I n

n o v a t i o

n

s

i n

E d u c a t i

o

n

Innovative Pathways 

to School Leadership

u . s . d e pa r t m e n t o f e d u c at i o n

o f f i c e o f i n n o vat i o n a n d i m p r o v e m e n t

SM

I n

n o v a t i o

n

s

i n

E d u c a t i

o

n

u . s . d e pa r t m e n t o f e d u c at i o n

o f f i c e o f i n n o vat i o n a n d i m p r o v e m e n t

Innovative Pathways 

to School Leadership

SM

SM
This report was produced under U.S. Department of Education Contract No. ED-01-CO-0012, Task Order D010, with WestEd. 

Sharon Horn served as the contracting officer’s representative. 

U.S. Department of Education

Rod Paige

Secretary

Office of Innovation and Improvement

Nina S. Rees

Assistant Deputy Secretary

Michael J. Petrilli

Associate Assistant Deputy Secretary 

Patricia Gore

Director, Teacher Quality Programs

December 2004

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint 

this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement, Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership, Washington, D.C., 2004.

To order copies of this report,

write to: ED Pubs, Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398;

or fax your request to: (301) 470-1244;

or e-mail your request to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov;

or order online at: http://www.edpubs.org/;

or call in your request toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet available in your area, call 

1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter 

(TTY) should call 1-877-576-7734. 

This report is also available on the Department’s Web site at: http://www.ed.gov/admins/recruit/prepare/alternative/index.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large print, or computer diskette. For more 

information, please contact the Department’s Alternate Format Center at (202) 260-9895 or (202) 205-8113.
iii

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Foreword v

Introduction 1

Part I: Elements of Innovative 

Pathways to School Leadership 9

Part II: Program Profiles 31

Boston Principal Fellowship Program,

Boston, Mass. (33) 

First Ring Leadership Academy,

Cleveland, Ohio (37)

LAUNCH (Leadership Academy and 

 Urban Network for Chicago), Chicago, Ill. (41)

 NJ EXCEL (New Jersey Expedited Certification 

for Educational Leadership),

Monroe Township, N.J. (45)

New Leaders for New Schools, 

New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C., 

 Memphis, and San Francisco Bay Area (49)

Principals Excellence Program, 

Pike County, Ky. (53) 

Acknowledgments 56

 Appendix A: Research Methodology 57

Appendix B: Resources 59 Notes 61

Contents
iv

L I S T O F F I G U R E S

Figure 1. Characteristics of Profiled Programs 4

Figure 2. Study Scope and Guiding Questions 7

 Figure 3. Boston Principal Fellowship’s Competencies of Effective Principals 11

 Figure 4. New Leaders for New Schools Candidate Selection Criteria 14

 Figure 5. Interview Guide to Identify First Ring Superintendents’ Priorities 17

 Figure 6. Boston Public Schools’ Essentials of Whole School Improvement 19

Figure 7. NJ EXCEL e-Mentor Responsibilities 21

Figure 8. LAUNCH Mentor Contract 23

Figure 9. Principals Excellence Program Self-Assessment 26

 Figure 10. NJ EXCEL Program Standards and Performance Rubric 28
v

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Foreword 

I am pleased to introduce the sixth publication in the Innovations in Education series: Innovative Pathways to 

School Leadership. This series, published by my Department’s Office of Innovation and Improvement, has already 

identified concrete, real-world examples of innovations in five important areas: public school choice, supplemental 

educational services, charter schools, magnet schools, and alternate routes to teacher certification. 

As we approach the third anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act, early evidence shows that America’s schools 

are meeting the challenge of moving our students toward proficiency in reading and math. The people most responsible for this progress are the leaders of our schools, who play a critical and important role in developing a vision 

for a high-quality education for every student and in implementing and supporting a learning environment that is 

developed and shared by key stakeholders. No Child Left Behind puts enormous pressure on these leaders to increase 

student achievement and close the achievement gap. We want to ensure that they are provided with the tools and 

training they need to succeed in this endeavor. This guide is dedicated to them.

As readers may know, my father was a school principal, and my mother a librarian. They taught me the importance 

of education—to individuals, and to communities. I have been proud to honor their examples by serving as superintendent of the seventh-largest school system in the nation, and now as secretary of education. But I never forget 

that the most challenging—and rewarding—leadership roles in education are on the front lines in the schools.

We know from decades of research and common sense that a strong school leader is an indispensable ingredient for 

school improvement. Yet, for too long, we have been satisfied with preparation programs that often lack rigorous 

standards and a coherent, systemic approach for recruiting, preparing, and supporting school CEOs. However, that 

is changing. A consensus is forming across political and ideological perspectives that our nation needs to tap new 

sources for school leaders, as well as support the talented educators already in the system. 

We are still in the early days of this movement to create innovative, effective pathways to school leadership. In fact, 

while many states have made great progress in tearing down the barriers that keep talented individuals out of the 

teaching profession, similar barriers remain largely in place for potential school leaders. Nevertheless, even under 

current constraints, entrepreneurial school districts, states, higher education institutions, and others have developed 

promising programs that draw new talent into leadership roles and provide job-embedded preparation and support 

to ensure the success of these leaders in today’s schools. 

This guide highlights six of these programs. They are a diverse set—rural and urban, focused on traditional public schools and on charter schools, and so forth. But they all have a few things in common: an unrelenting 
vi

commitment to program rigor and quality; a clear vision of strong school leadership; a cohort structure that encourages candidates to support one another throughout their careers; and a culture of continuous improvement. 

Most of these programs are relatively young. While they have not been in place long enough to have extensive 

data proving their effectiveness, they do appear to have some promise for success. It is our hope that these 

pioneering programs will provide ideas and strategies that help to strengthen school leadership preparation and 

professional development efforts.

Those of us at the federal level will continue to keep an eye on these promising programs and root for their 

success and replication. We will also continue to encourage and promote the efforts of those who are in 

schools and on the front lines, doing the difficult but exhilarating work of fulfilling the promise to leave no 

child behind.

Rod Paige

U.S. Secretary of Education

December 2004
1

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Unequivocal urgency shapes our national discussion of public education. Students strive to meet new 

academic standards while their teachers work to improve the quality and equity of education opportunities. Yet achievement gaps persist, particularly in urban and rural schools. The demand for effective 

leadership is clear. We need school leaders who visualize successful student learning, understand the 

work necessary to achieve it, and have the skills to engage with others to make it happen. How can we 

prepare more individuals to meet these challenges?

This guide highlights six diverse examples of the hard work underway across the country to answer that 

question. These programs are offering innovative pathways to school leadership, and people like Kyle 

Dodson are signing on. 

Introduction

earn a Massachusetts Administrative Credential without needing to return to school. And at the other end 

of this one-year program, he would be prepared to take 

the helm of an urban school—a prospect that until that 

point had seemed out of reach.

Dodson says BPF spoke to him because he wanted to 

make a difference in the lives of urban youths, especially African-American students “who need some hope 

in their lives.” Kyle’s philosophy is, “Deal with life as it 

is and work to change it to what you want it to be.” 

Being a principal would give him an opportunity to do 

that work. So, with his family’s support, he applied to 

BPF and was accepted in June 2003 as a fellow in the 

program’s first cohort.

Dodson was just the kind of candidate a nontraditional 

program hopes to attract. In addition to a graduate degree in management, Dodson brought a background of 

Kyle Dodson hadn’t planned to become a public school 

principal at this stage of his life. Although part of him 

was drawn to the idea of working with urban youths, 

his life had taken him in a different direction. He had 

earned a bachelor’s degree in history from Harvard 

University and an MBA from Columbia University. In 

January 2003, he was working as the director of multicultural student affairs at Saint Michael’s College in 

Vermont. The thought of enrolling once again at a university just to “jump the hurdles” of getting an administrative credential held no appeal.

But when a friend told Dodson about an expedited 

principal preparation program called Boston Principal 

Fellowship Program (BPF) that focuses on developing 

effective leaders for Boston’s most challenging schools, 

something resonated. Taking this step would mean 

moving his family, but, on the other hand, he could 
2

successful leadership experience; a deep understanding of the most pressing issues facing urban education; 

strong skills in building relationships with students and 

adults; an ability to analyze and interpret data; and a 

passion for the work.

In May 2004, Dodson was hired as the principal of a 

new school in Boston. Looking ahead to the challenge, 

he said: “I believe that all young people want to and 

can learn at high levels. I also believe that there are 

some very basic principles and practices that will best 

provide a young person with an opportunity to be successful. One of the primary tasks seems to be creating 

an environment where the dizzying array of societal 

and personal challenges that each student brings to 

the building can be stabilized and brought under control long enough to develop the skills and competencies that will give that young person options.”

It’s too soon to know the full impact Dodson will have 

at his school, but he brings with him the skills, the leadership qualities, and the understanding of students’ 

context that promise success. These include the determination and ability to create a culture of high-quality 

performance that energizes, motivates, and supports 

teachers who, in turn, can help their students hurdle 

the achievement gap.

Dodson embodies the promise of new pathways to 

school leadership such as BPF and the five other unique 

programs introduced in this guide. All are based on the 

premise that by inventing new pathways to school 

leadership, attracting experienced and successful leaders, focusing on the essential elements of school improvement, and clearing unnecessary hurdles along 

the path, they can attract high-quality professionals to 

lead schools where they are most needed. Most of these 

programs are relatively young in their development. 

They are testing and learning new ways to do things 

that are creative responses to the urgent need in their 

particular settings for high-quality principals. In doing 

so, they demonstrate innovative strategies that can be 

adapted to other settings.

Preparing the Next Generation of 

School Leaders

Great schools have great leaders. That’s the compelling 

if obvious message from two decades of research on 

effective schools.1 Yet finding effective leaders is not 

easy. As with many things, when it comes to principals, 

the central issue isn’t quantity, it’s quality. While most 

states have plenty of people who are credentialed as 

school administrators—often more than they need—

many school districts report having too few highly 

qualified candidates to fill their vacant positions. The 

shortage of top-notch principals is worrisome in the 

face of the escalating demands of No Child Left Behind.

The job of a principal, always challenging and complex, 

is becoming even more so. 

New expectations for principals run well beyond traditional requirements of managing school operations.

Recent and ongoing research2 points to some key actions that effective school leaders consistently demonstrate. Notably, successful principals3 establish an intense focus on learning and communicate its centrality 

in everything they do. Their high expectations combine 

with a sense of urgency to focus attention on learning for all subgroups of students, including the economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic minorities, 

students with disabilities, and English language learners. No excuses override their commitment to student 

learning. Effective school leaders understand that they 

are in a position to mobilize others by: 
3

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

›› articulating and modeling core values that support 

a challenging and successful education for all; 

›› establishing a persistent, public focus on learning at the school, classroom, community, and 

individual levels; 

›› working with others to set ambitious standards 

for learning; and 

›› demonstrating and inspiring shared responsibility 

and accountability for student outcomes. 

