Background

Federal Initiative and Summit

During July 24-26, 2000, the Office of the Secretary of Education convened a National Principals’ Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., to dialogue around the issue of the principal as instructional leader. Carole Kennedy, principal-in-residence in the Office of the Secretary of Education, coordinated this national event. The purpose of this summit was to create an opportunity for principals to inform the Department’s thinking, planning, research agenda, and other activities relating to the principalship. In addition, attendees established a network of colleagues with whom they could interact on various leadership issues.

Participants were selected through the combined efforts of the National Association of Elementary School Principals, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the National Middle School Association. Selected participants included two principals from each of the 50 states, one principal each from Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam, and nine principals from the Rainwater Foundation, which cosponsored the event.

Regional Summit

As a follow-up to this national activity, the Regional Educational Laboratory of Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL) convened a Principals’ Leadership Summit in Guam October 30-31, 2000. There are no chapters of national principal associations in the Pacific region outside of Hawaii. Therefore, the chief state school officers (CSSOs) of participating entities were asked to select two principals to attend the regional summit, one each from the elementary and middle/secondary levels. Additional selection criteria included the following:

Participants for this regional event included 25 principals, 3 zone coordinators, 1 teacher leader, 1 principal intern, and 4 PREL staff members.

Identifying Instructional Leadership in the Pacific Region

At the Regional Principals’ Summit, principals addressed questions on instructional leadership similar to those posed at the national summit in Washington, D.C. Thirty-four participants were divided into four groups to address the following questions on two topics: “Where We Are” and “Moving to the Ideal.” Discussions on “Where We Are” addressed the following questions:

Discussions on “Moving to the Ideal” explored these issues:

Highlights of each group’s discussion are covered in the following sections. Group responses are organized into categories and reflect the content of the statements and frequency of responses.

Components of Instructional Leadership

Buffie (1989, p. 82) identified knowledge, skills, and context as vital components in the development of instructional leadership. As Buffie (pp. 82-85) notes, knowledge is key to effective decision making. Knowledge is fundamental to the skill development necessary to carry out one’s goals. Skills are needed to turn knowledge into action. Effective leaders recognize the role of knowledge and skills in the change process. Knowledge and skills are applied within the context of a set of beliefs or values. One’s belief system is what serves as the foundation for decision making.

Responses by Pacific principals to the first two questions about the components of instructional leadership are categorized by component in Table 2. These questions focused on elements of instructional leadership, especially in Pacific schools. Responses were listed under knowledge and skills if they suggested what principals needed to know and be able to do. Responses under context suggested elements of the school environment.

Table 2
Knowledge, Skills, and Context of Principals as Instructional Leaders

Listings were not meant to be all-inclusive; they emerged from discussions which took place within given time periods on the 2-day agenda. In addition, participants were not specifically asked to identify knowledge, skills, and the context of instructional leadership. These categories were selected as important components of instructional leadership and as a means of organizing the responses.

In a study of 800 teachers, Blase and Blase (2001) found that characteristics identified by teachers as key to effective instructional leadership fell under three major themes: talk with teachers; promote teachers’ professional growth; and foster teacher reflection. Principals in the regional summit identified several items which spoke to one of these themes: promoting teachers’ professional growth. Although the questions and purposes of these two activities were different, it is interesting to compare what teachers and principals say about promoting teachers’ professional growth (see Table 3).

Table 3
Comments From Teachers and Principals on Promoting Teachers’ Professional Growth

Both teachers and principals emphasized the need for supporting the teaching/learning process. Teachers supported the building of a culture of collaboration that may imply more of a collegial/peer relationship among teachers and principals. However, other responses on the teachers’ list still invite a superior/subordinate relationship in that teachers expect their principals to coach, inform, encourage attendance, provide resources, etc.

