Blazing New Trails - Connexions
Blazing New Trails - Connexions
Blazing New Trails - Connexions
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Blazing</strong> a <strong>New</strong> Trail for the Educational Turnaround Leader 335<br />
building a leadership capability that engages senior politicians and managers in order to<br />
overcome inertia (Jas & Skelcher, 2005).<br />
Education Turnarounds<br />
While there are many educational initiatives utilizing the turnaround concept, there<br />
are only a few well-documented school district cases of turnaround schools in San Francisco,<br />
Chicago, Houston, and Prince George's County, Maryland (Kowal & Hassel, 2005). This is<br />
such a new venture that to date there are few cross-site analyses or published case studies that<br />
highlight successful school turnaround processes (Kowal & Hassel, 2005).<br />
Duke (2007) reported on the "school turnaround specialists" who are emerging from<br />
the pioneering program at the University of Virginia that adapts the business model of<br />
turnaround specialists to reverse the process of school decline. As mentioned previously,<br />
however, this predominant training modality for a turnaround specialist program and drastic<br />
school improvement did not support many state and district individual needs. In an effort to<br />
identify successful turnarounds, Brady (2007) described the interventions proposed by state<br />
and local policymakers as part of No Child Left Behind. He categorized and reviewed 17<br />
interventions that were attempted by states or school districts since 1989. Three interventions<br />
were examined: the Schools Under Registration Review process in <strong>New</strong> York State, the<br />
implementation of comprehensive school reform in Memphis, Tennessee, and the<br />
reconstitution of schools in Prince George's County, Maryland. Brady's conclusions were that<br />
no particular intervention strategy was successful. In other words, most interventions yielded<br />
positive results in less than half of the schools where they were implemented. However, in<br />
most cases, solid school-level leadership seemed to be critical to success and missing in most<br />
low performing schools. This concept about finding and developing the right school leader<br />
and developing critical leadership skills is also supported by other researchers (Bossidy, 2001;<br />
Buchanan, 2003; Joyce, 2004;). In fact, Hassel and Steiner (2003) found that 70% of<br />
successful turnarounds include changes in leadership.<br />
Murphy (2008) reported that Prince George's County, Maryland, hired turnaround<br />
specialists to lead failing schools, but they received no specialized training nor had special<br />
certification. These specialists were chosen based on state certification and notable experience<br />
(Neuman & Sheldon 2006). However, this criterion for selection was not enough according to<br />
Steiner (2009). School turnaround specialists need certain competencies, knowledge and<br />
skills. Murphy (2008) supported the notion of certain dimensions of leadership defining<br />
turnaround leaders, but a solid research base has not been established for competencies,<br />
knowledge and skills. Turnaround schools need special expertise and must be managed by<br />
educational leaders with the necessary training (Calkins et al., 2007). One organization that<br />
has achieved some success is the Darden/Curry Partnership for Leaders in Education (PLE)<br />
housed in the University of Virginia. The initiative sought to combine business and education<br />
concepts in order to improve schools. The goal for the initiative was to develop and deliver<br />
the training necessary to provide low performing schools with high-impact principals trained<br />
in the knowledge and skills needed to accelerate and sustain student achievement.<br />
In 2009, Mass Insight published a summary report that cited the limitations of state<br />
and district led school turnaround efforts (Calkins et al., 2007). States and districts had: (a)<br />
little political appetite/capacity to close schools; (b) few positive incentives for change with<br />
no negative consequences; (c) multiple improvement plans that become compliance<br />
documents rather than strategic action plans; (d) external improvement teams that did not help<br />
implement recommendations; (e) limited professional development and technical assistance;