Reflections on the evolution of educational leadership preparation programs in the United States and challenges ahead

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha McCarthy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Educational Leadership ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Leadership Preparation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Preparation Programs ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Educational Leadership Preparation Programs

Purpose – The purpose of this legacy paper is to review leadership preparation over time in the United States and addresses challenges ahead. It is hoped that the US developments will be instructive to an international audience interested in strengthening the preparation of school leaders. Design/methodology/approach – The paper synthesizes research and commentary on leadership preparation programs in the US as a basis for identifying five challenges ahead. Findings – Meaningful change should be informed by the past but not bound by tradition. It is imperative to be open to different viewpoints, to take reasonable – and at times bold – risks, and to question deeply held values and assumptions. Broad recognition of the significant role school leaders play in facilitating student learning suggests that the political climate is right to effect meaningful reforms in leadership preparation in the US. Those involved in preparing school leaders are urged to address the challenges identified in this paper. Research limitations/implications – Encouraging work is underway, but many more people need to be involved in efforts to rigorously assess and improve leadership preparation. Practical implications – We do not have all the answers but cannot be paralyzed by what we do not know. We are ethically responsible to act on what we do know, such as incorporating the compelling research on learning theory into the leadership preparation curriculum. Originality/value – The traditional complacency in the educational leadership professoriate cannot continue if university preparation programs are to meet the needs of the next generation of school leaders. The time is short, and the stakes are high for all involved especially for PK-12 students.

Got theory?: Reconceptualizing the nature of the theory-practice gap in K-12 educational leadership

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Roegman ◽  
Sarah Woulfin
Keyword(s):  
Educational Leadership ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Leadership Preparation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Preparation Programs ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Institutional Contexts ◽  
Practice Gap ◽  
Theory Practice Gap ◽  
K 12

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to reconceptualize the theory-practice gap in educational leadership, not as a deficit, but as a necessity for legitimacy within institutional contexts. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on institutional theory to reframe the theory-practice gap, which is often seen as a deficit of leaders or preparation programs. Findings Three vignettes illustrate how aspiring and current educational leaders engage with theory and practice within specific contexts and in relation to specific aspects of leadership. Importantly, the vignettes show that when school leaders decouple theory from practice, they may be doing so to function as legitimate providers of K-12 educational leadership. Research limitations/implications The theory-practice gap, while often perceived as something negative, can have certain benefits within particular contexts. Scholars interested in the interconnections of theory and practice would benefit from considering why and how school leaders engage theory and practice. Practical implications Implications for leadership preparation programs highlight developing more complex views of the challenges that leaders face in tightly coupling theory and practice. To support future and current leaders, leadership preparation programs need to ensure that their students understand their institutional contexts and the reasons that leaders may decouple theory from action in various ways. Originality/value Instead of viewing the theory/practice gap as a deficit, this paper argues for a new way to consider why school leaders and leadership candidates may engage with theory and practice in different ways.

Preparation Programs for School Leaders

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce G. Barnett ◽  
Nathern S.A. Okilwa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Leadership Development ◽  
School Leadership ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Leadership Preparation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Norms ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Preparation Programs ◽  
Norms And Values

For over 50 years, school leadership preparation and development has been a priority in the United States; however, since the turn of the century, school systems, universities, and professional associations around the world have become more interested in developing programs to prepare aspiring school leaders and support newly appointed and experienced principals. This increased global attention to leadership development has arisen because public or government school leaders are being held accountable for improving student learning outcomes for an increasingly diverse set of learners. Because school leadership studies have been dominated by American researchers, global program providers tend to rely on Western perspectives, concepts, and theories, which may not accurately reflect local and national cultural norms and values. As such, calls for expanding research studies in non-Western societies are increasing. Despite relying on Western-based leadership concepts, leadership preparation programs outside the United States differ substantially. Cultural norms and values, infrastructure support, and social and economic conditions influence the availability and types of programs afforded to aspiring and practicing school leaders. As a result, there is a continuum of leadership development systems that range from: (a) mandatory, highly regulated, and well-resourced comprehensive programs for preservice qualification, induction for newly appointed principals, and in-service for practicing school leaders to (b) non-mandatory, minimally regulated, and moderately resourced programs to determine eligibility for positions and induction to the role to (c) non-mandatory, poorly regulated, and under-resourced programs, which are offered infrequently, require long distance travel, and participants costs are not covered.

Leadership Preparation Programs: Preparing Culturally Competent Educational Leaders

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maysaa Barakat ◽  
Ellen Reames ◽  
Lisa A. W. Kensler
Keyword(s):  
Educational Leadership ◽  
Cultural Competence ◽  
Cultural Beliefs ◽  
Leadership Preparation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Knowledge ◽  
Culturally Competent ◽  
Preparation Programs ◽  
Educational Leadership Preparation Programs ◽  
Educational Leadership Preparation

The demographic profile of the United States has been rapidly changing; by 2020, minority students will constitute the majority of the public school student population nationwide. This makes cultural competence a necessity for today’s school leaders. Educational leadership preparation programs are responsible for preparing culturally competent leaders; however, few programs assess their students’ cultural competence. The purpose of this quantitative, cross-sectional, causal-comparative study was to examine whether graduates of educational leadership preparation programs had significantly different cultural competence than those beginning their respective program. The findings of this study suggest that matriculating through a principal preparation program positively correlates with educational leadership students’ overall cultural competence, cultural beliefs and motivation, and cultural knowledge. However, there appears to be no significant relationship between completing the program and students’ cultural skills.

