Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
An Examination of Literacy Leadership: Case Study of Two Urban Charter School Principals’
Literacy Leadership and Practices in an Era of Reform
Literacy Research Association
Margaret-Mary Sulentic Dowell Dana L. Bickmore
Louisiana State University
December 6, 2013
Session 6C Katy Trail – Level 2 – 3:00-3:40
School of Education
Context: Charters Schools Defined
Charter schools are public schools awarded a charter by individual states, entities, or local school boards that allow greater autonomy over curriculum, instruction, human resource functions, and operation than traditional public schools.
Zimmer, R., Gill, B., Booker, K., Lavertu, S., Sass, T. R., & Witte, J. (2009).
Context: Expansion of Charters
Over two million students attend more than 5,500 charter schools in the US in a political context that is supportive of continued proliferation of charter schools
(National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, 2012; U.S. Department of Education, 2009).
Context: Expansion of Charters
As the charter school movement in the US has shifted to become a neoliberal reform strategy, in Louisiana, charter schools have become a reform maneuver, a tactic for ameliorating education deficits, especially Post-Katrina (Isaacson, 2007).
28 schools in Louisiana in 2005218 schools in Louisiana in 2012 (Louisiana Department of Education, 2013).
BackgroundThere is a paucity of research that examines what happens inside charter schools with respect to instructional, curricular issues
(Berends, Goldring, Stein, & Cravens, 2010; Center on Reinventing Public Education, 2007; Gross, 2011; Merseth, 2009).
Purpose
The purpose of this embedded case study was to investigate novice principals’ literacy leadership in two Louisiana charter schools, a state (US) often touted as a model of educational reform. (Yin, 2009)
Theoretical Frame: Instructional Leadership Defined
The principal as the instructional leader is an accepted, well-documented leadership paradigm in schooling in the United States (US). As the role of the principal has expanded, however, literacy leadership, as a subset of instructional leadership, has not been a primary focus of research, principal preparation programs, nor practicing principal leadership development.
Theoretical Frame: Literacy Leadership Defined
Only recently has research outlining the principal’s role in literacy leadership emerged. A recent study established a framework of literacy leadership in an effort to both operationalize literacy leadership and provide a strategy of how principals may engage in literacy leadership.
(Sulentic Dowell, Bickmore, & Hoewing, 2012).
Research Questions1. How did two charter principals perceive their
engagement in literacy leadership?
2. How did teachers view the two charter school principal’s engagement in literacy leadership?
3. In what kinds of literacy support practices did two charter principals engage in the two charter schools?
Study methods-Embedded case design (Stake, 2005; Yin, 2009) within a comparative case study (Merriam, 2009) of principal instructional leadership in two charter schools. -Embedded designs focus on smaller units of analysis rather than examining the case as a whole. -Unit of analysis in this embedded design was literacy leadership, specifically focused on the principals’ literacy knowledge, literacy-based decisions, and literacy support practices.
Participants & Study SitesConvenience and criteria sampling; selected two principals new to their setting.
Principal David @ JMS, recent immigrant to US, taught HS physics in home country; taught 2 years in Oklahoma (alternative certification), enrolled in an educational leadership alternative certification program; did not possess state school administrator certificate
Principal Chase @ CS, alternatively certified teacher Teach for America’s New Teacher Project; taught 3 years; spent 1 year in an incubator role; did not possess state school administrator certificate
Participants & Study SitesTeacher pool of volunteers; five teacher/coach participants from each school
JMS was in its initial year of operation and began the school year with 447 students, grades 6-8. JMS served a high poverty population of 447 students of which 87% were Black and 95% received free and reduced lunch.
CS was in its 12th year of operation and began the school year with 277 K-8 students; 95% were Black with approximately 91% receiving free and reduced lunch.
Data Collection & Analysis Empirical materials: interviews observations, and documents 14 informal semi-structured interviews (fall and spring)observed in hallways, at meetings, before & after schooldocuments such as charter application, website, PD materialsAnalysis: Phase I: coded interviews, field notes generated from observations, and documents , line-by-line using Atlas TI ; initial as broad Literacy Principles and Practices a priori codes; inductively employed open coding as well, added in vivo codes such as commercial programs Phase II: used a typology as the analytical process, re-coded all 489 broad literacy code instances from the initial study ,added as a priori codes, the 35 categories that define the five themes of the Literacy Leadership Framework (LLF)
Results
Content KnowledgeComposition (spelling & writing) 121Cognition; complex thinking 17Comprehension 15Personal-sociocultural aspects 8Vocabulary 6Fluency 4Decoding 2Oral language development 2Print awareness 0Linguistic knowledge 0Phonemic awareness 0Phonics 0Narrative & expository literature 0Functions of language 0
ResultsKnowledge of Best Practice Spanning Developmental Ages Ranges and Content AreasDaily reading & writing practice 31Instruction based on assessment 16Reading & writing co-development 11Reading aloud 10Age & developmentally appropriate reading material 9Flexible groupings 5Reading & writing processes 4
Provide School Structures to Support LiteracyAccess to print/literature 65Organizing classrooms for optimal learning 3
(schedules/structure & use of blocks, workshops)Provision for literacy instruction & learning 0
ResultsLiteracy Environment and Management SystemsMix of whole, small group teaching 16Assessing literacy formally & informally 14Flexible skill grouping 5Teacher/child interactions 0Establishing routines 0Teaching at instructional level 0
Developing a Literacy Mission and Monitoring Evaluation of Literacy InstructionSupport teachers & coaches 17Evaluate teachers & coaches (walk thru) 17Professional development 5Classroom environment 3Establishing relationships 0
ResultsContent KnowledgeComposition (spelling & writing) 121Cognition; complex thinking 17Comprehension 15Knowledge of Best Practice Spanning Developmental Ages Ranges and Content AreasDaily reading & writing practice 31Instruction based on assessment 16Provide School Structures to Support LiteracyAccess to print/literature 65Literacy Environment and Management SystemsMix of whole, small group teaching 16Assessing literacy formally & informally 14Developing a Literacy Mission and Monitoring Evaluation of Literacy InstructionSupport teachers & coaches 17Evaluate teachers & coaches (walk thru) 17
ResultsContent KnowledgeComposition (spelling & writing) 121Knowledge of Best Practice Spanning Developmental Ages Ranges and Content AreasDaily reading & writing practice 31Provide School Structures to Support LiteracyAccess to print/literature 65
Charter principals’ specific literacy content and pedagogical knowledge was limited; both principals’ support, feedback, and advice regarding literacy learning and literacy best practices was limited resulting in both principals’ heavy reliance on commercial programs, mimicking commercial program claims versus use of instructional strategies, methods, or configurations.
ImpactPrincipals with limited teaching and administrative experience exhibited: 1) lack of self-awareness; 2) delegated to others;3) myopic, narrow focus on state accountability measures and improving state testing results, this focus dictated many instructional decisions regarding literacy and impacted teachers. For example, writing instruction stressed by principals was formulaic and tended to emulate test writing prompts. Teachers echoed this stance, with one at JMS dismissing writing because, “it’s [writing] only worth 18 points on the LEAP test.”
Background: Expansion of Charters
US in era of accountability No Child Left Behind. (2001).
Public Law No. 107-1110 Post-Katrina reform Neoliberal reform strategies Entrepreneurial reform Commodification
