To print this page, select "Print" from the File menu of your browser

Back to Graphic Version

Voices

A Researcher’s Voice: Developing Instructional Leaders By Susan Sather

What is a school district’s role in school improvement? In the past, districts were sometimes seen as places of inactivity—especially in matters of instruction and student achievement. The district handled business matters, ensured payroll was met, oversaw the hiring of new employees, and managed purchasing, contracts, and grants. A common perception was that the district office had little to do with curriculum and instruction, let alone leading change that resulted in heightened student achievement.

That picture is rapidly changing. The district’s role in supporting positive growth is now perceived as central to meeting the academic requirements of No Child Left Behind. McLaughlin and Talbert underscore the importance of district leadership in stating that “districts matter fundamentally to what goes on in schools and classrooms and that without effective district engagement, school-by-school reform efforts are bound to disappoint” (2003, p. 5).

Some Northwest districts are leading the way for schools as they work to develop professional learning communities that help teachers shift from former norms of privacy and isolation in the classroom to greater collegiality, collaboration, and experimentation resulting in heightened student success (DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Hord, 2004). In particular, two districts in Washington are beacons of change.

The Spokane School District, located in Eastern Washington, faces increasing numbers of students living in poverty along with a growing population of English language learners. The school board and superintendent established a stretch goal for 90 percent of all students to meet standards by 2007, creating a sense of urgency within the district. To reach this goal, they modeled systemwide instructional improvement after Anthony Alvarado’s work in New York City’s District 2 (Elmore & Burney, 1999; Fullan, 2001). They also developed a network of school directors with supervisory responsibility for a small number of schools. These district-level supervisors are required to spend time in schools getting to know the staff as well as supporting and mentoring principals. They often accompany site administrators on a “walk-through” (Downey, Steffy, English, Frase, & Poston, 2004), developing a more intimate view of the teaching and learning that takes place in classrooms.

During a middle school visit by the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory and three administrators (including the assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction), teachers and students were completely comfortable as four adults entered their classrooms, examined displays of student work, observed teaching, and asked students not only what they were engaged in but why they were doing that particular activity. Replies revealed the depth of learning and engagement of these students.

Monthly administrators’ conferences in the Spokane School District serve a professional development function, enhancing knowledge and skills needed to understand and lead schools to meet achievement targets. Instructional coaches and mentor-teachers continue to develop their own instruction and leadership skills through parallel monthly training sessions.

The Highline School District, located south of Seattle, serves a highly diverse population with students who speak 59 languages. Working with the Center for Educational Leadership at the University of Washington, the district aims to develop powerful instruction that enables all students to master cognitively demanding curriculum (Brandt, 1998). To this end, they have invested heavily in leadership and literacy training.

There are full-time literacy coaches in each of the district’s 30 schools working to connect new learning to classroom practice. All principals and central administrators undergo extensive professional development that includes training in literacy theory and strategies, as well as instructional knowledge and leadership skills (Gallucci, Boatright, Lysne, & Swinnerton, 2006). Principals and district officials are required to spend two hours a day in classrooms, working directly with teachers and observing and offering feedback. District administrators communicate regularly with building administrators, providing individual school data and other information as they support each principal. That communication, in turn, extends from principals to staff through reflective instructional letters, regular meetings, and classroom visits. These strategies have contributed to a steady increase in Highline’s Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) scores.

Both districts exemplify qualities identified by Togneri and Anderson (2003) in districts working to improve instruction and achievement in all schools—districts that are moving “beyond islands of excellence.” Highline and Spokane employ a systemwide approach to improving instruction with a vision focused on student learning. They continue to develop networks of instructional leaders to support classroom teachers as they adopt new approaches to professional development and redefine leadership roles. In the process, they are also constructing powerful networks of teacher-leaders and building their own capacity to sustain change over the long haul, leading to positive growth in student achievement. At the center of all efforts is an intentional focus on building relationships and developing avenues for teachers and administrators to work collaboratively.

It should be noted that both districts are located in the state of Washington, where the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction has invested heavily in school reform and published a number of documents using research to guide schools and districts in change efforts (see page 45). The work in both Spokane and Highline reflects characteristics necessary for improving districts identified by Shannon and Bylsma (2004): effective and distributed leadership focused on student learning with efforts sustained over time; quality teaching and learning, including high expectations and accountability for adults; support for systemwide improvement; and developing a professional culture that delineates clear and collaborative relationships.

References

Brandt, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Downey, C.J., Steffy, B.E., English, F.W., Frase, L.E., & Poston, W.K., Jr. (2004). The three-minute classroom walk-through: Changing school supervisory practice one teacher at a time. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service, & Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Elmore, R.F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as a learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 236–291). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gallucci, C., Boatright, B., Lysne, D., & Swinnerton, J. (2006). The pedagogy of third-party support for instructional improvement: A partnership between CEL and Highline School District. Interim findings report. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Center for Educational Leadership.

Hord, S.M. (Ed.). (2004). Learning together, leading together: Changing schools through professional learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, & Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.

McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2003). Reforming districts: How districts support school reform. A research report. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.

Shannon, G.S., & Bylsma, P. (2004). Characteristics of improved school districts: Themes from research. Olympia, WA: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Togneri, W., & Anderson, S.E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. A leadership brief. Washington, DC: Learning First Alliance.