Washington will rethink its foreign chip strategy

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Export Controls ◽  
Political Pressure ◽  
Technical Standards ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Technology Competition ◽  
Business In China

Significance Follow-on action from Washington and responses from foreign actors will shape the US government’s adversarial policy towards China in semiconductors and other strategic technologies. Impacts The Biden administration will likely conclude that broad-based diversion of the semiconductor supply chain away from China is not feasible. The United States will rely on export controls and political pressure to prevent diffusion to China of cutting-edge chip technologies. The United States will focus on persuading foreign semiconductor leaders to help develop US capabilities, thereby staying ahead of China. Washington will focus on less direct approaches to strategic technology competition with China, notably technical standards-setting. Industry leaders in the semiconductor supply chain worldwide will continue expanding business in China in less politically sensitive areas.

Online disinformation is greater risk for older users

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Senior Citizens ◽  
Rapid Evolution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
News Source ◽  
The Us ◽  
Older Users ◽  
Special Concern

Significance The growing numbers of senior citizens in the United States, their rapidly increasing adoption of social media and their high levels of voter turnout make their vulnerability to disinformation a matter of special concern. Other advanced democracies likely mirror the US experience. Impacts Older US adults' use of television as their primary news source may provide some bulwark against being targeted by disinformation online. The rapid evolution of news distribution technologies will challenge older adults used to a more slowly changing media landscape. Further research is necessary to determine the causes of age-based vulnerability and levels of resilience.

Winter Olympic boycott increases corporate pressures

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Winter Olympics ◽  
The Us ◽  
Olympic Boycott

Significance The US-led diplomatic boycott of the Winter Olympics in February will increase the pressure on US companies to decide whether China or the United States is their more valuable market. Some of that pressure to decide is coming from employees and customers in both countries. Impacts More frequent and sharper confrontations between US companies and China could accelerate the decoupling of the two economies. Renewed emphasis on human rights concerns will encourage the further shifting of some supply chain elements out of China. Consumer brands are particularly vulnerable to human rights concerns, as are their suppliers.

Political Climate, Voter Suppression Policies and Federal Sentencing Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 1155-1180
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S Nowacki ◽  
Danielle Creech ◽  
Megan Parks
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ethnic Diversity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Racial Threat ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
The Us ◽  
Voter Suppression ◽  
And Gender

Abstract Many states in the United States have recently implemented voter suppression policies, which make voting more difficult, particularly for members of marginalized populations (e.g. non-white and female voters). In this article, we examine how these policies and other measures of political climate influence criminal sentencing in US district courts. Using 2015 data from the US Sentencing Commission, alongside other district-level measures, we find both direct and conditioning relationships between political climate and extra-legal variables. Specifically, we find that, while voter suppression policies do not directly affect sentence length, racial threat effects are enhanced in districts governed by such policies. Conversely, districts without such policies see larger mitigating effects at high levels of ethnic diversity and gender equality.

scholarly journals Investigating academic library responses to predatory publishing in the United States, Canada and Spanish-speaking Latin America

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 625-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jairo Buitrago Ciro ◽  
Lynne Bowker
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comparative Investigation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
The Us ◽  
Predatory Publishing

PurposeThis is a comparative investigation of how university libraries in the United States, Canada and Spanish-speaking Latin America are responding to predatory publishing.Design/methodology/approachThe Times Higher Education World University Rankings was used to identify the top ten universities from each of the US and Canada, as well as the top 20 Spanish-language universities in Latin America. Each university library's website was scrutinized to discover whether the libraries employed scholarly communication librarians, whether they offered scholarly communication workshops, or whether they shared information about scholarly communication on their websites. This information was further examined to determine if it discussed predatory publishing specifically.FindingsMost libraries in the US/Canada sample employ scholarly communication librarians and nearly half offer workshops on predatory publishing. No library in the Latin America sample employed a scholarly communication specialist and just one offered a workshop addressing predatory publishing. The websites of the libraries in the US and Canada addressed predatory publishing both indirectly and directly, with US libraries favoring the former approach and Canadian libraries tending towards the latter. Predatory publishing was rarely addressed directly by the libraries in the Latin America sample; however, all discussed self-archiving and/or Open Access.Research limitations/implicationsBrazilian universities were excluded owing to the researchers' language limitations. Data were collected between September 15 and 30, 2019, so it represents a snapshot of information available at that time. The study was limited to an analysis of library websites using a fixed set of keywords, and it did not investigate whether other campus units were involved or whether other methods of informing researchers about predatory publishing were being used.Originality/valueThe study reveals some best practices leading to recommendations to help academic libraries combat predatory publishing and improve scholarly publishing literacy among researchers.

Professional Standards for Educational Leadership

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle D. Young
Keyword(s):  
Educational Leadership ◽  
Educational Administration ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Leadership Preparation ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Standards ◽  
Professional Standards ◽  
School Level ◽  
Professional Fields

Standards are used in a variety of professional fields to identify core elements of practice within the field as well as to describe a desired level of performance. The first set of standards for the field of educational leadership in the United States was introduced in 1996 by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). Since then, they have become the de facto national standards for educational leaders. The ISLLC standards have been updated three times and were recently renamed Professional Standards for School Leaders (PSEL) under the authority of the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). Over this same period of time, multiple sets of sister standards (e.g., standards for leadership preparation) have emerged as have evaluation tools and practice resources. Soon after their release, a variety of concerns were raised about the standards and their potential impact on the practice of education leadership, particularly school level leadership. Some argued that the standards were too broad, while others argued that they were too specific. Similarly, concerns were raised about the focus of the standards and what was left out or only weakly included. These and other concerns continued to plague newer versions of the standards. Concerns notwithstanding, today, educational leadership standards are fully embedded in the lifeworld of the educational leadership profession. They have been adopted and adapted by states, districts, professional organizations, and accrediting bodies and used in a variety of ways, including: setting expectations for educational leadership preparation and practice, state certification, leadership recruitment, professional development and support, and evaluating leadership practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document