Current research4

 also suggests that effective school 

leaders set a tone of mutual trust and respect among 

teachers, students, parents, and community members. 

They take deliberate action to understand their school 

communities and form partnerships that focus on 

learning both inside and outside of the school. 

These leaders garner the full range of resources available 

for their schools, and they develop alliances to proactively seek support for student and professional learning goals. Moreover, they deeply understand effective 

instructional strategies and help teachers learn them. 

Indeed, they create structures and time for teachers 

to collaborate, examine student work together, identify instructional improvement strategies, and learn 

from one another. They frequently visit classrooms and 

coach classroom teachers in how to analyze student 

achievement data so that they can make more effective 

instructional decisions. 

These leaders act strategically to: define and guide 

needed improvements in teaching and learning; identify teacher-leaders who have the potential to guide 

and support others’ learning; create opportunities to 

share responsibility and leadership for learning; make 

workplace improvements that contribute to improving instruction and learning; build organizational 

coherence; and engender confidence among students 

and teachers that, individually and together, they will 

successfully achieve their learning goals and sustain 

continuous improvement over time. 

Traditional education administration programs and certification procedures are producing insufficient numbers 

of these leaders. State laws and regulations generally 

set forth certification requirements for public school 

principals,5

 which typically require a set number of years 

of teaching experience and the completion of university coursework in education administration. Customarily, students self-enroll into traditional preparation 

programs, rather than being recruited, and selection 

procedures in these programs rarely include a screening 

to determine candidates’ leadership experience and potential along with other preferred qualities and dispositions (e.g., belief that all students can learn, ability to 

handle pressure, commitment to excellent teaching). 

In most cases, once accepted, individual candidates 

progress through a curriculum that includes a series of 

discrete courses that are not connected to the reality of 

a school leader’s actual work. Often such coursework 

presents the complexity of what principals do as a set of 

independent components, leaving candidates to put the 

pieces together on their own with little practical school 

administrative experience or context. Moreover, traditional preparation programs are unlikely to customize 

or personalize coursework to prepare potential principals to effectively lead schools with the particular characteristics of those in which they will work (e.g., highpoverty, low-achieving urban schools; schools with a 

majority of English learners; isolated rural schools). 

The pressing need for a greater number of principals 

capable of meeting higher expectations has generated 
4

FIGURE 1. Characteristics of Profiled Programs

Program/Location/

Program Initiated Admission Requirements No. of Applicants No. of Participants Participant Demographics

BOSTON PRINCIPAL 

FELLOWSHIP

Boston, Mass.

2003 

Bachelor’s degree; three years 

experience in teaching, youth 

development, or management; 

pass state licensure exam

(2004) 65 (2004) 10

(2005) 11

2004 Gender: 60% female

2004 Ethnicity: 64% White

26% Afr. Am.

5% Asian Am.

5% Hispanic

2005 Gender: 70% female

2005 Ethnicity: 70% Afr. Am.

20% Hispanic

10% White 

FIRST RING LEADERSHIP 

ACADEMY

Cleveland, Ohio

2003

First Ring superintendents 

nominate participants with 

teaching credentials who are 

employed in First Ring Schools 

and have demonstrated leadership 

potential

1–3 per district (2004) 26

(2003) 26

2004 Gender: 62% female

2004 Ethnicity: 70% White

30% Afr. Am. 

LAUNCH (Leadership Academy 

and Urban Network for Chicago)

Chicago, Ill.

1998

Master’s degree; Illinois Type 

75 Administrative Credential; 

six years teaching experience; 

previous leadership

(2004) 175 (2004) 21 2003 Gender: 76% female

2003 Ethnicity: 44% Afr. Am.

28% Hispanic

28% White

NJ EXCEL (New Jersey 

Expedited Certification for 

Educational Leadership)

Monroe Township, N.J.

2003

Master’s degree; five years 

teaching experience; requirements 

specific to four different models

(2005) 145 (2005) 100

(2004) 109

(2003) 66

2004 Gender: 76% female

2004 Ethnicity: 83% White

8% Afr. Am.

8% Hispanic

1% Asian Am.

NEW LEADERS FOR 

NEW SCHOOLS

New York, N.Y., Chicago, Ill., 

Washington, D.C., 

Memphis, Tenn., and San 

Francisco Bay Area, Calif.

2000

Bachelor’s degree; five years 

professional experience; 

two years K–12 teaching 

experience; demonstrated 

leadership

(2005) 1,100 (2005) 90

(2004) 56

(2003) 52

(2002) 31

(2001) 13

2004 Gender: 60% female

2004 Ethnicity: 60% Afr. Am.

30% White

7% Hispanic

3% Asian Am.

PRINCIPALS EXCELLENCE 

PROGRAM 

Pike County Schools

Pikeville, Ky.

2002

Holds or is eligible to hold 

principal certification 

(2004) 25

(2003) 21

(2004) 15

(2003) 15

2004 Gender: 33% female

2004 Ethnicity: 100% White
5

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Cost Per Participant Percent Placed Following Program

$60,000 fully paid 

residency and 

coursework

$4,000 optional 

expense to fellow for 

UMASS credits/

degrees

2004: 60% as Principals

30% as Asst. Principals

10% Other Administrators

$21,000 for coursework 

and site-based practice

$4,000 optional 

expense for CSU units

2004: 25% as Principals and 

Asst. Principals

$65,000 fully paid 

internship and 

coursework

2004: 42% as Principals

34% as Asst. Principals

24% as Central and 

Area Administrators

Tuition-based

Model 1 $6,500 

Model 2 $7,500 

Model 3 $9,500 

Model 4 $3,000

2003 (January cohort):

 51% as Principals, Asst. Principals

2003 (July cohort):

 35% as Principals, Asst. Principals

$65,000 fully paid 

coursework and 

yearlong full-time 

residency (within the 

LEA salary schedule)

2004: 60% as Principals

 35% as Asst. Principals

$12,000 fully paid 

coursework, residency, 

instructional materials, 

substitute costs

2004: 73% as Principals, Asst. 

Principals, Deans 

promising reforms in some traditional administrator 

preparation programs, such as cohorts of candidates 

who train together, field-based experiences, and more 

practical application of coursework. These reforms are 

hopeful and well-intentioned, but insufficient. The ur-

gent and compelling need for large numbers of effec

-

tive school leaders requires more. It calls for accelerated 

and intensely focused preparation programs that stra

-

tegically recruit and rigorously screen potential candi

-

dates, then immerse them in authentic coursework and 

integrated field experiences that prime candidates for 

success in challenging and demanding school settings.

Bold New Approaches

This guide looks at six pioneering programs that recruit 

and prepare principals in inventive ways. Building on 

their states’ modifications to leadership credentialing 

requirements

6

—and the ability of state-approved prep-

aration programs to apply for waivers from existing 

certification requirements—these innovative and en

-

trepreneurial programs are developing new recruiting 

strategies to attract potential leaders from beyond the 

traditional pipeline of experienced teachers who selfselect into the profession through university-based 

coursework. One way they are streamlining the prepa

-

ration process is by accepting candidates who meet 

highly selective criteria, including successful leadership 

experience along with effective skills in communica

-

tion, interpersonal relationship-building, data analysis 

and interpretation, strategic thinking, and problem 

solving. These programs concentrate learning experi

-

ences on the knowledge and skills needed to succeed as 

a principal in challenging circumstances. They provide 

intensive supports such as mentoring and coaching 

by experienced successful principals. Moreover, they 
6

emphasize the principal’s role as a catalyst for change 

and prepare principals to hold themselves accountable 

for student achievement results.

All of these programs have the same aim: generating 

highly qualified principals. But each does it in a way that 

reflects its unique roots and context: an urban school 

district’s need for well-prepared leaders who can carry 

out its school reform agenda; a rural district building an 

internal leadership pipeline; a consortium of “first ring” 

urban-suburban school districts developing a shared pool 

of highly qualified principal candidates; a state school 

administrators association determined to create an expedited route to the principalship; a large urban school 

district’s administrators’ union committed to recruiting, 

preparing, and supporting fledgling principals; and a national nonprofit organization focused on developing a 

new generation of highly skilled urban principals.

The six programs featured in this guide offer promising practices for others who aim to develop innovative 

solutions to our schools’ urgent demand for greater 

numbers of effective school leaders, particularly in 

high-need urban and rural schools. While each program is unique, they collectively reflect our emerging 

understanding of what it takes to be an effective school 

leader and of what it takes to develop that leader.7

The innovative programs profiled in this guide have 

attracted a range of experienced and talented leaders, including many who otherwise would not have 

considered becoming school principals because of the 

barriers—real or imagined—they encountered. These 

programs appeal to individuals who want to lead challenging schools in specific urban or rural settings and 

those who want a deeply practical, “real-life” preparation experience. They illustrate commitment, ingenuity, 

and a variety of practices from which other programs 

may learn and which can be adapted to other settings 

and school leadership contexts.

Case Study Sites and Methodology

The six programs featured in this guide are: Boston 

Principal Fellowship Program, Boston, Mass.; First Ring 

Leadership Academy, Cleveland, Ohio; LAUNCH (Leadership Academy and Urban Network for Chicago), Chicago, Ill.; NJ EXCEL (New Jersey Expedited Certification for 

Educational Leadership), Monroe Township, N.J.; New 

Leaders for New Schools, New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Memphis, and San Francisco Bay Area; and 

Principals Excellence Program, Pike County, Ky. Basic 

statistics about these sites appear in figure 1. For a 

narrative summary of each site’s context and program 

description, see Part II of this guide.

These sites were selected from a larger pool of possible 

programs through the benchmarking methodology 

that underlies this study. Adapted from the four-phase 

benchmarking process used by the American Productivity and Quality Center, as well as general case study 

methodology, the study proceeded through several 

phases (described more fully in appendix A). 

A study scope or conceptual framework was developed 

at the beginning of the project to guide site selection 

and analysis. Developed from an examination of relevant research literature, the framework was reviewed 

and refined by a panel of experts. Figure 2 outlines the 

final study scope and guiding questions.

Initially, 60 potential sites were identified using online search descriptors such as “alternative leadership preparation,” “alternative principal certification,” 
7

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

FIGURE 2. Study Scope and Guiding Questions

1. The program’s vision of high-quality school 

leadership and what it takes for school leaders to 

be ready to succeed.

›› What is your vision of high-quality school 

leadership? 

›› What are the mission and goals of the program?

›› What are the differences between your program 

and other school leadership preparation 

programs?

2. The innovative and entrepreneurial strategies the 

program employs to identify and recruit potential 

school leaders.

›› What kinds of participants is the program 

designed to attract?

›› Where do you market the program? 

›› What criteria do you use to identify and select 

participants? 

3. The program’s design and participants’ practical 

learning experiences. 

›› What are the components of the program?

›› How do program participants interact with 

mentors, experts, coaches, and models?

›› What follow-through experiences and support 

does the program offer program participants 

during their induction phase of development?

4. The evaluative strategies the program uses to 

determine its effectiveness in preparing highquality school leaders.

