Blazing New Trails - Connexions

66 CRITICAL ISSUES IN SHARED LEADERSHIP
Data Collection
Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured ethnographic qualitative
interviews with faculty and administrators and were consistent with qualitative data collection
techniques (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Creswell, 2003). Because this study focused on
experiences and perceptions of people at the classroom, school and district level, as well as
school board member perceptions, focus groups were ideal for uncovering factors that
influenced opinions, behaviors, motivations, and organizational outcomes (Krueger & Casey,
2000). Additionally, the type and depth needed to explore superintendent influence on
learning in an organization could easily be revealed with this technique. Focus groups
promote self disclosure that is achieved when participants feel comfortable among peers.
Common experiences elicit comments that disclose crucial information in nonjudgmental
environments (Krueger & Casey, 2000).
District A participants included three principals, three teachers, one school board
member, and the superintendent. Protocols were used with all classroom teachers, principals,
school board member and the superintendent. Questions for the interview protocol were
derived from previous studies that have examined superintendent leadership (Sayre, 2007;
Petersen, Sayre & Kelly, 2009) in organizational and instructional leadership. Questions were
also reviewed by current and former school leaders for clarity and wording.
Interviews were conducted by the lead author. Each interview was tape recorded and
transcribed verbatim to allow for triangulation and a convergence of findings. Transcripts and
field notes were analyzed by both authors separately for themes and concepts. The data were
then collectively analyzed. Representative samples of interview questions included (a) “How
involved are school personnel in the decision-making processes of the school?” (b) “How do
you talk about student learning?” (c) “Where do ideas for change come from, and are these
ideas valued by the superintendent?” and (d) “What practices demonstrate leader expectations
for excellence and quality on the part of school personnel?”
Analysis
Perceptions of the superintendent and of focus group participants were gathered to
assist in the development of codes and themes for qualitative data analysis. By focusing on
teachers’ ways of thinking and their personal experiences in relation to the superintendent’s
influence (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003), data analysis focused on categorizing participants’
responses in ways of thinking about the superintendent and the organization in order to gain
further insight into how a superintendent influences learning at the organizational level. To
accomplish the qualitative data analysis, the focus group data were analyzed in three separate
stages.
First, the data were analyzed by creating coding categories focused on the ways
teachers and principals assessed their superintendent’s influence on learning at the
organizational level (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). The advantage of this type of data analysis was
the emergence of common meanings over broad phenomena, such as, superintendent
influence and capacity of an organization to create knowledge. Next, the coded categories
were submitted to analysis focusing on the common themes that generated cover terms
(Spradley, 1979). The cover terms specifically focused on narrowing the qualitative data to
examine primary areas of a superintendent’s leadership and organizational learning. Cover
terms such as vision and leadership practices, analyzing, storing-retrieving, use, receivingdisseminating
and seeking information created clear boundaries for coded categories to focus