1. Doris Battle - NISL State Coordinator
The Leader in School Leadership
Leading provider of rigorous training to school leaders
Focus on aspiring principals
Improving the capacity of sitting principals.
SCRIPT:
We are the leading provider of rigorous training to school leaders over the last five years.
We’ve achieved this by not only focusing on aspiring principals but, unlike other leading programs, we have focused on improving the capacity of current principals.
Jason Dougal - NISL CEO
Doris Battle - NISL State Coordinator

2. Executive Development Program for School Leaders
Four Years, $11 Million Dollars on Research and Development
Foundations
Development
The Result
Non-Profit
Non-Profit
Look at Research and Development behind the NISL program results
Four years and $11 million
Executive Development Program
SCRIPT:
What led to the development of such a program? Over ten years ago, some leading foundations asked why their other education investments were achieving results in some schools but not others. The research pointed to the impact of school leadership. That’s why they invested $11mm in the development of NISL.
Executive Development Program for School Leaders
(EDP) TM

3. Principal Impact on Student Achievement
Principals are responsible for over 25% of school effects on student learning...
… and also impact the
hiring, training, and
retention of
teachers – who
account for 33%
of the effects.
Teachers
33%
Principals
25%
Significant Statistic
Wallace Foundation Study 2004
Size and Quality of impact
Leaders of Learning
Source: Leithwood, K. et al. (2004). Review of Research: How Leadership Influences Student Learning, New York: Wallace Foundation.

4. NISL Impact on Student Achievement
Average Increase in Proficiency Rates on Massachusetts State Tests
Avg. Degree of
NISL Implementation
High Degree of
Control – No NISL
Implementation
Percentage Point Increase
0.0
3.7
English
Degree of NISL Implementation
5.7
2.7
4.3
Key
Math
20 Low achieving districts
Elementary and Middle schools
Principals 2 levels from classroom
SCRIPT:
In Massachusetts, NISL trained principals in targeted low achieving schools. The academic achievement showed statistically significant increases in Math and English-Language Arts. The NISL sample consisted of 38 elementary, middle, or elementary-middle schools lead by principals who had participated in the program and remained at the same school from 2007 to 2010.
Background note : An obvious challenge in evaluating principal effectiveness is that principals are positioned two levels from the classroom. Their impacts on school quality occur through their recruitment, development, and retention of teachers, creation of positive school climates, and interpretation and enactment of federal, state, and district policies (Hallinger & Heck, 1998). Increased knowledge and skills in these roles clearly take time to filter down from principals to improved student achievement. The consistent and fairly immediate achievement score gains demonstrated in this study and in prior studies (Nunnery et al., 2010a; 2010b) for schools led by NISL-trained principals, therefore, acquire additional significance for both practice and theory. Also from a practical standpoint, the NISL Executive Development Program provides a viable alternative to the much harsher, seemingly riskier (and less proven) strategy of trying to improve student achievement simply by changing school leadership.
Source: “The Effects of the National Institute for School Leadership’s Executive Development Program on Student Achievement in Massachusetts: Findings from a State-wide Study of the Second Massachusetts Cohort (Nunnery, Chappell, Moots, Ross, Pribesh, & Hoag Carhart 2011)
More than a month of extra learning
38 Schools
Average Free &
Reduced Lunch: 69%
Researchers:
Johns Hopkins &
Old Dominion University

5. NISL Impact on Student Achievement
NISL Impact on High School Math Scores
Years Since Initial Training in
NISL Executive Development Program
% of Students Passing PA state Test
Pre-
Test 40 42 44 46 48 50 52
Year 1 2 3
PA NISL
Schools
PA Comparison Schools
On average, the 14 NISL schools started out 2 percentage points (PP) behind the comparison schools, and surpassed those same schools by 5 PP after three years.
101 School districts from 2006 – 2009
NISL schools consistently surpassed the comparison schools in achievement gains at a statistically significant level
Researchers stated that our High school results outperform any other intervention at this level.
NOTES:
Source: Effects of the National Institute for School Leadership’s Executive Development Program on School Performance in Pennsylvania: Pilot Cohort Results (Nunnery, Yen, & Ross, 2011)
This study examined the impact of NISL’s Executive Development Program for principals on student achievement in Pennsylvania schools between The 2006 school year was treated as the baseline year for the analysis. Roughly half of the NISL-trained principals started the program in during the 2007 school year and completed in the 2008 school year, whereas the other half started during the 2008 school year and completed in the 2009 school year. Schools served by principals participating in the Executive Development Program were individually matched to comparison schools with similar school performance and demographic profiles in 2006.
State of Pennsylvania implementation Study (March 2011)
Researchers: Johns Hopkins & Old Dominion University

6. x x x x x x √ √ NISL Impact on District Rating 2002 AYP
Left Corrective Action
NISL Implemented
2002
AYP
Chambersburg School District, PA
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009 x x x x x x √ √
Failed to make AYP six years
2007 NISL implementation
2008 made AYP
SCRIPT:
This district had failed to make AYP six years in a row. In 2007, the district decided to send all of its school and district leaders through the NISL Executive Development Program. The district made AYP in 2008 and 2009, allowing it to leave corrective action. (Pennsylvania State Education Department)
8,500 students, 29% poverty, and 20% minority
“It was one of the most rewarding and informative programs that I've participated in during my seven-year tenure as an administrator.”
- Benita Draper-Terry, Principal, Lincoln Elementary School, Bethlehem, PA

7. NISL Impact on District Rating
NISL Implemented
Accountability Rating
Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District, TX
2006
2007
2008
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recognized
Student Achievement Top 30% in TX
Acceptable to Recognized
Top 30% achievement in Texas
Good to Great
SCRIPT:
Carrollton-Farmers Branch School District, TX (26,000 students, 51% poverty, and 74% minority): The training of the first cohort of principals was completed in The district’s accountability rating at that time was “acceptable.” In 2008, the accountability rating for the district rose to “recognized,” ranking its student achievement in the top 30% of all Texas districts. The deputy superintendent has stated that NISL’s training was a major reason for the improved rating. (Texas State Department of Education)
“The program is designed to equip principals with the tools and knowledge needed to lead their schools to become high-performing schools. I highly recommend the NISL program to any district.”
- Sheila Maher, assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District, TX
26,000 Students 51% poverty
74% minority

8. Units are each 2 days and occur approximately monthly
Executive Development Program Curriculum
World-Class Vision and Goals
The Educational Challenge
Principal as Strategic Thinker
Elements of Standards-based Instructional Systems
Foundations of Effective Learning
Program Spans Months
Units are each 2 days and occur approximately monthly
Focus on Teaching and Learning
Leadership for Excellence in Literacy
Leadership for Excellence in Mathematics
Leadership for Excellence in Science
Promoting Professional Learning and Phase I Simulation
Coaching (optional unit)
Developing Capacity and Commitment
Principal as Instructional Leader and Team Builder
Principal as Ethical Leader
Face-to-face instruction is bridged by comprehensive online activities and professional readings.
Driving for Results
Principal as Driver of Change
Leading for Results
Culminating Simulation