›› What performance standards does the program 

use to evaluate its effectiveness in preparing highquality school leaders?

›› How are school performance and student 

achievement data used to evaluate the program’s 

effectiveness?

›› How are data used to revise and refine the 

program?

›› Are any external evaluation or research studies of 

this program available?

5. The program’s long-term sustainability.

›› How is the program financially and 

organizationally sponsored?

›› What are the prospects for long-term viability of 

the program?

›› How is the program building organizational and 

financial sustainability for the future?

›› How can your financial, structural, and 

organizational procedures serve as models for 

school leadership programs with similar goals?
8

”alternative administrative certification,” “expedited 

certification,” and “accelerated certification.” A screening process honed the list to 18 sites. These secondround sites were selected based on four criteria: 

(1) candidates are recruited into the program based 

on demonstrated leadership experience; (2) the program offers an accelerated route to certification; 

(3) the program is currently accepting candidates; and 

(4) it has evidence of promising practices in the 24 areas of the study scope, such as screening candidates 

using stated criteria, having tailored, field-based programming, and providing strong mentor support. The 

18 potential sites were then screened using a weighted 

criteria matrix based on the study scope. The final six 

sites scored between 24 and 20 on a scale of 24 possible points and were ranked as the top six. In addition, 

they represented a range of geographic locations and 

types of programs. 

Data collection took place through: two-day on-site 

visits; interviews with program administrators, faculty, 

current candidates, and graduates; and review of documentation. This guide is synthesized from a more comprehensive research report that includes case descriptions and cross-site analysis of key findings. 

This descriptive research process suggests promising 

practices—ways to do things that others have found 

helpful, or lessons they have learned about what not to 

do—and practical “how-to” guidance. The recommendations in this guide are based on a qualitative analysis 

of data from each site and do not represent experimental research or quantitative analysis that can yield valid 

causal claims about what works. Therefore, readers are 

advised to judge the merits of these suggestions according to their understanding of the reasoning behind 

them and their fit with local circumstances.
9

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

The six innovative programs in this study evolved in response to school districts’ frustration in finding 

and keeping adequate numbers of well-prepared school principals who are willing and able to lead challenging schools to high performance. In each case, the founders of these “grow-your-own” programs 

determined that existing ways of attracting and preparing principals for these jobs were falling short of 

what was needed in their particular context.

Part I: Elements of 

Innovative Pathways 

to School Leadership

These pioneering programs seek to recruit successful 

and experienced leaders from both within and without 

public education and prepare them to be ready to succeed as leaders in challenging public school settings. 

To do so, each program has started with a clear vision 

of the kinds of leaders needed to meet the needs of its 

constituent districts and regions. In addition, each has 

developed rigorous recruiting and candidate selection 

criteria, a meaningful and relevant program of coursework and fieldwork, and processes for building and sustaining the program over time.

Guiding Vision of Powerful School Leadership

Driving the development of each program was a compelling belief in the importance of highly committed 

and high-performing school leaders—individuals who 

were prepared to successfully mobilize the necessary 

knowledge, skills, resources, and energy to challenge 

and overcome institutionalized barriers to student 

achievement and to generate conditions in which all 

students achieve successful outcomes. Each of the six 

programs began with a clear and highly focused vision 

of the kinds of leaders needed within its specific context, and each continues to relentlessly pursue that vision through its program structure and design. 

The vision of Kentucky’s Principals Excellence Program 

(PEP), which serves rural districts, exemplifies the deliberation that characterizes each program: “The Principals 

Excellence Program will transform the principalship in 

underserved rural school districts from school management to visionary instructional leadership that assures 

high-quality learning for all rural students.” That vision 

permeates all facets of PEP’s program and is the basis 

for decisions about program design and refinement. 

Eight program objectives define PEP’s path to achieve 

the vision.
10

FOCUSING THE PROGRAM: WHAT MAKES A 

GREAT PRINCIPAL?

Extensive research over the last two decades has 

contributed to our understanding of what it takes to 

be—and to develop—an effective principal.8

 Analysis 

of these data yields a clear picture of what effective 

principals do, what they know, what they believe about 

student learning, how they interact with teachers, and 

how they reach out to parents and the broader community. The most significant and instructive finding 

emerging from the research is this: Leadership matters—a lot. Simply stated, it takes an effective principal 

to make a successful school. When leaders mobilize 

action by declaring a focus on learning and then lead 

from a set of fundamental values and beliefs about 

learning and about students’ ability to achieve, their 

schools are more likely to identify, set, and achieve ambitious goals for student learning.

While it’s clear that good school leaders share common 

characteristics, it’s equally clear that effective leaders 

are deeply attuned and responsive to the environment 

in which they operate. It makes sense that productive 

community outreach and parental engagement are 

likely to look very different in the hills and hollows of 

rural Kentucky than in the densely packed urban neighborhoods of Boston, Chicago, or New York City. 

Similarly, successful instructional leadership and teacher development may require a different approach in a 

high-turnover district where a significant percentage of 

teachers each year are new to the profession as compared to a district with large numbers of veteran educators and an active mentoring program. So while all 

six sites highlighted in this guide have grounded their 

program development and goals in the significant body 

of research about effective school leadership, each has 

interpreted that research against the backdrop of the 

districts it serves. The aim is to prepare the next generation of leaders to be able to step in and do well by any 

school but, most of all, to be effective in each program’s 

constituent district or districts, able to engage with the 

district’s vision of school improvement, and ready to undertake the hard work required to realize it. Operating 

on the belief that “great principals lead great schools,” 

the New Leaders for New Schools program defines a 

great principal as one who coaches and inspires teachers to reach and teach every child and collaborates with 

students’ parents, families, and communities to make 

schools work. The program boldly aspires to transform 

American education by creating a critical mass of such 

principals in urban school districts.

The Boston Principal Fellowship Program (BPF) 

evolved from the district’s ambitious whole-school 

reform initiative and its superintendent’s conviction 

that school leadership is the single most important 

factor in each school’s success. In support of that 

conviction, he allocated district funds and other resources to create an internal leadership development 

program to enhance the skills of the district’s current 

principals, preparing them to carry out their critical 

role in Boston’s whole-school reform plans. The superintendent also launched a “grow-your-own” preparation program—Boston Principal Fellowship Program 

(BPF)—that immerses participants in the daily work 

of effective principals and then places them in some 

of the city’s neediest schools. The program’s driving 

vision is that principals are “instructional leaders 

who effectively improve the teaching and learning 

process in their schools.” (See figure 3 for Boston’s 

competencies of effective principals.)
11

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

FIGURE 3. Boston Principal Fellowship’s Competencies of Effective Principals

Boston School Leadership Institute

Competencies of Effective Principals

Effective Principals:

• Understand how children and adults learn.

• Analyze instruction and student learning through regular classroom observations and provide detailed 

feedback to teachers that supports instructional improvement.

• Use data to measure student learning, instructional improvement and to drive planning.

• Create a school community that is devoted to social justice, high expectations for all, and equity in students’ 

opportunity to learn.

• Understand the achievement gap and implement explicit strategies to close the gap.

• Develop and communicate a shared vision and common understanding of effective classrooms and instruction 

and organize the school on it.

• Create a collegial environment in which leadership is shared, professional practice is made public, risk-taking 

and innovation are supported, and consistent, high-quality instruction is paramount.

• Understand the needs and assets students, parents and the community bring to schools and build strong 

relationships with all constituents.

• Use the school budget, human resource functions, and other resources strategically to support improved 

student learning.

• Develop and maintain a safe and disciplined learning environment and manage building operations in support 

of student learning.

• Reflect on practice and continually refine leadership, based on learning and experience.
12

MOVING FORWARD IN A FOCUSED DIRECTION

New Jersey’s EXCEL (Expedited Certification for Educational Leadership) program intends to prepare its candidates to be “visionary leaders with the knowledge, skills, 

dispositions, and readiness for them to be effective agents 

of change and improvement and effective instructional 

leaders who actively advocate for and guide the achievement of high academic standards by all students.”

The concept of the principal as a “change agent” also 

guides the First Ring Leadership Academy in Cleveland, 

which defines an effective principal as “a change agent 

able to lead a school community to improve instruction 

so that all students in First Ring schools achieve at high 

levels.” Similarly, Chicago’s LAUNCH identifies a highly 

qualified principal as one who is “ready to lead the 

school to high achievement by continuously improving 

teaching and learning so that every child realizes his 

or her educational potential.” Each of these programs 

delineates—in a set of standards—the knowledge, skills, 

attitudes, and behaviors one needs to grow into the 

role of instructional leader, and then structures selection criteria, curricula, an apprenticeship, and performance measures around those standards. 

The critical importance of the program vision in these six 

programs is illustrated in the many significant ways their 

visions have provided a clear focus and sense of purpose 

for them. LAUNCH incorporates its vision and focus into 

a standards-based assessment program. Twenty-four indicators of effective leadership serve as the foundation 

for both its instructional program and its formative assessment of candidates’ leadership competencies.

Invest in Being Selective

All six programs offer an accelerated pathway to becoming a principal. While the programs differ from one 

another in design and structure, they share such characteristics as a rigorous curriculum, demanding fieldbased projects, and an expedited timeline. All of the 

featured sites agree that their programs do not have 

the luxury of time to shape a candidate’s belief system about student learning or to develop foundational 

leadership skills. Candidates must come with these 

qualities fully developed. In short, they need to be able 

to hit the ground running. Furthermore, each program 

invests substantially in its candidates. (Figure 1 details 

the cost per participant in each program.) Ensuring a 

good return on that investment is a high priority.

All programs strongly emphasize that they are not 

remedial; instead, they aim to transform individuals 

with a proven track record of leadership into school 

principals who can effectively promote great instruction and learning in their schools. They say the secret 

to their success is not so much the specifics of their 

instructional program—important as that effort is—as 

it is to enroll the right candidates. 

Each program deliberately screens and selects participants who are already equipped with the appropriate 

A Powerful, Guiding Vision:

›› Conveys a clear, focused picture of what 

an effective school leader does to improve 

instruction and learning;

›› Reflects evidence-based research;

›› Mobilizes action to attain it; and

›› Keeps the program on track.
13

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

experiences and dispositions to become powerful 

principals. And each provides those participants with 

an accelerated program whose every element powerfully radiates from its vision.

Each of the six programs defines the ideal candidate 

slightly differently, but the personal traits and leadership competencies sought are similar in all. The programs seek people with a passionate and demonstrated 

commitment to academic improvement for every 

student, a genuine belief that all children are intelligent and will learn and make progress, given the right 

circumstances. They want self-aware individuals who 

understand great teaching and learning, are creative 

problem solvers, and have strong communication and 

collaboration skills. To that end, each program starts 

with a comprehensive screening process based on program-specific criteria that reflect its guiding vision of 

powerful school leadership. (See figure 4 for an example of screening criteria from New Leaders.) 

