Principals’ instructional leadership under statewide teacher evaluation reform

• Published in: International journal of educational management 2019-05, Vol.33 (4), p.629-643
• Main Authors: Lochmiller, Chad R, Mancinelli, John L
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Administrator Behavior; Administrator Responsibility; Change Strategies; Classroom Observation Techniques; Coaching (Performance); Content analysis; Education policy; Educational administration; Educational Change; Educational leadership; Elementary Schools; Evaluation Criteria; Instructional Leadership; Job Performance; Learning; Literature Reviews; Principals; Professional Development; Program Implementation; School Administration; School principals; State Policy; Teacher Effectiveness; Teacher Evaluation; Teacher evaluations; Teaching Methods; Teaching Skills; Time Management
• ISSN: 0951-354X; 1758-6518
• DOI: 10.1108/IJEM-06-2017-0151

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe how elementary school principals adjust their leadership practice in response to Washington’s new teacher evaluation policy. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a modified content analysis of open-ended survey responses collected from elementary school principals in Washington State. In all, the survey included responses from 354 elementary school principals representing 25.0 percent of the state’s elementary school principal population. ATLAS.ti supported data analysis and assisted in the derivation of three key findings. Findings Elementary school principals changed their instructional leadership practice in response to the new teacher evaluation policy in three significant ways. First, principals adjusted their approach to classroom observation to complete more intentional, in-depth observational activities. Second, principals redistributed non-instructional responsibilities to clerical staff members to allow themselves and other administrators more time for classroom observation. Third, principals adopted a learning stance to the new policy and thus sought external support, especially coaching, to assist them with the implementation of new evaluation practices. Research limitations/implications The study faced three limitations. First, the sample of respondents included in this study cannot be generalized to the state as participants were not randomly selected. Second, the survey did not utilize a longitudinal design, and thus its findings only relate to the first year of the policy’s implementation. Third, the study does not include school-based evidence to triangulate principals’ survey responses. Originality/value The study contributes to the instructional leadership literature. Specifically, the study offers further insights into the adjustments principals make in their leadership to accommodate expectations found in new teacher evaluation policy.