View/Open - Drake University

109
In each of the three districts the curriculum director shared imponant responsibilities
wltn me supel'intendent. each curriculum director had his or her own distinctive role as
implelnelltation advocate. Bas et a1 (1987), Suggest that transformational leadership
looh "diffcl-enr" dependent upon the adopted style of the leader. This was especially true for
teaching staff in that the curriculum director was generally viewed as "one of the staff3 and
t that way themselves. Each had come up through the teaching ranks alithin their district
arid had gained credibility as a teacher firs
PI-il~ripnls. Building principals were counted on to maintain the day-to-day operations
the school as ~vell as support the implementation process. They were viewed as the
instructional leaders of their buildings even in light of the fact that they often had less to do
directly with the actual implementation process than did top administrators and teachers.
Utilizing shared leadership, urherein administrators regardless of their formal leadership roles
use ~nultiple strategies to alter school culture in improvement efforts (Brown, 1993). it was the
principal \\.IIo had to keep in perspecti~~e the over-all workload of teachers, as particularly in
111~s~ \mall districts. mo~t teachers already had multiple responsibilities. Aside from tning to
help hal;lnce on-roing as well as new assi~nments for teachers. principals had their~~sual
nlultiple n,lcs in ..keeping school... They functioned as buildinp disciplinarian- athletic
dircclnr, ;lnd even rlthletic coach. the sorts of responsibilities. U'hich were commonl!:
ossocinted hv 3s escential aspects of a good school. In principds Irere
imponant s\rnlholic leader.;. supponing school improyenlent through and
pn,-,icipnting in a vnriety
silnple compliance with thc state In\!'.
genernll\l viewed as essential to nlove a school he!'ond
,