ASPIRING LEADERS ’ PERSPECTIVES 1 Measuring Change as a Result of Program Pedagogy : An Exploration of Aspiring Leaders ' Perspectives

National attention on effective schools has focused on the issue of the quality of leadership preparation programs (Davis, Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson, 2005). The need for more and better-prepared principals (Hale & Moorman, 2003) raises the question of how to measure the impact of program preparation on the perspectives of aspiring leaders. While other research may rely on self-reports of perception, this qualitative study explores changes in leader identity and problem-framing through analysis of principalship program student problem-based narratives. In an earlier phase of this study, we developed continua to describe leader identity and problem-framing. Through this process we developed five leader identity categories. Three of these categories reflect leader-centric identities: leader-in-solitude, leader-dictated, and leaderdriven identity. Two of the categories represent participative-centric leader identity: collaborative leader and transformative leader identity. We also created a continuum to locate participant’s problem-framing as first-order change: student and family, teacher and classroom, administrator and campus, or second-order change: capacity building and culture frames. Comparison of pre-program and end-of-program data analysis support the majority of participants included in this study exhibited movement toward participativecentric leader identity and second order change problem-framing by the end of the twoyear principal preparation program. The full paper can be accessed at www.utprincipalship. org, under research. No part of this paper may be cited without written permission from the lead author. ASPIRING LEADERS’ PERSPECTIVES 2 Measuring Change as a Result of Program Pedagogy: An Exploration of Aspiring Leaders' Perspectives The discussion regarding the quality and effectiveness of campus leadership has sparked a far-reaching range of research and inquiry. While the centrality of leadership to impact school effectiveness has been documented (Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008) the complexity of the interplay of factors contributing to leadership influence continues to be explored (Hallinger, 2003; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008). Research indicates that effective campus leaders are adept at a wide range of skills including the ability to develop positive relationships with an array of stakeholders, foster professional learning communities, inspire the commitment to a shared vision of educational equity and excellence, guide instructional improvement and reform efforts, and implement structures and systems to support these efforts (Engels, Hotton, Devos, Bouckenooghe, & Aelterman, 2008; Harris, 2007; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006). Questions regarding the preparation of aspiring leaders in light of this emerging body of knowledge thus arise. Given the extraordinary challenges that confront contemporary campus leaders, equipping aspiring leaders with the skills and content knowledge required to meet these challenges is a daunting task. Recent research of innovative preparation programs suggests a range of promising pedagogical practices geared to address this challenge (Brown, 2004b; DarlingHammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, & Orr, 2007). Evaluating and measuring the impact of the curriculum and instruction of these program components is vital in the task to contribute to the body of knowledge examining preparation program effectiveness. The purpose of this paper is to describe the second stage of a multi-phase research project designed to determine the impact, if any, of a purposefully designed preparation program on the perceptions of program participants. We frame this research through the theoretical and practical underpinnings of effective leadership preparation programs, leadership identity and problem-framing as explored in the literature. Effective Program Components and Pedagogy The components and pedagogical approaches of effective leadership preparation stem from the literature analyzing effective leadership practices (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr. & Cohen, 2007). The literature suggests that campus leaders who exemplify and embrace notions of social justice, bridge theory and practice through critical reflection, and embody qualities of servant leadership are more likely to guide a campus to substantive change (Brooks, Jean-Marie, Normore, & Hodgins, 2007; Gooden, 2002; Jacobson, Brooks, Giles, Johnson, & Ylimaki, 2007; Theoharis, 2009). Additionally, research indicates that leaders who implement improvement strategies geared toward the cultivation of a learning organization and professional community are more likely to realize campus-wide reform and improvement efforts (Leithwood & Duke, 1998; Leithwood, et al., 2008; Leithwood, Steinbach, & Jantzi, 2002). Research indicates that leaders who act from beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions anchored in values