All programs require at least a bachelor’s degree; in 

New Jersey and Chicago, candidates must have a 

master’s degree. All require professional experience, 

including some teaching, although Boston accepts 

those with a youth development background. In some 

instances, programs are designed specifically to develop new principals; others also look to further develop 

individuals who are already working as principals or 

assistant principals.

Beyond such basic requirements, the programs also 

look at more qualitative factors. Boston, for example, 

asks candidates to articulate their personal theories of 

leadership. New Leaders seeks people with an unrelenting commitment to ensuring that every child achieves 

at high levels. Its selection criteria (see figure 4) are 

based on its vision of effective school leadership that 

consists of high expectations and respect for every 

child, instructional leadership, school-family-community partnerships, data-driven decisions, collaboration 

and distributed leadership. The PEP screens its candidates for a strong knowledge of instruction, curriculum, and assessment, along with an understanding of 

Kentucky’s statewide reform program. PEP looks for a 

commitment to improving rural schooling conditions 

and an appreciation of Kentucky’s rural culture; it also 

screens for a belief in the capacity of every student to 

achieve Kentucky’s academic standards.

RECRUITMENT

The starting place for attracting good candidates, as 

well as for dissuading those not qualified, is the recruitment process. Program directors spoke of beginning a 

Tested Recruiting Strategies:

›› Market in places where you are most 

likely to find the ideal program candidates (e.g., relevant conferences, publications, local media);

›› Use word-of-mouth (e.g., current participants’ connections and networks);

›› Expand outreach through partnerships 

with related organizations (e.g., local 

colleges, teacher unions, community 

youth centers); and

›› Seek nominations from other respected 

leaders (e.g., superintendents, principals, curriculum supervisors). 
14

FIGURE 4. New Leaders for New Schools Candidate Selection Criteria

New Leaders for New Schools Selection Criteria (listed alphabetically)

1. Belief in the Potential of All Children to Excel Academically 

• Believe each and every child can excel academically

• Take personal responsibility for ensuring high academic achievement for every child

• Demonstrate the personal drive and commitment to eliminate the disparity of educational quality that exists

2. Commitment to Ongoing Learning

• Seek feedback and reflect on experiences to grow and develop

• Demonstrate humility and willingness to continually improve 

• Commit to the coaching and the development of adults

3. Communication and Listening

• Possess written and verbal skills to communicate with clarity, conciseness, and appropriateness to multiple audiences

• Demonstrate poise and professionalism in diverse situations

• Listen actively

4. Interpersonal Skills

• Build successful one-on-one relationships

• Value each person’s perspective and treat people with respect

• Relate to adults and children: understand where they are coming from, what they need, and how to meet their needs

• Diffuse anger and find common ground to move people towards solutions

• Exhibit confidence and competence under pressure

5. Knowledge of Teaching and Learning.

• Identify exemplary teaching 

• Provide feedback and guidance to improve instructional strategies

• Enable students to attain results despite significant challenges

6. Problem Solving 

• Work proactively to solve problems and reach effective solutions

• Analyze and diagnose complex issues to develop strategic plan

• Identify concrete outcomes as a way to evaluate results

7. Project Management to Deliver Results

• Articulate a clear vision, set agenda, and implement goals

• Select, prioritize, and communicate strategies effectively to reach goals

• Balance day-to-day tasks and urgent needs with progress towards goals

• Delegate decision-making and authority in responsible manner

8. Self-Awareness

• Identify accurately personal strengths and areas for development 

• Demonstrate integrity by acting in a manner that consistently reflects stated values and beliefs

• Understand how you are perceived by and impact others 

9. Team Building

• Collaborate effectively

• Read group dynamics accurately 

• Mobilize adults to take action and hold them accountable for reaching common goals

• Engage and empower others to take responsibility in decision-making to achieve results

10. Unyielding Focus on Goals and Results 

• Confront difficult situations head-on and implement diverse solutions to get results

• Achieve results despite obstacles by demonstrating persistence, determination, and relentless drive

• Exhibit resilience to persevere and overcome setbacks

• Take personal responsibility for finding solutions when faced with challenges

• Be decisive and hold people to core values when it counts
15

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

year ahead of their start dates to publicize and promote the opportunity. Chicago’s LAUNCH, for example, 

issued 3,200 brochures in November 2003 to spread 

the word to prospective 2004 participants about what 

the program is, who might qualify for admission, and 

where the application could be found online. New Jersey’s EXCEL relies largely on word-of-mouth generated 

by its graduates, but also recruits via the publications 

of its parent organization, a statewide principals and 

supervisors association. 

New Leaders for New Schools targets its marketing 

and recruitment in hopes of attracting not just those 

currently working in a school system, but also those 

who have led community organizations, nonprofits, 

and youth development programs. It utilizes an executive search-style approach of creating local, regional, 

and national networks. As a result, more than half of 

the new leaders are considered “nontraditional” in that 

they were from outside the public school systems with 

which New Leaders works, although all participants 

have strong K–12 experience. For its first 150 fellowships, New Leaders received over 2,600 applications 

representing a selection rate of 6 percent.

Several programs, such as LAUNCH and PEP, seek 

nominations from school or district administrators. In 

Cleveland, participants are handpicked by participating 

superintendents based on their perceived potential as 

schools leaders or, in the case of assistant principals or 

officially designated teacher-leaders, their actual performance. Program staff report that this recruitment 

approach has the added bonus of sending a message 

that the districts value the capacity development of 

their own staff.

THE SCREENING PROCESS

Each program has structured a clearly defined and multiphased process for screening applicants. The first phase 

may be the application itself, designed in some cases to 

help ensure that candidates self-select based on rigorous criteria. Succeeding phases involve interviews and, 

in some programs, performance assessments. 

In New Leaders, the application is a weeding tool. It defines criteria (e.g., skills in project management, communication, listening, relationship-building) and requires 

would-be candidates to answer 14 complex questions designed to reveal how well their backgrounds, 

An Effective Selection Process:

›› Defines the ideal program candidate 

and establishes application requirements that reflect that ideal;

›› Screens applicants using criteria that 

reflect the vision and the application 

requirements;

›› Uses multiple measures such as interviews, on-demand writing, performance 

tasks, observations, and assessment 

rubrics to select participants;

›› Takes place over multiple days to 

evaluate the candidate in a variety 

of contexts; and

›› Involves multiple assessors with a 

variety of perspectives, knowledge, and 

experiences.
16

experiences, and personal qualities meet the criteria. Similarly, Chicago and Boston applicants receive 

prompting questions for which they must develop essay 

responses that are scored by program teams.

In most programs, the screening process is followed by 

an interview phase. The most intensive and elaborate 

of these is New Leaders. The roughly 50 percent of applicants who make it through the first screening must 

then participate in a second screening that includes an 

hour-long interview with two staff members and requires applicants to produce a written analysis of a case 

study. About half of the applicants are successful. These 

individuals then go on to a full-day interview with staff 

and program mentors, which includes role-playing and 

the evaluation of a simulated classroom lesson.

In Boston, teams of principals, teacher-leaders, district 

administrators, and higher education faculty interview 

candidates, who are also rated on a performance assessment in which they are asked to conduct a teacher 

observation and assessment at a designated school. 

Chicago uses a similar panel approach (theirs consists 

of principals, administrators, and staff from Northwestern University) for interviewing the 30 percent 

of candidates who make it past the initial application 

screening. New Jersey’s screening requires candidates 

to formally present a professional portfolio, complete 

a writing sample that includes a statement of their 

educational philosophy and personal vision for school 

leadership, and respond to problem-based scenarios. 

Design a Meaningful, Relevant Program

For all these programs, six key elements help to ensure 

an experience that is meaningful for candidates and 

relevant to the needs of their students and schools: 

1) knowledgeable, committed leadership within a 

partnership structure; 2) a standards-based curriculum incorporating clear performance indicators; 

3) instructional design based on adult learning theory; 

4) an intensive, focused induction; 5) a supportive cohort structure; and 6) a school-based practicum, involving expert mentors.

CREATE A PARTNERSHIP STRUCTURE

All of the programs studied operate as partnerships between a school district or multiple school jurisdictions 

and other entities, notably universities and foundations. Such partnerships often support the initial costs 

of program staffing, design, and development, and they 

contribute to the program’s long-term sustainability. 

Cleveland’s First Ring Leadership Academy, for example, is led by a collaboration of the 13 school districts 

that encircle the city. Their superintendents, working in 

partnership with Cleveland State University, launched 

the academy in response to the critical shortage and 

high turnover of qualified principals in their districts. 

Figure 5 is the interview guide that academy staff used 

to identify the superintendents’ program priorities. 

Each superintendent commits to identifying two or 

more promising leaders for each academy cohort and 

supporting them through the academy, then sharing 

the pool of academy graduates across First Ring districts to fill principal vacancies. The university is committed to customizing the program for participants and 

making personalized services and resources available to 

them so that they have every opportunity to become 

effective school leaders.

The New Leaders national team is a diverse mix of social 

entrepreneurs and leaders from education, business, 
17

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

FIGURE 5. Interview 

Guide to Identify First Ring Superintendents’ Priorities
18

and public policy. They staff a program that operates as 

a partnership of five metropolitan school districts—in 

New York City, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Memphis, 

and the San Francisco Bay Area—and several of the nation’s leading venture philanthropists. Further support 

comes in the form of strategic consultancy from the 

Monitor Group, a leading strategy firm, and pro bono 

legal assistance from Kirkland and Ellis, a major New 

York City law firm. New Leaders provides the framework 

for public and private sector leaders to join together 

and commit time and resources to transforming public 

school leadership.

Boston’s and Chicago’s district-based programs also 

benefit from partnerships. Boston’s operates as a collaboration of the Boston Public Schools and the University of Massachusetts. Chicago’s LAUNCH is operated 

by the Chicago Principals and Administrators Association in collaboration with Chicago Public Schools and 

Northwestern University. NJ EXCEL partners with the 

New Jersey Principals and Supervisors Association and 

the Association’s Foundation for Educational Administration. Kentucky’s PEP is a dynamic partnership between the Pike County School District, a deeply rural 

Appalachian community, and the University of Kentucky in Lexington.

DEVELOP A STANDARDS-BASED CURRICULUM 

Across all six programs, standards guide the structure and sequence of the leadership curriculum and 

establish indicators of effective practice. In each case 

the curriculum derives from local- or state-adopted 

performance-based standards, such as the New Jersey Professional Standards for School Leaders. All of 

them delineate what school leaders need to know 

and be able to do at various points in their careers, 

and all of them draw from the Interstate School 

Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers 

in 1996.9

In each case, overarching leadership standards are 

integrated with the specific kinds of knowledge and 

skills the particular program was founded to develop. 

Boston, for example, focuses on effective practices as 

defined by Boston’s six Essentials of Whole School Improvement (see figure 6), which emphasize principals’ 

need to deeply understand instruction and organize the 

entire school enterprise to improve student learning. 

Likewise, New Leaders focuses on 12 essential competencies that reflect research on the practices of urban 

school principals who have successfully turned around 

low-performing schools. Chicago’s program is guided 

by the seven leadership proficiencies in that district’s 

educational improvement plan. 

