the most challenging schools Andragogy: Providing the professional development needed for adjuncts and full-time faculty, as well as mentoring/coaching administrators, to bring adult learning methodologies into their practice as well as actualize the knowledge of learning facilitators to the challenges of today’s profession.

Curriculum TAKEAWAYS FOR THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE Many participants are state “flagship” programs in their area; recognized as the foremost program for educational leadership Programs like these are engaged in curricular “tweaks” to meet the needs of their partners There is a lot of conversation concerning the role of the assistant principal vs. the principal Many initiative programs are responsible for producing THE certification level for the principalship – fewer have two levels of certification Instructional leadership has become the dominant leadership term and emphasis across standards and curriculum as opposed to transformational/change or innovation leadership models Standards-based curricula tend to look backward, not forward, and are not necessarily tied to what we supposedly support and promote through our professional organizations (UCEA, NCPEA, AERA): Leadership for social justice Leadership for democratic citizenship TAKEAWAYS FOR THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE How is it possible for Florida school leadership programs to really be responsible for leadership development if they are only addressing one level of administration preparation? How do we, in a system that is based on competition for students, really develop robust curricula that meet the needs of multiple districts? Doesn’t context REALLY matter? Don’t districts, schools, and their communities have different and specific needs, and shouldn’t localism be an emphasis in leadership preparation? Are we preparing assistant principals, or are we preparing early stage principals, and if the former doesn’t the state need two sets of standards, and if the latter don’t districts need to change the structure of their school leadership teams?

Recruitment and Selection Most universities are dealing with the need to diversify their student body to be reflective of the student population that their graduates will serve Universities are moving toward highly intensive selection processes that include interviews, role play, group observation, and testing There is a strong desire for applicants to be tested for their “dispositions” and awareness of issues of social justice, equity, and multiculturalism Many institutions are bringing their district partners into the process, including bringing district data (teacher evaluations, recommendations, etc) to the table for consideration TAKEAWAYS FOR THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE Recognition of the need for a diverse leadership student body doesn’t lead to a diverse student body The cost of highly selective processes can make it prohibitive for universities to engage in these selection alternatives Do we test of dispositions or teach for dispositions? How readily available are our districts to join us in the efforts for a more rigorous recruitment and selection process?

Job-Embedded Practice Some initiative universities are in states where funding is provided for full-time internships. Internships vary greatly between programs, some happen during, others after, some during the summer, etc. Internships are still being built without a close coupling to the knowledge and skills being taught in the classroom Supervision, coaching, and mentoring are not stressed: focus tends to be on what the students do and not on how they are apprenticed through the experience TAKEAWAYS FOR THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE While states are requiring these internships and experiential learning, there is no real funding or resources given to the districts or the universities to resource these experiences. How do we address this? States are beginning to insist on internships and experiential learning that are tied to program learning, but districts are not willing to release teacher or assistant principals to be engaged in these activities. How do we avoid harsh accountability from stifling leadership learning? Principals and Principal Supervisors are not developed professionally to be the facilitators of leadership learning – this requires an investment in professional development that is not emphasized. Does principal professional development end upon becoming a principal?

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE The university problems with: On-line delivery systems designed for maximum revenue generation Adjuncts teaching generic courses; the controversy of adjunct-driven and generic programs Andragogy: how do we ensure the professional development of faculty, adjuncts, and mentors / coaches? Competition: a race to the bottom? The district problems with: Under-funded bureaucracies turning to external consultancies for professional development based on one-time grant initiatives Accountability measures making it increasingly difficulty to allow for real leadership development Competition, vouchers, and charters: the neo-liberal move to undo public schools

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE The move from principal as manager/leader to principal as instructional leader Systems that keep the principal as the sole person accountable for performance as opposed to distributive accountability for distributive leadership The need for leadership teams; principals not teaching individual teachers but leading systems that improve teacher performance through learning organization principles A growing recognition that the simple accountability equations are not meeting the needs of our community or society: a shift to “soft skills” for both school leaders and the learners they are responsible for The increased recognition of teacher leadership and peer learning The movement from federal (central) to state (local?) control An increase in the influence of State government on education Program Approval Funding Priorities Micro-managing legislation ESSA Opportunities Title I Title II Set Asides for Leadership Entrenched bureaucracies both state and district Increased control by states leads to decreased control by districts – the trend seems to be for power to be going from the federal to the state and from the district to the state Or is it all a move to third party control? The role of foundation / grant funding for innovation – but does that bias?

FAUPPI Task Force Initiative Task Force 1: Development of Level 1 and Level 2 Standards of Excellence for Programs Quality Measures Survey Adopted by the State Rubrics and Support for Programs Seeking Approval The Need for Leadership Tracking Systems Task Force 2: Examining School Leadership Policy; Resourcing Leadership for the Needs of Tomorrow’s Schools, Districts, and the State