Supporting principal supervisors: what really matters?

Abstract

Purpose Districts across the country are calling on their principal supervisors to shift from mainly focusing on operations and compliance to dedicating their time to help principals grow as instructional leaders. Learning theory elaborates that such support for principals demands that supervisors take a teaching-and-learning approach – which the authors define as consistently using particular strategies that are characteristic of high quality teachers and mentors across various apprenticeship settings – to their work with principals on their instructional leadership. Prior research on leadership supports these shifts but does not examine the conditions under which principal supervisors are able to persist and grow in taking a teaching-and-learning approach specifically. What are those conditions? The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This paper addresses that question through a re-examination of data from two studies with socio-cultural learning theory as the conceptual framework. The authors primarily use observation data (approximately 760 hours), supplemented by 344 interviews and reviews of hundreds of documents. Findings Contrary to extant research the authors did not associate high quality outside coaching with the positive cases of principal supervision. Nor did hiring principal supervisors with requisite prior knowledge explain why some principal supervisors regressed and grew. Findings underscore the importance of supervisors of principal supervisors (SPSs) being principal supervisors’ main mentors and principal supervisors not over-relying on others for assistance but actively leading their own learning, especially through work with colleagues and protecting their time themselves. Originality/value This analysis distinguishes conditions that support principal supervisors in taking a teaching-and-learning approach to their work with principals. The authors elaborate key roles for chief academic officers and others who supervise principal supervisors typically overlooked in policy and research on district leadership. Findings reinforce the importance of mentoring to learning and also district leaders serving as main mentors for each other, rather than relying on outside coaching.

Understanding District Support for Leader Development and Success in the Accountability Era: A Review of the Literature Using Social-Cognitive Theories of Motivation

“…Authentic learning opportunities, like problem-based learning and on-the-job expert coaching/mentoring, are also examples of meaningful principal development activities that can be coordinated by school districts (Darling-Hammond et al, 2007; Stucher et al, 2017). Though evidence is still emerging, early research suggests that principal supervisors can play a critical role in development, particularly in the areas of racial equity (Rigby et al, 2019) and instructional improvement (Honig, 2012; Honig & Rainey, 2019; Thessin & Louis, 2019). Furthermore, at least one study has pointed to a specific area where principals might benefit from additional training and support to foster competence—using data to assess teacher effectiveness and to make hiring decisions (Cannata et al, 2017).…”

“…Furthermore, the advent of intermediary principal supervisory roles has precipitated increased study of these positions as potentially important vehicles for building principal efficacy as instructional leaders (Honig & Rainey, 2019; Thessin & Louis, 2019). In a study of three districts, Honig (2012) found that high variation in Instructional Leadership Director practices with respect to self-efficacy emphasized the importance of several key practices: (a) the degree to which principal supervisors worked to inculcate in principals the value of principal instructional leadership; (b) the use of modeling and its role in forging meaningful, productive relationships with principals; and (c) the use of tools as a basis for having challenging conversations and serving as information “brokers” (i.e., providing principals with connections to external resources).…”

“…As an intermediary between U.S. state and federal policy and the school, the school district, many scholars maintain, stands as a key player in meeting the needs of school-level leadership (Daly & Finnigan, 2016; Leithwood & Louis, 2012; Louis, 2015; Supovitz, 2006; The Wallace Foundation, 2013; Waters & Marzano, 2006). Indeed, many “district effectiveness” studies highlight various aspects of support for school leaders that appear to make a difference, including professional development, supervision and mentoring, increased autonomy, and improved instructional coherence (Honig & Rainey, 2012, 2015, 2019; Johnston et al, 2016; Knudson et al, 2011; Marsh et al, 2005; O’Day & Bitter, 2003; Supovitz, 2006). Despite the steady accumulation of evidence in these areas, scholars note that progress on improving district effectiveness has remained relatively stagnant (Anderson & Young, 2018).…”

How Georgia may learn from changes in principal support and supervision internationally

“…This means that they became "more engaged in coaching, mentoring and partnering with the specific goal of improving student achievement" (Browne-Ferrigno and Allen, 2006;Clarke and Wildy, 2011;Johnson and Chrispeels, 2010;Leithwood, 2010). The same processes are reported as taking place in other localities of the USA as well as in Canada, Australia and Scotland (Leithwood et al, 2019;Wilkinson et al, 2019;Honig and Rainey, 2019;Chapman, 2019). The changing role of principal supervision has triggered various approaches and efforts to achieving success.…”

A teaching-and-learning approach to principal supervision

“…their central o ces as engines of educational equity (Honig, 2012;Honig & Rainey, 2014, 2019, 2020Honig, Venkateswaran, & McNeil, 2017). As part of their e orts, leaders in all these districts took concrete steps to focus principal supervision on supporting principals' growth as instructional leaders, but they ended up with quite di erent results.…”