The First Ring Leadership Academy (FRLA) in Cleveland developed its curriculum by identifying and 

prioritizing the recurring and challenging issues and 

concerns that the next generation of leaders will encounter in the schools FRLA serves. From a prioritysetting process that used a focus group consisting of 

a cross section of district and community leaders, five 

persistent leadership challenges emerged as critical: 

increasing student diversity; parent and community 

involvement; communication; legislation and politics; and the need to balance priorities. FRLA then 

cross-checked these five themes with the ISLLC standards to ensure that they were embedded in all learning experiences. The end result is a curriculum scope 

that integrates FRLA contextual issues with the ISLLC 

standards and indicators.
19

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

BASE THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN ON ADULT 

LEARNING THEORY

The structure and focus of the instructional part of each 

program varies, but each involves a combination of 

coursework and fieldwork, and each is organized around 

a cohort and small groups. This approach is in keeping 

with adult learning theory, which holds that significant 

learning results from experiences that allow adults to: 

1) engage with meaningful content; 2) socially process 

the information; and 3) construct their own meaning 

through a self-regulated process.

BEGIN WITH AN INTENSIVE AND HIGHLY FOCUSED 

INDUCTION EXPERIENCE

Most of the programs initiate candidates with a rigorous induction experience designed to help participants 

develop a strong conceptual framework for understanding—and later applying—a deep knowledge of the 

leadership theory that drives the program. Whether it is 

a summer residency or an accelerated course sequence, 

these experiences demand an intense commitment, 

leading candidates to describe them variously as a 

“drop-everything-else dedication” and “the most challenging and powerful learning experience I’ve ever had.” 

They serve multiple purposes, including testing a participant’s commitment and drive to take on the challenging 

role of being a fully invested and effective school leader 

and arming candidates with the conceptual knowledge 

and informational resources that they will need on the 

job. In effect, these induction experiences serve as a 

final screening. Participants who cannot or do not want 

to make such a commitment opt out.

The New Leaders program, which aims to equip participants to be catalysts of urban change, starts with 

a six-week summer institute at the Wharton School of 

Management in Philadelphia where the group focuses 

on developing instructional, transformational, and operational leadership skills. At this early stage, bonding 

FIGURE 6. Boston Public Schools’ Essentials of Whole School Improvement

Six Essentials of Whole School Improvement

Essential 1: Effective instructional practice and a collaborative school climate lead to improved student learning.

Essential 2: Student work and data drive instruction and professional development.

Essential 3: Investments in professional development improve instruction.

Essential 4: Shared leadership sustains instructional improvement.

Essential 5: Resource use supports instructional improvement and improved student learning.

Essential 6: Schools partner with families and community to support student learning.
20

and network-building are valuable natural outcomes. 

Chicago holds a five-week summer leadership academy 

at Northwestern University’s Kellogg Graduate School 

of Management, emphasizing instructional leadership. 

Skills are built around the school district’s principal 

leadership competencies, including creating a studentcentered climate, improving teaching and learning, 

and increasing parent involvement and community 

partnerships. During this beginning phase, the fellows 

in the program have opportunities to build an “urban 

network” that offers networking connections for fellows throughout their careers.

NJ EXCEL initiates candidates during a demanding twoweek summer residency. This expedited learning experience introduces candidates to the rigorous theory- and 

research-based curriculum and the action-research 

projects they will be expected to complete. At this 

point, candidates also begin to assess their knowledge 

and skills against specific standards and criteria.

DEVELOP A SUPPORTIVE COHORT STRUCTURE

All programs use a cohort group structure and all report that participants find cohort interactions to be 

the most valuable element of the program. Cohorts 

allow participants to proceed through the program 

with the safety and support of a learning community. 

Members of the cohort construct meaning and make 

sense of new contexts by comparing experiences, and 

they generalize theories of action by sharing individual successes and failures. In short, over the course 

of their time together, they adopt new identities, in 

essence “becoming” principals. Together, they evolve 

from teacher or other professional into an accountable educational leader who knows how to manage 

a school and improve teaching and learning. Far from 

disbanding at program completion, the cohort tends 

to be an ongoing source of support as people progress 

in their careers.

In the Principals Excellence Program, the cohort of 

approximately 15 is a uniquely defined community 

of learners that remains intact throughout the entire 

program year. Early and ongoing community-building strategies help to create a sense that the cohort 

is a safe haven for problem solving and brainstorming. 

Boston’s fellows report that this kind of ongoing interaction led them to recognize the expertise of their 

colleagues and allowed them to benchmark their own 

progress with that of other cohort members.

Cleveland’s program puts a premium on developing 

trust and reliance among cohort members as a means 

of creating a strong network of new leadership within 

the 13 First Ring school districts. The expectation is that 

cohort members will sustain and support each other 

as they begin and continue through their careers as 

school principals, directors, and superintendents.

New Jersey’s cohort structure develops collegiality, collaboration, and peer support as candidates engage in a 

range of program activities. All candidates participate 

in regional inquiry groups, which meet regularly and 

continually communicate online to discuss readings, 

problem-based activities, and day-to-day challenges. 

Members of each regional inquiry group also support 

one another with peer reviews and feedback related to 

action research and school-based projects. Each group 

works with an “e-mentor” who facilitates the group’s 

activities and serves as its primary advisor. (See figure 7 

for a description of e-mentor responsibilities.)
21

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

FIGURE 7. NJ EXCEL e-Mentor Responsibilities

e-MENTOR RESPONSIBILITIES

Communication

• Plans minimum of 18 hours face-to-face Inquiry Group meetings scheduled at time/site by the group

• Conducts ongoing communication with candidates using NJ-EXCEL’s On-Line Learning Community 

(e-mail, Discussion Board, Instant Messenger)

• Conducts additional individual/group meetings as needed at discretion of candidates and e-Mentor

Coordinating and Guiding Inquiry Group Meetings and Other Ongoing Activities

• Extends discussions from cohort seminars on critical topics and tasks

• Conducts discussions of research and readings

• Conducts problem-based and critical analysis activities (case studies, in-basket activities, simulations, ect.) within group meetings and/or 

continuing discussion as Discussion Board activity using NJ EXCEL’s On-Line Learning Community

• Stimulates information sharing and networking activities

• Plans peer reviews that provide feedback to candidates related to their projects and portfolios

• Arranges inter-district activities as appropriate

Providing Individual and Group Guidance, Support, and a Collegial Environment

• Guides ongoing self-assessment, reflection, feedback for development of Professional Growth Plans (PGP)

• Guides development of Action Research and Job-Embedded Projects

• Conducts peer reviews of projects and portfolios to encourage feedback and continuous improvement

Candidate Assessment and Recordkeeping

• Maintains the NJ EXCEL Requirements Checklist for each assigned candidate, submit complete Checklist to NJ EXCEL Coordinator for Research 

and Evaluation at end of program 

• Conducts quarterly reviews of candidates’ portfolios to determine progress toward completion of program requirements:

• Professional Growth Plan (PGP)

• Personal Educational Platform (professional philosophy, vision for school leadership, personal professional code of ethics)

• Reflective Journal

• Inquiry Group Log

• Internship Log

• Action Research Project

• Action Research Project Presentation

• Job-Embedded Projects

• Leadership e-folio

• Module Activities

• Completes formal assessment of Action Research Project, Action Research Project Presentation, and Job-Embedded Projects using NJ EXCEL 

Rubrics

• Completes an e-Mentor Assessment Report at the end of the program that reflects the e-Mentor’s summative assessment 

of the candidate’s overall performance

Participation in Other NJ EXCEL Activities

• Attends Candidate Orientation scheduled at beginning of program

• Attends training for NJ EXCEL’s On-Line Learning Community scheduled at beginning of program

• Attends Action Research Project Presentations for Inquiry Group scheduled at end of program

• Attends External Portfolio Reviews scheduled at end of program

• Attendance at 1-2 e-Mentor Organizational Meetings during the year as needed

(Revised February 2004)
22

INCLUDE A SCHOOL-BASED PRACTICUM WITH 

EXPERT MENTORS

Participants in all six programs identified their fieldwork—

a school-based internship, or residency—as second only 

to cohort interactions in effectiveness in engendering 

powerful professional learning. In most of the programs, 

participants are paired with mentor principals—professional experts committed to sharing successful practices 

and supporting the development of effective new principals. These programs use specific practices for identifying and selecting mentors. Several have published 

guidelines for mentoring and require mentor training 

that is focused on key instructional components, expectations, and program beliefs and value systems.

In Boston, the residency is the primary framework for 

learning. Each fellow has a paid, yearlong residency, 

four days a week, with one of Boston’s most effective principals. As with all of these programs, Boston 

puts forth great effort into ensuring that theory and 

practice are integrated. Therefore, a course on learning 

theory, for example, is coupled with classroom observations of students and teachers during the residency. 

These observations are guided by the mentor principal 

to hone the fellows’ skills in understanding students’ 

learning processes and the instructional strategies 

of effective teachers. As one former fellow said, “The 

school was my classroom, and my teacher was my 

mentor principal. He identified what I needed to know 

by having me do the real work, and then he gave me 

feedback.” That kind of mentoring helps the fellows 

construct meaning from the theory they are learning 

in their 70 days of coursework. 

Since the fellow-mentor relationship is the linchpin of the program, great care is taken to identify 

excellent mentors based on demonstrated leadership 

and mentoring skills, their schools’ success in implementing the six Essentials of Whole School Improvement, and raising student achievement. Equal care is 

then taken in matching a fellow to a mentor.

Chicago’s fellows begin a yearlong paid internship (again, with exemplary mentor principals) 

that includes both an elementary and secondary 

experience. Mentor principals are selected through 

an application and screening process. They are required to attend a half-day session at the summer leadership academy as well as seminars on 

coaching and feedback. Fellows and mentors sign 

a contract for each site experience—one elementary and one secondary—that explains each person’s role in working to develop the fellow’s skill in 

Chicago’s principal leadership competencies. (See 

figure 8 for the mentor contract.) 

New Leaders residents enter into a formal yearlong, 

full-time relationship with a successful mentor principal who shares his or her knowledge and experience 

and creates opportunities for the resident to take the 

lead in multiple aspects of the urban principal’s role. 

The most direct support, however, is provided by a 

specially trained leadership coach who visits each 

resident and mentor at least once a week. Working 

with no more than 10 residents, coaches help structure the resident-mentor relationship, as well as assist residents in integrating theory from coursework 

into their day-to-day leadership challenges. Coaches 

are recruited from a pool of outstanding, retired 

urban principals, and they undergo their own training as a cadre in addition to attending the residents’ 

summer coursework and seminars.
23

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

FIGURE 8. LAUNCH Mentor Contract
24

Build and Sustain Over Time

Each program studied conducts ongoing evaluations 

on several levels, using evaluation findings to continuously improve program performance and outcomes in 

ways that will help to sustain the program over time. 

