Blazing New Trails - Connexions

Distinguishing Practices for Administrators 209
tours and excursions, but many departments directly collaborated with the lab settings to
provide services such as music and physical instruction for lab children. Funding lab settings
was traditionally a concern that required university administrators to capitalize on all
available inside and outside resources.
DISCUSSION
Triangulation of the interview and document data confirmed the distinguishing
organizational and instructional practices implemented by the lab settings that enhanced
students’ academic success. As expressed by one education administrator, the mission was
focused and practices were aligned to the longstanding mission, “To provide an environment
where children are in a learner-centered environment and, at the same time, provide model
classrooms to better prepare students.” Constructivist-based instruction was the instructional
focus in the lab settings where children actively engaged in experiences designed to develop
the whole child. Curriculum was developed to support state expectations and assessed using
authentic measures. Findings revealed that continued and sustained learning became a
common practice for faculty and staff. Lab setting administrators led alongside experts in the
Education Department to create a collaborative, coherent program for lab children and
university teacher candidates. Thus, this collaborative spirit encouraged the family-like
atmosphere that was displayed in the lab settings. Echoed through the voices of many,
administrators reacted quickly to market needs and desires, and this practice helped to
maintain the lab settings over time. Although funding always was a concern, capitalizing on
resources such as people, tuition, outside funding sources, and inside resources supported and
expanded lab offerings.
The study is significant to practicing administrators in educational settings today. With
accountability standards looming, administrators are seeking avenues to encourage students’
academic success. Researching successful institutions highlights distinguishing practices that
provide such avenues. Furthermore, the preparation of future school leaders that have the
knowledge to lead successful schools is imperative. Such stories provide hope and direction in
how to create and bolster faculty and staff with the capacity to guide students to excellence
through implementing proven organizational and instructional practices. Good, proven
practices will map the way to good teaching and learning where attaining accountability
standards is common place.
REFERENCES
ACES (CDE, 2008). Access, culture and climate, expectations, and strategies (ACES): A winning hand for
student success. Retrieved from www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/t1/title1conf.asp
Chrispeels, J. H. (2002). The California center for effective schools: The Oxnard school district partnership. Phi
Delta Kappan, 83(5), 382–388.
Craddock, B. H. (1973). The golden years: The first half century of Stephen F. Austin State University. Waco,
TX: Texan Press.
Cuban, L., Lichtenstein, G., Evenchik, A., Tombari, M., & Pozzoboni, K. (2010). Against the odds: Insights
from one district’s small school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Davis, C. B. (2007). Initial teacher certification in a virtual environment: Student dispositions and program
implications. Dissertation Abstracts International. (UMI No. 3274972)
Dewey, J. (1935). New York, Experience and education. NY: Kappa Delta Pi.
Effective Schools. (2008). Why effective schools? Retrieved from http://www.effectiveschools.com/
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., Airasian, P. (2008). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications
9 th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.