There has been value identified in having ‘cohorts’ come through principal preparation programs together. As found in the US-based Indian Hills School System, central office leaders and principals had developed an academy to develop internal leadership which they felt was ‘stocked’ with candidates to be developed into school principals. Candidates started and finished the one year program together, with principals suggesting that they ‘never felt alone’ in their jobs as principal, a finding that is opposed to the common acknowledgement that being a principal is a ‘lonely’ position. These principals spoke of regular meetings with other principals, and of having peers to contact whenever it was needed (Bengston et al., 2013). These cohorts provide an efficient structure as well as producing camaraderie and a
professional network for education leaders (Hackmann & Wanat, 2007). It is
important to note, though, that not all preparation program designs are suitable in all contexts (Sparks, 2017).
Bengston et al. (2013) outlined the specific steps that aspiring leaders had to go through before becoming a principal in the Indian Hills School System in the United States. In sequence, the steps were:
1. Obtain employment as an assistant principal within the system. 2. Have a leadership behaviour form filled out by an active principal(s). 3. Fill out an extensive application for admission into the leadership program.
4. Complete the year-long leadership program led by the system superintendent and other district leaders.
5. Interview with two screening committees and the superintendent for a specific opening.
The Indian Hills School System also emphasised the use of mentoring programs, both formal and informal. The formal mentoring systems was described by the district superintendent (Bengston et al., 2013):
Academy mentors are assigned to our new principals for two years. We use veteran, actually retired, principals [as mentors]. Principal retirees are principals that were respected, were in great schools, know what leadership is, and know how to do the management oversight
responsibilities. They are also individuals who can really help the person develop [as principals]. (p. 155)
Militello et al. (2009) undertook research in the United States that explored the types of preparation courses and perceived helpfulness of those courses to Massachusetts principals. Of the 605 respondents, more than 70% indicated taking four types of courses: school finance/budget, learning/instructional leadership, teacher
supervision/evaluation, and school law, along with an internship process.
Respondents least cited school accountability as an area of focus. Additionally, of the 13 courses that respondents indicated taking, only field internship, teacher
supervision, and evaluation were found to be helpful by more than 50% of the respondents. Overall, the courses that appeared to be most helpful for a principal’s practice were learning/instructional leadership, teacher supervision and evaluation, and school law, in addition to the field internship.
Literature consistently recognises the need for formal programs of preparation for school leaders, and the provision of learning experiences that are both formal and informal in nature (Table 2. 1). A compilation of research recommends that leadership programs have the following components, and should:
1. be long term in focus rather than one off events;
2. be job embedded rather than detached from the work place;
3. be carefully planned with a coherent curriculum which links to any relevant state certification schemes;
4. be focused around student achievement;
5. emphasise reflective practice and a utilise a variety of instructional methods; 6. provide opportunities for peers to discuss and solve problems of practice; 7. provide a context for coaching and mentoring;
8. be clear in mission and purpose and link leadership to school improvement; 9. incorporate relevant information technology (Bezzina, 2012; Brittingham,
2009; Peterson, 2001 cited in Leithwood et al., 2004; Sparks & Hirsh, 2000).
Table 2. 1 Preparation Program Designs
Program Elements / Authors Peterson (2001), cited in Leithwood et al. (2004) Sparks & Hirsh (2000) Bezzina (2012) Brittingham (2009)
Provides ongoing learning and leadership development opportunities
Is job embedded
Emphasise reflective practice
Involves real-life problem solving
Provides access to a mentoring
relationship
Involves regular feedback and/or
goal-setting
Improves the candidate’s sense of
self efficacy
Prior classroom experience
Relevant curriculum
Program content delivered through
a variety of methods
Offers perspectives on a wide range
of approaches to leadership
Brittingham (2009) outlined some of the significant discoveries around operating a successful leadership succession program which included an aspiring leaders
program as part of a large US school district, including: Establishing a clear process for selecting candidates for the program; requiring candidates to have at least five or more years of successful classroom teaching; offering ‘Big Picture’ opportunities to candidates; ensuring regular feedback, goal setting and self-reflection take place; identifying the districts needs and ensuring the program addresses those needs; and, gaining commitments to the aspiring leaders program from the top on down.
Less formal learning experiences that emphasise the building of knowledge for practical problem-solving are also found within the literature. They incorporate participation with others in what can only be described as non-routine activities, and provide for authentic learning activities that facilitates ongoing professional learning.
While leadership preparation programs are important for formalised learning
experiences, Hall (2008) posits that leadership development should be every leader’s responsibility. He suggests that every administrative and supervisory job description should have leadership development as an essential job function, and the results of this should be included in annual performance appraisals. Other researchers such as McKinsey and Company (2010, p. 7) support the idea that leaders should be
effective developers of people, arguing “High performing principals focus more on instructional leadership and developing teachers... They believe their ability to coach others and support their development is the most important skill of a good leader”.
Huber (2008) suggests six phases of leadership development.
1. A continuous development phase for teachers: providing them with continuous training and development in school effectiveness, school improvement and school leadership.
2. An orientation phase: where teachers interested in school leadership reflect on the role of the principal in relation to their own abilities and expectations. 3. A preparation phase: where new principals prepare to take on a position
(before even applying for it).
4. An induction phase: to support transition into the role of principal.
5. A continuous professional development phase: to provide opportunities for established school leaders that meet their needs and the needs of their schools.
6. A reflective phase: where principals continue to grow through providing development for leadership opportunities within and across schools.
It is important that a board or education authority develop a profile of a leader so that all staff may understand what is expected. At the same time, opportunities need to be
provided at the school level for teachers to develop the requisite skills and competencies needed for the role of principal and vice principal (Gallo & Ryan, 2011).
It is clear from the literature in the area of leadership development, that both school systems and individual schools must be more committed to taking deliberate actions around leadership sustainability and succession practices, with particular emphasis placed around how teacher leadership development can increase the leadership pools available, as well as the quality of future school leadership (Dempster et al., 2011).