The progress of each participant is tracked for both formative and summative purposes. Systematic monitoring of overall program effectiveness yields data used to 

guide program improvements. 

ASSESSING CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

The intent of candidate assessment in the six programs 

is to prepare candidates for success as principals in challenging schools. Indeed, each sees assessment as a learning tool. Rather than casting blame when assessment 

identifies the need for improvement, this system of intelligent accountability rewards learning and continued 

effort. The programs also recognize the need for public 

accountability, using assessment to verify and validate 

candidates’ competency and readiness to take charge in a 

real school with the education of real students at stake.

In addition to serving as the foundation of each program’s curriculum, the Interstate School Leadership Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards provide a framework for assessing candidates’ performance and are the 

gauge by which candidates and program staff alike assess a candidate’s professional growth over time. Each 

program has contextualized the ISLLC standards and 

aligned them with program performance goals. For example, NJ EXCEL’s School Leader Standards Framework 

includes the six ISLLC standards and adds a seventh for 

technological leadership, a key program goal aligned 

with Technology Standards for School Administrators. NJ EXCEL inducts candidates into its program by 

developing their understanding of the standards-based 

requirements, expectations, and performance criteria 

against which their success in the program is measured. 

At the start of their program experience, candidates 

assess themselves against the program’s standardsbased performance indicators. EXCEL then uses data 

from those assessments to guide instructional, mentoring, and coaching efforts. It also publishes for each 

cohort group a summary of program requirements, the 

timeframe for completing the requirements, a description of the assessments, and an indication of who will 

assess their performance. To prepare candidates for 

A Successful School Leadership Program:

›› Focuses on the program’s vision of an effective school leader;

›› Uses a standards-based instructional 

program with clear performance indicators and outcome expectations;

›› Designs instruction based on adult-learning theory and personal sense-making;

›› Includes a residency or internship with an 

exemplary principal and the expectation 

that the resident will be accountable for 

instructional leadership responsibilities;

›› Uses a cohort structure and provides 

frequent opportunities for reflecting on 

and discussing learning experiences and 

outcomes; and

›› Personalizes participant learning through 

close monitoring, coaching, and followthrough support after placement.
25

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

success, EXCEL provides them with exemplars of the 

types of work products and performances that have 

been judged as meeting the standards and have contributed to effective leadership on the job.

Chicago’s LAUNCH program aspires to develop leaders 

capable of transforming ineffective schools into organizations that work for all students. LAUNCH has translated 

the ISLLC standards into its own Principal Competencies, 

which form the foundation of the program’s standardsbased curriculum, instruction, and assessment. 

Its five standards and 24 performance indicators represent the goals that successful LAUNCH candidates 

will achieve. To facilitate their success, the program 

provides candidates with an assessment tool that they 

are expected to monitor throughout their program 

experience. To this end, LAUNCH has created a clear 

and focused assessment guide with a structure that 

lays out its standards and performance indicators in a 

page-by-page format. Each page presents one of the 

five standards with its related performance indicators, 

a description of the indicators at their highest level of 

performance, a list of competency-based learning opportunities, and a four-stage rubric that describes four 

developmental stages of competency (rudimentary, 

emerging, competent, and transformative). 

That assessment guide enables candidates to continuously assess their progress, and it provides a focus for 

coaching and mentoring. Candidates use the feedback 

information to develop their own professional growth 

plan, and then use that plan as a tool for setting developmental goals. They document their work in a professional portfolio that is assessed by LAUNCH staff members, coaches, mentors, and others, using a rubric with 

which candidates have been familiarized. 

Other programs follow a similar process. In Boston, 

fellows begin the program by completing a self-assessment on the district’s 11 competencies of effective 

principals. Based on this assessment, the fellows work 

with their mentors and program staff to develop a personal learning contract that provides a map for their 

first four months. At the end of that period, both fellow 

and mentor review the contract, benchmark progress 

made toward its goals, and revise or set new goals for 

the balance of the program.

When participants begin Kentucky’s PEP, they complete 

a comprehensive six-part survey that enables them to 

establish baseline data about their leadership skills. It 

also asks them to develop their own vision of the kind 

of leader they want to be. (Figure 9 displays one page of 

the 10-page survey.) The completed survey serves as a 

self-assessment and goal-setting tool that participants 

can use throughout their PEP experience to monitor 

their leadership development.

Every program maintains a rigorous academic gauge 

of candidate performance and publishes a grading or 

rubric system that is used for assessing the quality of 

candidates’ coursework assignments, projects, and other work products. Most programs use a portfolio system 

as a cumulative file of projects, products, assessments, 

and observation records that document and verify candidates’ professional growth and their readiness to successfully assume the role of leader in a difficult school.

ASSESSING PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The most telling data about a program’s performance 

are those that portray its ability to reach its goals. In the 

case of school leadership preparation programs, data 

about the performance of graduates in leadership roles 
26

FIGURE 9. Principals Excellence Program Self-Assessment
27

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

will provide a lens for assessing program effectiveness. 

Most of the programs in this study are not far enough 

along in their development to use this lens. Nonetheless, Chicago’s LAUNCH program, which initiated its 

first cohort in 1998, is taking a courageous look at student performance on standardized tests in the schools 

where its graduates are serving as principals. LAUNCH 

has compiled five-year profiles of these schools to track 

student performance on the district’s mandated standardized tests from 1999 through 2003. Each year these 

schools have made an average gain, with the highest 

gains in math. By tracking their graduates using school 

performance data, LAUNCH intends to investigate the 

relationship between its school leadership preparation 

program and improvements in student learning. 

In Chicago, a public education fund has supported 

several external evaluations of LAUNCH’s progress and 

outcomes relative to its goals. Findings indicate that 

LAUNCH principals perform more like veteran principals than their non-LAUNCH counterparts. Indeed, their 

leadership actions demonstrate that they understand 

the complexities of the principal’s role and are able 

to guide instructional improvement from the outset 

of their principalship. In addition, findings show that 

LAUNCH has been able to recruit and place Latino principals, who traditionally have been underrepresented 

in Chicago public schools and that LAUNCH graduates 

appear to be more active than either other new leaders 

or veteran principals in obtaining professional development for themselves and their faculties.

Every program in the study relies on many partners 

and multiple measures to help evaluate and continuously improve itself. Feedback from candidates and 

mentors, as well as candidates’ progress—as evidenced 

by their portfolios, for example—help gauge program and faculty effectiveness and guide mid-course 

and annual improvements. The First Ring Leadership 

Academy (FRLA) in Cleveland and PEP in Pike County 

use “barometer” surveys and focus groups to help 

identify perceptions about program responsiveness 

and effectiveness. 

FRLA is also partnering with the Batelle Memorial Institute, a third-party evaluator, to establish a program 

evaluation protocol that will be used to collect field 

data about FRLA’s graduates working in new leadership 

positions. The protocol process will collect observational 

and interview data that FRLA staff plan to use to identify program-wide strengths and weaknesses. Batelle 

evaluators will also use data collected by Academy 

staff, conduct surveys and observations, and establish a 

control group of non-participating first-year principals 

for comparison purposes. 

In keeping with its core philosophy, New Leaders puts 

a major emphasis on using data analysis to determine 

program effectiveness. Data on candidate success, 

for example—during and after the program—provide 

feedback on the selection process. The program also 

tracks candidate placement rates and monitors student achievement results over time in schools led by 

program graduates. New Leaders’ strategy of ongoing 

assessment ensures the development of outstanding 

principals, while also creating key learning to continuously improve the program model and to share with 

the field.

New Jersey EXCEL annually evaluates its program design and effectiveness against six program standards 

and related performance rubrics that are aligned 
28

FIGURE 10. NJ EXCEL Program Standards and Performance Rubric (page 1 of 2)
29

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Common Features Across the Six Innovative Programs:

 6. Candidate selection criteria and screening process that reflects the vision and the 

capability of the program;

 7. Structuring participant groups into continuing cohorts that frequently meet to discuss 

what they are experiencing and learning 

about the principal’s job; 

 8. Authentic learning experiences that incorporate on-the-job, practical realities of the 

principal’s work;

 9. Frequent structured opportunities for participants to do personal reflection and performance assessment; and

10. Structured program monitoring and assessment through feedback, participants’ performance in the program, and participants’ 

success on the job after the program.

1. An initial base of support that includes partnerships with key stakeholders and funders to 

finance “start-up” costs of planning, development, and early implementation;

 2. A commitment on the part of program developers to do the extremely hard work of developing, establishing, and implementing the program over a minimum of three to five years;

 3. A research-based vision of what an effective 

principal does to lead instructional improvement and student achievement gains;

 4. A focused theory of action about program development and instructional design based on 

the vision;

 5. School leadership performance standards and 

outcome assessments aligned with the vision 

and theory of action; 

with national accreditation standards for universities 

(see figure 10). The evaluation data are used to make 

formative adjustments in the program and they feed in 

to EXCEL’s five-year evaluation plan that will report the 

program’s long-term effectiveness. 

All of the programs have demonstrated a culture of 

continuous improvement and professional excellence. 

Each defines success differently, but all show relentless 

energy in striving to achieve it.

Summary

The six leadership preparation programs in this study 

are distinct strategic responses to one underlying crisis: 

the pervasive need to identify, recruit, prepare, and 

place high-quality principals in our nation’s schools. 

While this crisis is most acutely experienced in challenging urban and rural areas, the problem of an insufficient applicant pool or pipeline of effective school 

principals is spreading into every region of the United 

States. Without more innovative pathways to leadership certification, the problem is likely to worsen with 

40 percent of current school principals eligible for retirement in the very near future.10

Simultaneously, across the country, elected officials, 

policymakers, parents, and educators themselves are 

pressing schools for higher returns on the public 
30

investment. This press for improvement reflects 

discontent with the results our schools are yielding 

and our understanding that, as a society, we are not 

yet meeting our responsibility for ensuring that every 

child achieves academic success. A growing body of 

research suggests that we will only be able to do that 

when we improve the ability of principals to skillfully 

remove barriers to learning and put in place conditions for academic success.11

Each program had a unique creative approach that enabled it to move beyond traditional structures. Every 

program started with a profound belief that what currently existed was insufficient for meeting the urgent 

need. An ability to work both with and around existing 

structures, leaving them intact and building relationships with them, allowed the innovative new programs 

to gain some footing, then some traction, and, ultimately, make sure-footed progress. 
31

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Part II: 

Program Profiles

 Boston Principal Fellowship Program, 33

Boston, Mass. 

First Ring Leadership Academy, 37

Cleveland, Ohio

 LAUNCH (Leadership Academy and 41

 Urban Network for Chicago), Chicago, Ill.

 NJ EXCEL (New Jersey Expedited Certification 45

for Educational Leadership),

Monroe Township, N.J.

New Leaders for New Schools, 49

 New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C., 

 Memphis, and San Francisco Bay Area

Principals Excellence Program, 53

Pike County, Ky.
32
33

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Boston Principal Fellowship Program, Boston, Mass.

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

University of Massachusetts, 

Broad Foundation, 

U.S. Department of Education

2003 Bachelor’s degree; three years 

experience in teaching, youth 

development, or management; 

pass state licensure exam

(2005) 11

(2004) 10

2004

Gender: 60% female

Ethnicity: 64% White, 26% African 

American, 5% Asian Am., 5% Hispanic

2005

Gender: 70% female

Ethnicity: 70% African American, 

20% Hispanic, 10% White 

Twelve months that 

include: five-week 

summer intensive; 

yearlong residency; 

60 days of coursework; 

and two years of support 

following placement.

Initial Principal License

Option of MEd

Or CAGS from UMASS

In 1995, after analyzing schools that were effective in teaching low-income urban students and reviewing the effective-schools literature, Boston came up with six Essentials of 

Whole School Improvement to guide its own efforts:

›› Essential 1: Effective instructional practice and a collaborative school climate lead to improved student learning. 

›› Essential 2: Student work and data drive instruction 

and professional development. 

›› Essential 3: Investments in professional development 

improve instruction. 

›› Essential 4: Shared leadership sustains instructional 

improvement. 

›› Essential 5: Resource use supports instructional improvement and improved student learning.

›› Essential 6: Schools partner with families and community to support student learning.

At the heart of Boston Public Schools’ improvement effort 

is the core belief that leadership is the single most important factor in bringing about real school change. This belief is 

manifested in the district’s School Leadership Institute (SLI), 

developed to recruit, prepare, and support the next generation 

of Boston’s school leaders. In 2003, SLI launched the Boston 

Principal Fellowship (BPF) in response to the district’s need for 

skillful new principals who could “hit the ground running.” 

SLI also established the New Principal Support System to 

provide follow-through and coaching for new principals. In 

combination, these two programs build a strong, knowledgeable and committed school leadership workforce in Boston’s 

neediest schools.

The BPF set out to identify, recruit, prepare, place, and support new principals in its most challenging schools and to 

serve as the district’s preferred pathway to principalship. The 

first BPF cohort of 10 “fellows” started in June 2003, followed in June 2004 by a second cohort of 11 fellows. After 

successfully completing an intensive 12-month experience 

that integrates theory and practice, candidates may apply for 

a principal or assistant principal position. Once these beginning principals start their new job, the SLI provides two years 

of support through its new principal support system.

Selection Process

The most important step in preparing new principals, 

stresses the BPF executive director, is to “get the right 

people on the bus.” Recruiting and screening potential 

candidates is a carefully structured process. The district actively and broadly recruits candidates through its Web site, 

through announcements and advertisements in national 

school leadership journals, local newspapers, and through 

recommendations from other principals. Word-of-mouth is 

another reliable source. 

The BPF admissions process consists of a written application 

(including two essays), a performance assessment for semifinalists, and an interview for finalists.
34

Minimally, applicants must have a bachelor of arts—a master 

of arts is preferred. In addition, applicants must have:

›› A minimum of three years experience in teaching (any 

p–16 level), youth development, social work, counseling, or nonprofit or business management; 

›› Evidence of experience as a successful leader; 

›› Willingness to relocate (if necessary) and commit to 

working in Boston Public Schools for a minimum of 

three years following fellowship; 

›› The ability and time commitment for immersion in 

an intense yearlong learning experience that includes 

some nights and weekends, academic coursework, 

research, reports, and field-based projects; and

›› Official results from (or proof of registration to take) 

the Communication and Literacy Skills section of the 

Massachusetts Test for Educator Licensure.

Applicants who successfully make it through the initial 

screening participate in an interview with a BPF team looking for individuals who: see themselves as lifelong learners; 

understand the elements of effective instruction; display an 

ability to think outside the box and be a critical thinker and 

a complex problem solver; demonstrate good listening skills; 

exhibit an ability to work as an effective team member; articulate a personal theory of leadership; demonstrate persistence 

and follow-through; and display a knowledge of current research and literature related to educational leadership.

Screening teams at all stages consist of principals, teacherleaders, higher education faculty, and Boston Public Schools 

central office administrators.

Fellows become employees of the Boston Public Schools and 

receive a full salary and benefits that are comparable to the 

position they leave in order to participate in the program. 

In accepting the salary, fellows agree to work in the Boston 

Public Schools for three years. Upon completing the residency 

and course requirements, they have the option of receiving a 

master’s degree or a certificate of advanced graduate studies 

from the University of Massachusetts–Boston. The cost of this 

option, estimated at $4,000, is the responsibility of the fellow.

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

The BPF curriculum integrates the theory behind Boston’s six 

Essentials with the knowledge and skills required to implement them and carry out the pivotal role of instructional 

leader. The two major program components are a yearlong 

four-days-a-week residency with one of Boston’s most effective principals—a mentor principal—and 85 days of coursework and seminars. Fellows participate in coursework for five 

weeks in the summer and one day per week and one weekend 

per month during their residency experience. The classes take 

place at the BPS professional development center and are 

taught by national experts, district leaders with recognized 

expertise in one or more topics, and faculty from local universities. To help synthesize their learning, fellows are given 

assignments designed to address real needs in the schools 

where they work as residents or issues they will face as new 

principals. For example, one resident developed a weekly 

training program for new teachers on instructional strategies 

to accelerate children’s early reading development. They also 

keep reflective journals, using them in part as a source for 

questions that can be discussed in the seminars.

Mentor principals are selected because of their demonstrated 

leadership skills, their schools’ success in implementing the six 

Essentials and raising student achievement levels, and their 

skills in and commitment to mentoring. Because a strong 

match between a fellow and mentor principal is critical to 

each candidate’s success, pairings are made with great care. 

One 2003–04 program participant said, “The school was my 

classroom, and my mentor principal was my teacher. He identified what I needed to know by having me do the real work, 

and then he gave me feedback.” This candidate saw the fellow-mentor relationship as a critical laboratory for testing 

his emerging theory of leadership: “The most important thing 

I learned was how to organize and work through groups of 

adults. That’s how a principal improves the school.”

In addition to the residency, considered by most fellows to be 

the program’s most significant source of learning and preparation, many program graduates cite their interactions with 
35

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

fellow cohort members as another critical element of BPF. 

They came to recognize the expertise of their colleagues and 

were able to benchmark their own progress against that of 

their cohort members.

The program curriculum and residency are designed to engender 11 very concrete competencies that Boston has defined 

as essential to effective school leadership (e.g., understanding how children and adults learn). Since each fellow comes 

to the program with a different set of skills and experiences, 

candidates start in July by doing a self-assessment related to 

the competencies. The results are then used to develop an individualized learning plan that guides the first six months of a 

candidate’s fellowship. The plan outlines specific types of experiences and activities that a fellow and his or her mentor will 

focus on during the residency. Some examples include planning and implementing a parent engagement strategy, leading 

a faculty meeting to analyze student performance data and 

identify their instructional implications, and conferencing with 

a set of parents regarding their child’s learning progress. 

In January, the fellow, his or her mentor principal, and the BPF 

executive director review the candidate’s progress on the learning goals and, based on that assessment, revise or set new goals 

for the next three months. Fellows also begin to identify their 

placement goals for the following school year (e.g., principal, 

assistant principal). In early May, the same trio meets again to 

review the fellow’s progress and readiness to assume the full 

responsibility of a principalship. The fellow’s self-assessment 

and mentor feedback, along with the observations of the BPF 

executive director, guide decisions regarding the kind of position a fellow is ready to take on during the next school year. 

BPF’s curriculum is organized into a developmental sequence 

that builds fellows’ understanding of the principles and practices that underlie the BPF Essentials. The content is structured into four “cornerstone” initiatives and one “capstone” 

initiative, all addressing some number of the competencies, 

illustrating the interconnection of the Essentials, and integrating the coursework and the residency. Collectively, the 

initiatives provide a continuous, yearlong focus on critical 

levers for school improvement. Cornerstone and capstone instructors include principals and other school leaders, highereducation faculty, and community leaders.

As part of the first cornerstone, Analyzing Instruction and 

Supporting Improvement, fellows observe students and 

teachers in their classrooms to hone their understanding of 

students’ learning processes and the instructional strategies 

of effective teachers. Building on this foundation, they then 

learn elements of teacher supervision and evaluation and 

examine how to use these processes as levers for instructional improvement. Finally, through participation in regular 

“learning walks” both at their residency school and in schools 

across the city, they become skilled in analyzing instruction in 

classrooms and schools and in giving feedback that supports 

improvement in practice.

In the second cornerstone, Family and Community Engagement, candidates deepen their understanding of how schools 

can most effectively partner with parents and the community and how the principal can lead this effort. Fellows build 

their understanding of family and community interests by 

participating in their school’s School Site Council and School 

Parent Council. Simultaneously, they assume leadership of a 

team to examine family and community engagement at their 

school. This builds their skills in research, needs assessment, 

asset mapping, action-plan development and implementation, working with a diverse population, and facilitating and 

mobilizing teams.

In the third cornerstone, Leadership and Management, fellows deepen their understanding of what a principal does 

to enhance the learning and achievement of all students. 

Through coursework and individual learning plans, and by assuming leadership and closely observing their principal mentor and school leaders, fellows develop and are expected to 

demonstrate a deep understanding of how leaders promote 

core values to shape culture and bring about organizational 

change. At the same time, through coursework and engagement with and analysis of operations, budgets, and the use 

of other resources, fellows develop and begin to practice a 

theory of management. This cornerstone culminates in fellows developing transition and entry plans to be used when 

they assume school leadership roles.

The fourth cornerstone, Scaling Up Instructional Improvement, focuses on what is required to reach every classroom, 
36

every teacher, and every student. Fellows learn the skills 

required to implement a continuous cycle of improvement, 

including analyzing and using data on student performance 

and teacher practice to support improvement; identifying 

instructional priorities; creating and implementing professional development that supports teachers in addressing 

instructional priorities; tracking implementation and impact 

through classroom observations and student performance; 

and continually refining the cycle in response to data.

The capstone, Leadership and Learning, ties together all of 

the competencies of effective principals and the four cornerstones of the program. Leadership is a specific set of skills 

introduced through the Leadership and Management cornerstone, as well as the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that cut 

across all the cornerstones. Fellows’ leadership determines 

their effectiveness in their residencies and, looking forward, 

their effectiveness as principals who are able to: create a 

vision; organize a school around that vision; develop a culture that places students and their learning at the center; 

create relationships and structures essential to implementing 

the vision; and hold high expectations for students and staff 

and support them in reaching the expectations. 

In the spring, as fellows complete the program, they meet 

individually with BPS district administrators and pursue 

positions for the next school year. Fellows who are hired as 

principals continue to receive mentoring and coaching support for two years following their placement. Fellows point 

to this continuing support and the additional support from 

networking with their cohort members as key elements in 

their early successes as school leaders.