of social justice and who initiate capacity building strategies that emphasize relationships, collaboration, and shared decision-making are more effective in achieving transformational reforms that lead to more equitable and just school conditions for all students (Brown, 2004a; Jacobson, et al., 2007; Marks & Printy, 2003; Theoharis, 2008). ASPIRING LEADERS’ PERSPECTIVES 3 Innovative educational leadership preparation programs are revamping course content and instructional delivery to account for these findings (Brown, 2004b; DarlingHammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr. M. T., et al., 2007; Orr, 2006a). Taking into account theories relative to adult learning (Brown, 2004b; Orr, 2006a) educational administration scholars and professors are revamping program designs to include such elements as the cohort model, problem-based learning, internships, rigorous recruitment and selection, and critical reflection and discourse (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr, et al., 2007; Orr, 2006a). Exemplary programs embrace adult learning styles by emphasizing self-directed, collaborative, and authentic learning experiences which foster the development of personal and professional beliefs and attitudes as well as promote flexibility in problem-solving. These efforts are geared toward cultivating the aspiring administrators’ leadership identity and problem-framing. The conceptual notion that beliefs mediate action and are a critical element of identity (Bandura, 2001; Brown, 2004a) suggests that the development of leadership identity is vital to fostering campus leaders who are prepared to meet the complexities of the school setting. Bandura (2001) notes, “People are not only agents of action. They are also self-examiners of their own functioning,” (p. 165). Beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions are key elements to agency and identity which can be influenced through critical self-reflection and interaction (Bandura, 2001). Contemporary research suggests that campus leaders who are most effective at critically addressing educational inequities exhibit commonalities in terms of leadership identity (Brown, 2004a; Gooden, 2002; Theoharis, 2009). Theoharis (2008) notes that leaders committed to social justice share a common set of “beliefs” and “dispositions” which are “central to [the] principal’s work and identities as school leaders,” (p. 19). Moreover, Theoharis indicates that these principals maintain a “strong belief in empowering and trusting teachers,” (p. 19). The literature informing our current research study builds on the notion that beliefs, dispositions, and attitudes are key to the development of leadership identity. Learning experiences which challenge pre-service leaders to examine their assumptions through reflective practices and critical discourse are a key element of current innovative programs which strive to foster this critical consciousness (Brown, 2005; Orr, 2006b). As Brown (2005) advocates for a transformative pedagogy: Pre-service leaders can then be challenged to explore these constructs from numerous, diverse, changing perspectives. Personal biases and the preconceived notions they hold about people who are different from themselves by race, ethnicity, culture, gender, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, and physical and mental abilities can be identified and discussed. As such, these courses require an active, sustained engagement in the subject matter and an openness of mind and heart. Aspiring leaders need time and structure to think, reflect, assess, decide, and possibly move from their current perspectives or status to another level of commitment and action, (p. 159) Through the experiences of collaborative critical inquiry, self-reflection, and authentic learning experiences, emerging school leaders expand their worldview and cultivate more sophisticated dispositions and identities (Brown, 2005; Byrne-Jimenez & Orr, 2007). Beliefs and attitudes regarding authority and power resonate in the literature relative to effective school leadership (Brooks, et al., 2007; Brown, 2005; DarlingASPIRING LEADERS’ PERSPECTIVES 4 Hammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, & Orr, 2007; Leithwood & Mascall, 2008) and are inherent in the concept of leadership identity (Theoharis, 2008). For effective leaders, the locus of control is distributed (Brooks, et al., 2007). As noted by Theoharis (2008), principals committed to the tenets of social justice exhibit identities that foster school environments that are “distinct from schools where the principal is autocratic and imposes decisions in a top-down manner,” (p. 19). Cultivating a collaborative and transformative leadership identity through authentic learning experiences and reflective discourse is a key component of exemplary leadership preparation programs (Brown, 2005; Cowie & Crawford, 2007; Orr, 2006b). Research findings examining the development of graduate students’ leadership identity further informs our current research by providing a conceptual framework. Komives and her colleagues argue that “Understanding the process of creating a leadership i