The Pacific principals saw their leadership role as based on teachers’ needs, providing direction, support, and feedback. One key observation is that Pacific principals saw themselves as much more involved in the teachers’ professional development. For instance, they noted that principals should attend professional-development activities with teachers in order to support the implementation of new learnings; conduct or assist in staff development; fulfill a teacher’s role as needed; and learn from teachers. These responses suggest that the principal should serve as a facilitator, co-developer, technical-assistance provider, professional developer, and, at times, as a substitute teacher. These roles were also listed in Table 2 as skills necessary for instructional leadership. This collegial approach among teachers and principals is often observed in Pacific contexts. One of the cultural values of Pacific island groups is working together (i.e., building a canoe, preparing for a feast, funeral preparation and protocol, taking care of others’ children).

Two Pacific leaders who were guest speakers on the topic of “What makes an effective leader from a government and business perspective?” offered a complementary perspective on leadership. Senator Vicente Pangelinan, Minority Leader in the 25th Guam Legislature, suggested that leadership involves four Ls: Leadership, Look (or be aware of your surroundings), Listen, and Learn. He gave the following advice:

This legislator’s motto as a public servant is to be real (i.e., make no pretenses, keep ego in check); be tough (i.e., tough enough to change and to compromise); and be a leader (i.e., make positive changes).

From a business perspective, Mr. Philip Flores, president and chairman of the board for a local bank, explained that if you are an effective leader, you can get “people to do what you want them to do because they want to do it.” He also focused on leading by example and setting clear and measurable goals. Leaders must be committed to leading and to involving others. Hard work is at the core of this businessman’s belief: “Do everything as if you want to make your parents proud.”

Defining Instructional Leadership for the Pacific Region

While describing instructional leadership for Pacific schools, participants listed characteristics they felt were important. As an instructional leader, the Pacific principal should be:

These characteristics reflect the importance that Pacific Islanders place on their respective cultural beliefs and traditions; they include cultural sensitivity, respect for tradition, and strong positive interpersonal relationships. As a people, Pacific Islanders tend to avoid confrontation, show respect for authority, speak languages other than English, and maintain many traditional practices. Knowing these characteristics can assist instructional leaders in guiding their schools and involving their communities. Furthermore, this knowledge will help to more appropriately define the role of instructional leader for Pacific schools.

In an effort to define instructional leadership for the Pacific region, discussion groups offered a number of creative descriptions. Since it would be difficult to arrive at one succinct and comprehensive definition, each definition is offered in turn.

A representative from Pohnpei State in the FSM shared the following acronym, which was developed by school leaders in Pohnpei, to describe the characteristics of an effective leader:

Two interesting characteristics are servant and helper. The concept of “servant leadership” has been embraced by some leaders in the Pacific. Robert Greenleaf, grandfather of the modern empowerment movement in business leadership, has researched and presented on the concept of servant leadership since the 1970s. This style of leadership requires the following:

[Servant leaders] have a natural desire to serve first. . . . [they] listen to, respond to, and support employees. They remove barriers and obstacles which would prevent employees from growing as individuals and performing well in the workplace. They see . . . that opportunities for personal and professional growth are readily available to employees. (Bounds, 1998, p. 2)

This leadership style has implications for leaders in the Pacific who see themselves as instructional leaders who facilitate, advocate, nurture, collaborate, and serve as stewards of the vision shared by the school community. Besides thinking about servant leadership, how would principals in other parts of the nation describe leadership?

Here is an abridged version of another group’s definition:

An instructional leader in the Pacific is a person with vision who is able to assess the needs of his/her school/community. He/she is able to articulate his/her vision into a plan of action in which all parties can participate and feel a sense of ownership that will enable quality learning to go on in the learner. In doing so, this leader must be knowledgeable of the curriculum, culturally sensitive to his/her community, and able to demonstrate total commitment to his/her teachers and staff. This commitment will empower staff to be agents of change in their own way, where each individual can build self-esteem, and where all components become part of the whole, thereby giving life to the vision and the impetus to arrive there.

Elements of instructional leadership depicted in these and other group definitions are supported by research. An instructional leader:

The focal point on instructional leadership throughout the research as well as in discussions by Pacific principals was the emphasis on improving student learning (Keller, 1998; NSDC, 2000; Parker & Day, 1997).

Consideration for the affective side of leadership and sensitivity to cultural values, beliefs, and contexts were identified by the Pacific principals as important. These characteristics did not seem to receive the same emphasis in the research on instructional leadership. Besides gaining knowledge and skills in instructional leadership, Pacific principals also emphasized the need for instructional leaders to know the language and culture of the community and to show flexibility toward social/cultural activities as they relate to school calendars and schedules.

Barriers to Instructional Leadership

Following the identification of elements and characteristics of instructional leadership, especially for the Pacific context, principals considered some of the barriers that exist in their respective contexts. Some of the examples they gave were site-specific, while others were generic across the Region.

Table 4
Barriers to Instructional Leadership

The list of responses shows some evidence of the extreme range of barriers to instructional leadership across the Region. In Hawaii and Guam, almost all teachers have bachelor’s degrees, although not all of these degrees are in the field of education. Other entities have a higher incidence of teachers who have only a high school diploma or associate’s degree or a BA/BS degree in a field outside of education, or who are assigned to content areas outside their fields of expertise. Of the 10 entities, Hawaii is the only one that has organized teachers’ and principals’ unions. Hawaii also faces a court-mandated deadline to bring all K-12 public schools into compliance with special-education laws. Staff are finding that the efforts necessary to bring schools into compliance are very time-consuming (Keesing, 2001).

Although Hawaii may be considered isolated by its counterparts on the continental U.S., its geographic location still allows for greater access to travel and to electronic communication than other parts of the Pacific region. Travelers from American Samoa and Micronesia pass through Hawaii on a regular basis. Hawaii is only 4 1/2 hours from the west coast of the continental U.S. by air; American Samoa is 9 hours away, while flights from Guam take 12 1/2 hours. In some remote areas of Micronesia, travel access is limited to ships that come into port only once a month. The high cost of air travel both within and outside the Pacific region is another limiting factor (roundtrip airfare from Hawaii to Guam is $1,400). Electronic communication is limited or nonexistent where there is no electricity or no Internet access. The E-rate has increased Internet access in American Samoa, the CNMI, Guam, and Hawaii, but the FSM, the RMI, and the Republic of Palau are not eligible for this discounted service.

Schools and communities may have conflicting expectations; differences may be culturally based. For example, obligations for family funerals may create conflicting demands on teachers. In Micronesia, when someone dies, each family member is expected to attend a series of events, which may continue for several days. Where there are no substitute teachers, classes may be dismissed until the teacher returns. The school expects teachers to be in their classrooms during the school day. If teachers fulfill their obligations to the school, they may be dishonoring their families. If they fulfill their obligations to their families, their jobs and students may be in jeopardy.

Decisions made in the political arena may impact leader attrition. In many entities, the chief state school officer is appointed by the governor. This often means that when the governor changes, so does the chief state school officer. These changes in leadership often trickle down to the school level, impacting principal assignments and stability in leadership for the schools.

Some Causes of Identified Barriers

Principals attributed other causes of existing barriers to their districts, states, or entity leadership. These included:

Moving Toward the Ideal

The following recommendations emerged from discussions to reduce barriers and move toward an ideal context that supports principals as instructional leaders.

Encourage principals to build knowledge and acquire skill. Principals felt that formal education should ensure that principals are prepared for curriculum development, clinical supervision, negotiation, assessment, and systemic change. The more informal professional-development opportunities need to go beyond the “one-shot” (one-time intensive workshop) or “shot-gun” (several unrelated workshops) offerings. Instead, professional development needs to be sustained over time and focus on principals’ priority areas of need. One of these areas is to build the knowledge and skills necessary to support the emphasis on leadership for improved student learning.

Articulate professional-development offerings with post-secondary programs. As appropriate, review credit opportunities for training that could be applied to a degree or certificate program (e.g., AA, BA, professional certificate). As with professional development for teachers in the Pacific region, leadership workshops are often not articulated with any other post-secondary education program and therefore do not lead to a higher level degree. A guided comprehensive program may result in many more teachers achieving a post-secondary degree.

Establish a mentoring program for new principals. Traditionally, it has been noted that the best learning takes place when the learner is in a relationship with one who can teach. This has usually referred to some type of superior-subordinate relationship such as parent-child, teacher-student, supervisor-trainee, etc. Pacific principals identified unique learning opportunities, which do not necessarily involve a superior-subordinate relationship but a collegial one by which peers learn from each other (e.g., Principal Exchange, Adopt-a-Peer, site visitation).

Establish a process for recruiting and screening potential leaders. School systems in the Pacific region should realize the importance of filling the pipeline with effective school leaders by supporting recruitment and retention efforts. Minimum qualifications that reflect higher standards should be established, such as:

Principals also noted their responsibility to identify and recruit potential administrators from across their teacher ranks.

Recognize the professionalism of principals. The need for trust was a repeated cry from the Pacific principals. Pacific principals need to be recognized as professionals who can make decisions in a system that supports them. Principals also recognized that, as professionals, they need to make personal commitments to grow professionally. These commitments may include:

Create appropriate rewards and incentives for school leaders. Research supports the need to pay principals higher salaries and to give them more authority. Examples given by principals confirm that at times principals make salaries comparable to those of experienced teachers, which provides little incentive for teachers to become principals. Incentives could include, but should not be limited to, monetary rewards. Other motivators could include supporting attendance at conferences, peer recognition, assisting professional development, and providing travel opportunities and released time.

Showcase positive aspects of schooling. Principals supported pushing the “positives” platform by accentuating the positive every time an opportunity arises to turn the bad-news reporting around. They felt that principals should be more assertive in asking the broadcast media to provide airtime for the purpose of highlighting school activities within their respective communities. Many principals felt that knowing how to work with the media was an area of need for professional development. A partnership with the media could be mutually beneficial to both schools and the media. A resulting product could be a guidebook on public relations for schools that could assist school leaders in working with the media.

To accomplish the ideal, conference participants generated a few ideas to support instructional leadership at the school, district- and central-office levels, as well as in the community.

Supporting Instructional Leadership at the School Level

Supporting Instructional Leadership at the District- and Central-Office Levels

Community Support for Instructional Leadership

In addition to the above considerations for stakeholders, the Pacific principals proposed the following recommendations to service providers and policy makers in the Pacific region.

Recommendations for Service Providers

Recommendations for Policy Makers

Through these recommendations, principals called for support from various groups at different levels of the school/community. While principals hoped to gain support from others, they also voiced their personal commitment to effecting change in school leadership for the Pacific region. The following statements reflect what these Pacific principals are willing to do and also what they expect from the system in terms of support for effective instructional leadership:

Conclusion

The regional summit gave principals from Pacific island schools an initial opportunity to focus on school leadership issues with their peers and colleagues. Highlights of their discussions show that Pacific principals share many common barriers to instructional leadership with principals nationwide. They also noted barriers that were unique to the Pacific, such as cultural incongruence with contemporary demands. Pacific principals showed a strong commitment to move their systems toward instructional leadership through their recommendations. There was a call from this group for continued networking and communication. Some ideas are to create an electronic listserv, convene networking sessions at the annual Pacific Educational Conferences, and collaboratively plan professional-development activities for school leaders. Pacific principals are also interested in establishing a Pacific chapter of the National Associations of Principals.

As Pacific educators, we may be able to answer the universal questions on schooling, but we also need to continue to ask our own questions as to what makes us instructional leaders in a Pacific context. What cultural values do we bring to our leadership of Pacific schools? How do we build on a professional as well as an indigenous knowledge base to be more effective leaders? That which is unique to the cultures of the Pacific should be valued and respected, while we continue to address those challenges that may also be unique to the Pacific. The focal point of the principal’s leadership is to increase student achievement by improving teaching and learning. The Pacific principals see instructional leadership as necessary to accomplishing this goal.

References