University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations Dissertations and Theses Spring August 2014 School Principal Leadership and Special Education Knowledge Rob Schulze University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.edu/dissertations_2 Part of the Special Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Schulze, Rob, "School Principal Leadership and Special Education Knowledge" (2014).7275/hr4c-be46 https://scholarworks.edu/dissertations_2/147 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact scholarworks@library. SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP AND SPECIAL EDUCATION KNOWLEDGE A Dissertation Presented by ROBERT J.
SCHULZE Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION MAY 2014 Student Development © Copyright by Robert J. Schulze 2014 All Rights Reserved SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP AND SPECIAL EDUCATION KNOWLEDGE A Dissertation Presented by ROBERT J. SCHULZE Approved as to style and content by: ___________________________________________________ Mary Lynn Boscardin, Chair ___________________________________________________ Lisa Keller, Member ___________________________________________________ Robert Marx, Member ________________________________________________ Christine B. McCormick, Dean College of Education DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated, first and foremost, with love to my amazing wife Sue.
She is the one who supported, encouraged, and guided my studies, all while also doing the real work while I was away playing student. This is entirely her achievement. It is also dedicated to my children, Robby and Molly, who I love and to whom I hope this is someday an inspiration. I thank my parents, Bob and Colleen, who, despite all evidence to the contrary, seemed to think I was pretty smart right from the beginning and who encouraged me to take my education as far as it could go.
Lastly, this is dedicated to my late grandmother Avilda, who would have taken satisfaction from this achievement. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Mary Lynn Boscardin. I asked her for many, many, many things over the years, and the answer was always ‘yes.’ I also would like to thank Dr.
Lisa Keller, Dr. Robert Marx, Dr. Rebecca Woodland, and Dr. Craig Wells for their time, patience and invaluable assistance with this process.
Thanks are due to the EXCELSIOR program cohort, with and from whom it has been my privilege to learn for the past four years. Finally, I would like to thank the University of Massachusetts Amherst. I first came to the University in 1998, and it has been a large component of my life ever since. I will miss you.
v ABSTRACT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP AND SPECIAL EDUCATION KNOWLEDGE MAY 2014 ROBERT J SCHULZE, B., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST M., WESTFIELD STATE COLLEGE Ed., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST Directed by: Professor Mary Lynn Boscardin This study investigated the effects of special education background and demographic variables on the perceptions of leadership styles by public school principals with and without special education backgrounds in Massachusetts. Utilizing Q-‐sort methodology, principals sorted 47 statements reflective of transformational, instructional, transactional, and distributed leadership. Analysis found that the participants separated into two factor groups. The special education background of the participants did not influence the formation of the factors, and it was found that prior special education experience was not a predictor of subsequent leadership perceptions of principals.
Instead, Factor A was composed of younger, less educated, less experienced principals in lower-‐performing schools who valued instructional leadership and school improvement in their leadership. Factor B was composed of older, more educated, more experienced, and more ethnically diverse principals who worked in higher-‐performing schools and who valued multiple leadership styles and high-‐level, whole-‐school leadership. A model was developed, vi showing a process for how principals grow their expertise and evolve their leadership over the course of their leadership careers. This study demonstrates the importance of continued research into special education leadership and of how leadership is differentiated among schools with different levels of student performance.
vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .vi LIST OF TABLES.xi LIST OF FIGURES. SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL.2 Frameworks for Analyzing Leadership.5 Laissez-‐faire Leadership. 15 Towards a Combined Approach. PRINCIPALS’ ROLE IN THE LEADING AND ADMINISTRATION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION.
20 Special Education Leadership. 23 Role of the Principal. 27 Principals’ Role in the Leading and Administration of Special Education. 52 viii Research Design and Rationale.
54 Item Development and Selection. 79 Factor A Demographic Composition. 86 Factor B Demographic Composition. 88 Demographic Similarities Between Factors A and B.
93 Demographic Differences Between Factors A and B. 94 Defining the Factors .112 Factor B and Special Education .122 Similarities Among Factors A and B .129 The Effect of Special Education Background .129 Factor A Profile: Instructional-‐Distributed Leadership Oriented Principals .132 Factor B Transformational-‐Distributed-‐Instructional Principals .135 Implications of the Research .139 Career Growth Model for Principal Leadership .141 Limitations of the Research .143 Suggestions for Future Research .158 x LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Foundations of Instructional Leadership Research. Streshly and Gray’s Nine Characteristics of Superstar Principals.
Critical Functions of Principals. Evidence-‐Based Equity Strategies for Principals. Principals’ Responses to Special Education Legal Scenarios. Characteristics of Participants With and Without Special Education Background.
Correlation Matrix Between Sorts. Factor Significance and Membership. Demographic Information for Factor A and B. Factor A and B Item Rankings.
Factor A Lowest and Highest Ranked Statements. Rationale of Factor A Members for Highest Ranked Items. Rationale of Factor A Members for Lowest-‐Ranked Items. Factor A Greatest Help in Special Education.
Factor A Greatest Obstacle in Special Education. Factor A Special Education Principals on How Their Background Impacted Their Sorts. Factor B Lowest and Highest Statements. Rationale of Factor B Members for Highest Ranked Statements.
Rationale of Factor B Members for Lowest-‐Ranked Items .14 Factor B Greatest Help in Special Education. Factor B Greatest Obstacle in Special Education. Factor B Special Education Principals on How Their Background Impacted Their Sorts. Similar Low Statements for Factors A and B .124 xii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.
Component Plot in Rotated Space.1 Career Growth Model for Principal Leadership.141 xiii CHAPTER 1 SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL Introduction The principal of a school has a great effect on the education of all students within that school, for good or for ill. Research has shown that how principals approach their position, and its ultimate impact on students, depends on their leadership style. Some styles have been shown to be more beneficial for students than others. One particularly vulnerable subsection of student populations are special education students.
Indeed, they are so vulnerable that they are protected by laws specifically designed to safeguard their education. These laws promote collaboration, shared leadership, and inclusive planning – many of the same characteristics of the leadership styles which have been shown to have the most beneficial impact on outcomes for all student groups. This study seeks to discover the relationship between the knowledge and experience that principals have with special education and the tendency to possess these leadership styles. It is hypothesized that principals who have a special education background will have more developed progressive perceptions of their leadership styles and their impact on improved outcomes for their special education students.
This connection would be useful in assisting the development of principals’ special education skills and leadership. 1 Leadership Frameworks for Analyzing Leadership What is leadership? It is difficult to say. Leadership, like humor, is something that everyone can recognize and which can be expressed and shown in many different ways, but still is very difficult to precisely define (Rosch & Kusel, 2010). A review of research indicated no one clear definition of leadership, but rather many different ways of describing what makes leader effective.
A famous and effective way of examining leadership is through the use of Bolman and Deal’s four frames of leadership (2008). A frame is a worldview or lens through which to view a problem or situation. Looking at an identical problem through different frames can lead to differing solutions, and this analysis can be very valuable in attempting to solve intractable, institutional problems. The first frame posited by Bolman and Deal (2008) is the structural frame.
The structural frame is based around organizational hierarchy, efficiency and procedure. This frame posits that it is the structures of an organization that directly impacts what happens in the workplace, and that structure “needs to be designed with an eye towards desired ends, the nature of the environment, the talents of the workforce, and the available resources” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. The second frame is the human resource frame. The human resource frame is built around the mutually dependent needs of organizations and people – both need the other in order to thrive.
When organizations are built in such a way that people are fulfilled and find their work meaningful and satisfactory, then people will work hard and apply their talents to make the organization successful. The human 2 resource frame posits that organizations need to invest in employees to make them skilled and motivated in order to reap the benefits of that energized and talented workforce (Bolman & Deal, 2008). The political frame views organizations as divided into camps, each having different values, fighting for resources, and engaging in bargaining and negotiation in an effort to promote its own best interests. Even though everyone in an organization may have the same goals – in the case of a public school, to educate students – different members of the organization may have different beliefs in how to attain that goal, what root problems are, and what good changes are.