Search results

The chapter examines school administrator responsibilities to special education students and their families from case scenarios based on conflicts between parents and districts regarding services provided by schools to special education students. From these case studies based on real case law, readers are exposed to situations intended to pose questions as to whether administrators met their responsibility to ensure the rights of the special education students. Principals, superintendents, and special education administrators committed to work together to make their school environment and optimal place for children to learn. An equally important role for school administrators is to create and maintain cultures where faculty understand their advocacy role for all children, but in particular, those children most in need of support. Effective administrators hold themselves and other professionals in their district to high standards related to knowledge of school law, particularly special education school law; communication with parents and other professionals; and collaborations based on the value of what is best for the student. This chapter concludes with a section on ethical leadership or the values underlying administrative actions affecting individualized education program students, their families, and all students who are different whether due to socioeconomic status, cultural differences, or race.

The standards movement, while new in the current NCLB iteration, has been a part of education for almost the last half century (Popham, 2001; Sirotnik, 2004). According to several researchers (e.g., DiPaola & Walther-Thomas, 2003; Fullan, 2001; Lashley & Boscardin, 2003; Marsh, 2000; Villa & Thousand, 2000), there have been significant changes in the roles that school leaders must fulfill to implement a standards-based educational accountability system. The requirements of NCLB will not be a “passing fad” and so will affect the manner in which special education administrators conduct their work (Hochschild, 2003). As it stands, districts and schools are viewed as an amalgam of complex relationships (Harry, Sturges, & Klinger, 2005) that come together as learning communities to meet accountability targets for all students. The requirements for building a learning community involve the skills of collaboration and empowerment of others. Apparently, developing productive partnerships will exceed the previously defined narrow interpretation of collaboration with families and other professionals (Crockett, 2002). Standards-based accountability practices which disaggregate data based on specific subgroups, one of which is students with disabilities, are a result of the concern that exclusion of students from testing distorts the efficacy of educational reform efforts (Heubert & Hauser, 1999; McDonnell, McLaughlin, & Morison, 1997; Schulte & Villwock, 2004). However, concerns have also been raised regarding the validity of conclusions drawn from large-scale accountability data (Schulte & Villwock, 2004; Ysseldyke & Bielinski, 2002). Hargreaves (2003) concluded that “the rightful pursuit of higher standards has generated into a counter productive obsession with soulless standardization” (p. 82).

Librarians have traditionally looked to academic library directors (ALDs) to list those qualities that make them good at what they do. Little research has sought the input of institutional administrators (who are the ones who hire ALDs) about what they look for when hiring ALDs. This study presented a list of qualities that had been rated by ALDs as being important for the position to these senior institutional administrators and asked them to rate the relative importance of these qualities and to add to the list any qualities they felt should be there. Their ratings were then compared with those of the library directors to see how closely they correlated. The results showed not only that there was statistically significant agreement between the two groups, but also that there were important differences, with the hiring administrators placing more priority on ideological attributes (attributes based on professional orientations and ideals) while ALDs emphasized the need for experience. The hiring administrators also added several attributes to the original list, including managing multiple priorities, being learning/student oriented (especially toward low achievers), being self-directed with a good work ethic, being able to relate effectively to all constituencies, and experience in the same type of institution as the one the person was being hired to lead.

Recognizing the need for a pool of diverse future administrators, the Los Angeles Unified School District entered into a partnership with the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at California State University, Northridge to prepare the next generation of leaders. The process to develop the program and produce the cadre of candidates is a study in the facilitation of the transition of educators from teachers to administrators. This chapter examines the issues encountered and the processes established to create a rigorous, accessible master's degree/Administrative Credential Program that met the needs of the students and the school district.

This chapter presents a crosswalk of the International Society for Technology Standards for Administrators commonly referred to as NETS*A, the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards for Administrators and the Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) Standards. This crosswalk will serve as a framework for a discussion of how the administrative standards have evolved to their current state and how administrators can best shift dispositions and knowledge and skills to get the maximum impact of technology in their standards-based leadership activities. The chapter finishes with practical advice as to how administrators can proceed to assess their environment and use appropriate technology to facilitate meeting the requirements of the revised standards.

The effective use of student data has gained increasing attention in the past 10 years. Although district leaders would like to support data use and improvement, exactly how to go about such work systemically is often unclear. Accordingly, the aim of this chapter is to illuminate the inner workings of data use throughout a mid-sized school district. In doing so, we highlight issues in how data were used and supported, and provide discussion about how districts such as this one may improve data use throughout the district.

For over two decades, we have known from melding fertility and immigration data, that the population of the United States would become steadily more diverse. Throughout the 1990s it was reported that one in four persons in the nation was a minority. By the time we entered the new millennium, that figure increased to one in three. Now it is predicted that in the year 2030, the emerging majority of Americans will be people of color. No matter the type of library or information agency, in this century all will face the challenge of providing service to population within the context of an entirely new order of pluralism.

The issue of training and appointment of school administrators has consumed substantial attention from educational scholars for several decades. The literature has witnessed a growing amount of research effort in investigating and identifying the effective ways of training and appointing school principals. However, there are also political, social and cultural aspects to this endeavour, which potentially influences the practices pertaining to training and appointment of school principals. This chapter represents scholarly efforts to discuss issues on the training and appointment of school administrators in Turkey within its historical and political background. Thus, first, it focuses on the historical journey of the field of educational administration in Turkey. This journey has been categorised under three phases: The Ottoman Era, Early Years of Turkish Republic and the 1950s Onwards. Second, this chapter discusses school principalship in Turkey with a specific focus on political and legal dimensions. Finally, the chapter ends with an overall evaluation of the practices and policies pertaining to school administration curriculum in Turkey.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether middle-level female administrators (particularly women of color) in the California Community College system were being mentored to higher-level positions and whether the retention of leaders in higher-level positions was influenced by mentoring. Specifically, this study examined the mobility and retention of female administrators through a web-based survey that was completed by 156 females currently working in administrative positions at the dean's level or higher in California Community Colleges. Data were also collected through face-to-face interviews with 11 female administrators, 5 of whom were women of color, in senior-level positions from vice president to chancellor. These interviews reflected a range of demographics and were located in Northern, Central, and Southern California. The focus of this chapter is on the responses of the respondents who were women of color.

The study addressed two questions: (1) What effect did mentoring, if any, have on a person's ability to achieve higher-level leadership positions? and (2) What relationship does mentorship have on the retention of women of color in leadership? Findings reported that mentoring was having a positive and often significant influence on women of color administrators and leaders in the California Community College System.

One of the most challenging issues facing building level administrators is the supervision of special education programs in their schools. This chapter outlines the role of the building administrator in overseeing the implementation of special education laws and policies from the initial process of referring students for special education services through the implementation and monitoring phases of service delivery at the building level. Detailed topics include dealing with parents, regular education staff, and student privacy issues. This text examines student discipline and due process complaints as well as strategies for dealing with outside agencies, such as child welfare departments and law enforcement officials. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the No Child Left Behind Act, and its impact on special education services at the building level.