Not available / text

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Miami University, Dept. of Educational Leadership, 2007. / Title from second page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 116-124).

Thèse (D. en éducation)--Université du Québec à Montréal, 2006. / En tête du titre: Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières en association avec Université du Québec à Montréal. CaQTU Bibliogr.: f. [151]-183. Également disponible en formats microfiche et PDF. CaQTU

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent secondary assistant principals in large Texas high schools demonstrate behaviors consistent with what the literature describes as instructional leadership. Three hundred seventy principals and assistant principals of large Texas high schools participated in this study. The Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (Hallinger, 1987) was used to quantify instructional leadership in 10 different job functions. The study found that (a) assistant principals perceive themselves as exhibiting instructional leadership behaviors at a high frequency, (b) principals perceive their assistant principals exhibiting instructional leadership behaviors at a high frequency, (c) the perceptions of the principals and assistant principals were similar, and (d) principals and assistant principals reported more engagement in instructional leadership responsibilities and felt more pressured over the last five years under the new accountability and rating requirements of No Child Left Behind and the state assessments. These findings suggested that the administrative roles and responsibilities in high schools should be restructured to allow assistant principals to focus on instructional leadership.

The central problem of the study was to determine the nature of the workday of the urban high school assistant principal. Specific questions guiding the investigation were as follows: (1)What are the workday activities of an assistant principal? (2)How long is this day? (3)How might the pace of the workday be described? (4)With whom does an assistant principal interact? How? Why? (5)To what extent is daily work proactive? Reactive? (6)Do the workdays of the various urban high school assistant principals differ? The investigator, in the nonparticipant observor role, employed five data-collection techniques: field notes; structured interview; review of written materials; and structured observation, employing the framework of Mintzberg (1973), whereby chronology, written communication, and verbal contact records were kept. The sample was composed of five assistant principals, representing a cross-section of administrative functions, in an urban school district on the West coast. Each assistant principal was observed throughout five days and evenings of school-related activities. The worktime of the composite sample was apportioned in the following manner: six percent, telephone calls; 17 percent, desk work; 24 percent, scheduled meetings; 24 percent, unscheduled meetings; and 34 percent, observational/informational tours. The average work week was 42 hours and 33 minutes; the average workday, 8 hours and 31 minutes. The dimensions of brevity, fragmentation, and variety were evident in daily work. In twenty-five days, 1,280 separate activities were undertaken. The average duration per activity was quite short: telephone calls, two minutes; unscheduled meetings, five minutes; desk sessions, nine minutes; tours, 12 minutes; and scheduled meetings, 36 minutes. Seventy-five percent of all activities lasted less than nine minutes. Only one percent exceeded an hour. The assistant principal interacted with many participant groups, with heaviest emphasis on subordinates within the building (64 percent of input mail, 79 percent of output communications; 49 percent of all verbal contacts) and clients, or students and their families (26 percent of all verbal contacts). Fifty-eight percent of all meetings and tours were with one other person. The prime purpose for interactions was to convey, receive, review, or exchange information (66 percent of input mail, 74 percent of contacts, and 79 percent of contact time). The assistant principals initiated 54 percent of their verbal contacts and 46 percent of the number of pieces of mail received. The factors tentatively isolated as related to workday differences were physical facilities, personal style and philosophy of assistant principal, time of year, and assigned functions.

No description available.

This research was based on a multi-case study design focused on the leadership practice of high school principals and assistant principals and their roles in improving graduation rates. The study sought to answer one overarching research questions: In schools that demonstrate an increase in graduation rates what leadership practices are evidenced in principals and assistant principals and teacher leaders. One sub-question addressed the tools and interventions that the leadership team practices in relation to improving graduation rates and the second sub-question addressed the accountability of changing standards with respect to graduation rates. A third sub-question sought to answer how interactions of principals and assistant principals relevant to improvement in student performance are interpreted by faculty and staff. The purposeful sample from each of the three high schools consisted of one principal, four assistant principals and one teacher leader. Data collection methods included interviews, observations and qualitative document review of high school graduation rates. The study reveals six major findings: (a) school leaders establish a clear vision, mission or goal to increase graduation rates, (b) identification, management and evaluation of academic enrichment programs are necessary interventions for student success, (c) school leaders build a culture of student learning and achievement through a system of processes, programs and support initiatives, (d) the leadership team is knowledgeable, strongly motivated and devoted to their role as leaders in serving all students, (e) school leaders use data as guiding variables in making decisions regarding at-risk student achievement and success, and (f) school leaders develop and foster positive relationships with students and teachers. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2016. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection