National Commission for the Advancement of Educational Leadership: Opportunity for Transformation

Abstract

The work of the National Commission for the Advancement of Educational Leadership begins with an important understanding: The need for change in leadership preparation is not contested. Rather, the possible approaches that can be taken to strengthen our field are the subject of debate. Those differences warrant the attention of a respected national body, the commission, to work through them, clearing the way for the further development of a critically important field. Formation of the commission provides an opportunity for the profession to create collectively the common understandings and working assumptions that are needed to inform leadership development at every level. The commission, through its composition, is recognition that the profession consists of diverse constituencies located in many places. It is an example of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. It is not about university faculty inviting school leaders to the table to react to their recommendations. It is about focused, collective discourse and planning of a shared agenda that contributes to the well-being of a nation's children.A significant context for our response to the commission articles is a decade of experience with the Danforth Foundation's Forum for the American School Superintendent. Work with this group of 60 superintendents has compelled us to reexamine our assumptions about leadership and the practices of the education administration field. It has left us with grave concerns 289

What the Research and Literature Say about the Delivery of Educational Leadership Preparation Programs in the United States

“…The need for change in educational leadership preparation, particularly delivery, is questioned by few. Rather, disputes lie in proposed methods for improving the field (Cambron-McCabe & Cunningham, 2002). We need to highlight exceptional programs, spread the word, and create plans for change that are driven by pre-defined "valued ends" (Murphy, 2002).…”

Educating School Leaders for Social Justice

“…At the preparation level, recognition of the inextricable link between practitioners and the academy signals the need for close collaboration in the design and delivery of leadership programs. This is particularly important because school leaders generally find the academy irrelevant to their work (Cambron-McCabe & Cunningham, 2002;Hess & Kelly, 2005, this issue). For the most part, the formal preparation of preservice administrators resides in the academy with minimal input from practice.…”

“…Perhaps it is most important for professors to undertake an advocacy role in influencing educational policy to achieve social justice (Cambron-McCabe & Cunningham, 2002). School leaders and those preparing them will need to be creative and proactive to address current challenges, drawing on the past as well as multiple disciplines for new perspectives to shift their thinking.…”

Preparing First-Time Leaders for an Urban Public School District: An Action Research Study of a Collaborative District–University Partnership

“…Young, Peterson, and Short (2002) argue that no single organization, group, or individual can successfully take the reins of principal preparation and make substantive changes in leadership programs. There must be an acknowledgment of interdependency and shared accountability (Cambron-McCabe & Cunningham, 2002). Levine (2005) advocates that theory-based university programs and practice-based alternate-route programs work together to create balance.…”