Leadership for Family and Community Engagement: A Qualitative Policy Analysis of State Principal Evaluation Processes

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Administration Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-11-10 DOI:10.1177/0013161X211052501
L. Mayger, Kathleen Provinzano
{"title":"Leadership for Family and Community Engagement: A Qualitative Policy Analysis of State Principal Evaluation Processes","authors":"L. Mayger, Kathleen Provinzano","doi":"10.1177/0013161X211052501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The primary purpose of this policy analysis is to examine how states changed their principal performance evaluation systems since the passage of Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015. In particular, we focus on whether states have capitalized on the flexible policy landscape to make space for meaningful family and community engagement (FCE) in assessing principals’ effectiveness. Research Methods: This study uses document analysis to review the structure of principal evaluation systems in all 50 states and selects 17 revised systems for a deeper review of their approach to leadership for partnering with families and communities. Findings: A plurality of states have not substantively revised their evaluation systems. Several of the revised systems narrowly focused on instructional leadership and student achievement measures and were thus unsupportive of meaningful FCE and federal policy aims for schools to work in partnership with family and community stakeholders. The principal evaluation systems most supportive of authentic family and community engagement allowed for flexible goal setting and explicitly encouraged the use of stakeholder feedback as evidence of principals’ effectiveness. Implications for Research and Policy: The authors discuss the implications of the results in terms of 1.) expanding definitions of educational leadership to include tenets of authentic FCE, 2.) creating coherent yet compendious systems for school improvement, and 3.) planning for and implementing a developmental approach to the evaluation of school leaders.","PeriodicalId":48091,"journal":{"name":"Educational Administration Quarterly","volume":"58 1","pages":"141 - 177"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Administration Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211052501","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The primary purpose of this policy analysis is to examine how states changed their principal performance evaluation systems since the passage of Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015. In particular, we focus on whether states have capitalized on the flexible policy landscape to make space for meaningful family and community engagement (FCE) in assessing principals’ effectiveness. Research Methods: This study uses document analysis to review the structure of principal evaluation systems in all 50 states and selects 17 revised systems for a deeper review of their approach to leadership for partnering with families and communities. Findings: A plurality of states have not substantively revised their evaluation systems. Several of the revised systems narrowly focused on instructional leadership and student achievement measures and were thus unsupportive of meaningful FCE and federal policy aims for schools to work in partnership with family and community stakeholders. The principal evaluation systems most supportive of authentic family and community engagement allowed for flexible goal setting and explicitly encouraged the use of stakeholder feedback as evidence of principals’ effectiveness. Implications for Research and Policy: The authors discuss the implications of the results in terms of 1.) expanding definitions of educational leadership to include tenets of authentic FCE, 2.) creating coherent yet compendious systems for school improvement, and 3.) planning for and implementing a developmental approach to the evaluation of school leaders.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭和社区参与领导力:国家主体评价过程的定性政策分析
目的:本政策分析的主要目的是研究自2015年《每个学生成功法案》通过以来,各州如何改变其主要绩效评估系统。我们特别关注各州是否利用灵活的政策环境为有意义的家庭和社区参与(FCE)腾出空间来评估校长的有效性。研究方法:本研究使用文献分析来审查所有50个州的主要评估系统的结构,并选择17个修订后的系统来深入审查他们与家庭和社区合作的领导方法。调查结果:许多国家并没有实质性地修改其评估体系。一些修订后的系统只关注教学领导和学生成绩衡量,因此不支持有意义的FCE和联邦政策目标,即学校与家庭和社区利益相关者合作。校长评估系统最支持真正的家庭和社区参与,允许灵活的目标设定,并明确鼓励使用利益相关者反馈作为校长有效性的证据。对研究和政策的影响:作者从以下几个方面讨论了结果的影响:1.)扩展教育领导的定义,包括真实的FCE原则;2.)为学校改进创建连贯而简洁的系统;3.)规划和实施一种评估学校领导的发展方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Administration Quarterly
Educational Administration Quarterly EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Educational Administration Quarterly presents prominent empirical and conceptual articles focused on timely and critical leadership and policy issues of educational organizations. As an editorial team, we embrace traditional and emergent research paradigms, methods, and issues. We particularly promote the publication of rigorous and relevant scholarly work that enhances linkages among and utility for educational policy, practice, and research arenas.
期刊最新文献
“Fighting an Uphill Battle”: The Pursuit of Equity Through the Every Student Succeeds Act in North Carolina Preparing Early Education Leaders: An Analysis of UCEA Principal Preparation Programs Assessing the Psychometric Qualities of the Data-Informed School Leadership Survey Conflict, Competition, and Collaboration in Co-Located Schools: School Leaders Navigating Structural Distrust Responding to Crisis: A Multiple Case Study of District Approaches for Supporting Student Learning in the COVID-19 Pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1