Key Success Factors

Although BPF is in an early stage of development, its impact 

on BPS is impressive. BPF fellows demonstrate an ability to “hit 

the ground running” when they become principals—especially 

in challenging and low-performing schools. As a result of its 

districtwide school improvement efforts over the last seven 

years, Boston is realizing steady improvements in student 

achievement and has made significant progress in closing 

the achievement gap that exists between black and Hispanic 

students and white students. The district has been recognized nationally for having a coherent and comprehensive 

improvement strategy that yields results, most recently as a 

semi-finalist for the prestigious Broad Prize in education. The 

district anticipates that BPF will play a significant role in its 

continuing improvement because of the “ready-to-succeed” 

principals the program produces. The BPF Program received 

seed funding from the U.S. Department of Education’s School 

Leadership Program and the Broad Foundation that will sustain it through 2006. Planning is underway to secure more 

long-term funding to ensure BPF’s continued contribution to 

Boston Public Schools.

The BPF model demonstrates how a school district can prepare 

principals to lead schools through whole school improvement 

grounded in leadership theory and principles and targeted to 

the goals of the district. BPF leaders and participants attribute 

the program’s success to the following key elements:

›› The vision of a new model of school leadership 

specifically focused on the Boston Public Schools’ six 

Essentials of Whole School Improvement;

›› A research-based theory of action about effective 

school leadership;

›› A rigorous, thoughtful screening process to select 

applicants with the most potential;

›› A strongly held core belief that all children can and will 

learn when the principals of their schools are effective, 

knowledgeable instructional leaders;

›› Strong support and leadership from the district 

superintendent;

›› Understanding of the principal’s pivotal role in whole 

school improvement;

›› Alignment of program curriculum with state and national leadership standards and performance indicators;

›› Consistent use of data and feedback to strengthen the 

program;

›› Direct and frequent feedback to fellows from faculty, 

mentor principals, and BPF staff; and

›› Tight articulation among standards, BPS Essentials, 

residency, curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
37

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

First Ring Leadership Academy, Cleveland, Ohio

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

Cleveland State University, 

13 First Ring Suburbs Consortium 

school districts, Ohio Department 

of Education, U.S. Department of 

Education, Local Foundation Support

2003 First Ring superintendents 

nominate participants with 

teaching credentials who are 

employed in First Ring Schools 

and have demonstrated 

leadership potential

(2004) 26

(2003) 26

2004

Gender: 62% female

Ethnicity: 70% White, 

30% African American 

Fifteen months that 

include 11 2.5-day 

modules and site-based 

practice in the interim 

between sessions.

Principal License

2 CSU credits for each 

2.5-day module

Cleveland, Ohio, is surrounded by 13 suburbs known as the 

“First Ring Suburbs,” each struggling with the same issues facing large urban core cities: poverty, transiency, violence, underemployment, and achievement gaps aligned along racial 

lines and diversity. In 2002–03, the 13 school districts in this 

First Ring reported a 25 percent turnover in school principals. 

This crisis, along with other negative trends, such as the detrimental effects of high student mobility and low overall test 

scores, inspired the creation of the First Ring School Superintendents’ Collaborative. The superintendents’ most urgent 

concern was a shortage of principals. After exploring several 

options, they concluded that the most promising solution 

would be to identify principal candidates from within their 

own districts: highly skilled teacher-leaders who, with appropriate training and support, could rise to the challenge of 

leading the change and innovation necessary to reverse the 

effects of high student mobility and poverty, to utilize student 

diversity as a resource, and to close the achievement gap. 

In 2003, districts in the Collaborative joined forces with 

Cleveland State University’s College of Education to create 

the First Ring Leadership Academy as an accelerated route to 

principal licensure and certification. The academy’s mission is 

to recruit, train, and retain school leaders capable of meeting challenges unique to First Ring school districts, thereby 

increasing regional capacity for educational leadership and 

school reform. Its program is built around a belief system that 

sees the principal as key to creating school environments 

where all children are learning all of the time. The three driving beliefs of the academy are that great schools are places 

where every child learns and achieves at high levels; that it 

takes a great principal to lead a great school and make things 

happen; and that the most fundamental work of a principal 

is to improve instruction and create a learning environment 

where each child is a high achiever. 

Selection Process

Superintendents in the First Ring school districts identify and 

nominate candidates to apply to the academy. Each is judged 

to possess “the raw talent to become a high-quality leader.” 

Once nominated, candidates complete a formal application 

process and are screened for admission by the Acceptance 

Committee, which includes representative superintendents 

from the First Ring districts and members of Cleveland State 

University’s Education Administration faculty. The academy 

accepts candidates by cohort group. Each cohort of 26 includes two to three candidates nominated by each of the 13 

districts. Participating superintendents say that this process 

sends a strong message throughout their districts that there 

is a deep internal capacity among staff to take on challenging leadership roles. In some districts, staff interest and capacity is great enough that superintendents have generated 

candidate waiting lists. To be admitted to the academy, each 

nominee must make a three-year commitment to stay in the 

First Ring Suburbs when joining the program. 

A key part of the application process is the requirement that 

candidates articulate a personal theory of action regarding 

school leadership. The selection criteria identify candidates 

with a strong understanding of the challenges facing First 

Ring schools and a commitment to accept those challenges 

and transform low-performing schools into places where all 
38

students can meet high standards. The screening panel includes university faculty, First Ring district administrators, 

funders, and academy staff.

Those who are ultimately chosen to participate in the program 

have been deemed most likely to become strong instructional 

leaders who can meet the needs of First Ring schools. Most 

candidates have a master’s degree in education, and some 

have a doctoral degree.

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

A guiding theory of leadership informs all aspects of the program: an effective leader is a change agent who guides a 

school community toward improved instruction so that all 

students achieve at high levels. As the executive director asserts, “Excellent leaders stir the imagination so that others 

can see a new way to do things. Excellent leaders communicate a new model that inspires action.”

Candidates are released from teaching to participate in 11 

two-and-a-half-day training modules over a 15-month 

period. Each module emphasizes a different aspect of effective school leadership, and taken together, their scope 

and sequence lead to a developmental understanding of a 

school principal’s core work: social justice; instructional improvement; curriculum articulation; teacher supervision and 

growth; communication; change theory; the use of technology to improve instruction and meet student needs; school 

oversight and management; parent and family involvement; 

and community development. Most training sessions take 

place on the Cleveland State University campus.

Academy candidates take on authentic site-based projects 

in the interim between each module. Such projects include 

supervising and coaching teachers, writing teacher performance reviews, organizing a parent group to accomplish a 

specific goal, and developing a site-specific teacher development training. During each interim period, candidates receive 

coaching and guidance from their districts’ liaison. They also 

spend time shadowing and observing the principal, recording 

journal reflections on their observations, and participating in 

routine management tasks.

While focusing on the core work of a school principal, the 

coursework also includes time for discussing journal observations and site-based projects in relation to the module content. Cohort members point to these interweaving 

discussions as their most enduring learning experiences. 

They also state that building their cohort network during 

these sessions extends their learning because they call on 

one another for peer coaching and advice.

Participants generate a portfolio based on the projects and 

tasks they complete so that they can subsequently share 

their work with employers. The portfolio is also used for 

assessing candidate achievement in the program. Candidates are also required to create a Capstone Presentation 

about a successful project and what they learned from it, 

and then present it at an annual leadership conference 

they are responsible for planning.

Academy staff facilitate ongoing cohort networking 

activities in which candidates have opportunities to share 

with and learn from one another beyond their initial 

15-month program.

Key Success Factors 

The First Ring Leadership Academy had received strong local philanthropic support. Although the program is less expensive than traditional pathways to certification, it does 

have tuition fees, which go directly to the university. The 

First Ring districts support the program by providing release 

time to candidates.

To understand the impact of the program over time, First Ring 

has instituted a long-term assessment plan. An independent research organization will be evaluating the academy’s 

content and structures in addition to establishing a control 

group of non-participating, first-year principals. Essentially, 

the assessment will determine whether or not the academy’s 

non-traditional, standards-based program has created skilled 

leaders for First Ring schools.

According to anecdotal evidence, the academy has already 

added value in the districts. The executive director of the 

academy reports that teachers in the First Ring schools are 
39

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

now using different instructional models reflective of the 

learning of academy graduates. 

The First Ring Leadership Academy staff and faculty have 

identified the following key factors as contributing to their 

success so far: 

›› The commitment to build authentic relationships with 

all of the stakeholders;

›› The collaboration and support of the First Ring superintendents;

›› The vision of an excellent principal as a change agent 

that focuses the curriculum and program experiences 

for candidates;

›› The enduring belief that every child can achieve high 

standards; 

›› The recognition that an effective, knowledgeable instructional leader understands the instructional process 

that ensures that every child meets high standards;

›› The understanding that adult learners are most successful when learning experiences are authentic and 

relate to their actual work demands;

›› A well-designed, developmental curriculum that builds 

and reinforces an understanding of the core work of 

the principal; and

›› The use of portfolios as the means of assessing candidate progress.
40
41

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

LAUNCH (Leadership Academy and Urban Network for Chicago), 

Chicago, Ill.

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

Chicago Public Schools (CPS), 

Chicago Principals & Administrators 

Association, Chicago Public Education Fund, Northwestern University

1998 Master’s degree; Illinois Type 

75 Administrative Credential; 

six years teaching experience; 

previous leadership

(2004) 21 2003

Gender: 76% female

Ethnicity: 44% African 

American, 28% Hispanic, 

28% White

Twelve months that include: 

4-week summer institute, 

10 full-day professional 

development classes;

5-day case study project;

2 (fall and spring) retreats; 

yearlong full-time internship.

Illinois Administrators 

Academy recertification 

hours

Like many large urban school districts, Chicago Public 

Schools (CPS) faces a shortage of well-qualified principals. 

But the need for quality leadership is made even more pressing by the district’s ambitious improvement plan, Every Child, 

Every School. “Our goal,” says CPS’s chief executive officer, is 

“to make every Chicago public school a school of choice, and 

by that I mean that it must be a school that families of every 

income choose to attend, no matter what the obstacles or 

challenges.” A core strategy for achieving that goal is to ensure that an effective principal guides every school. 

Begun in 1998, the Leadership Academy and Urban Network 

for Chicago’s aspiring principals—LAUNCH*—is one of five 

professional development programs created under the aegis 

of the Chicago Principals and Administrators Association and 

operating as part of the Chicago Leadership Academies for 

Supporting Success (CLASS). CLASS seeks to develop leaders 

who embody the knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviors, and 

aspirations needed to pilot Chicago’s schools to increased 

student achievement. Three of the programs provide professional development for principals at a different point on the 

experience continuum: aspiring, beginning, experienced. The 

fourth helps principals and other CPS leaders meet legislated 

requirements for professional development. 

LAUNCH is guided by an executive director and a director—both recognized as exemplary principals—who provide 

direct, hands-on leadership for all program components: 

marketing, recruiting, selection, program development, curriculum design, follow-through with fellows, and assessment 

and evaluation. Their vision, shared by CLASS and supported 

by CPS, is having a highly qualified principal in every Chicago 

public school ready to lead that school to high achievement 

by continuously improving teaching and learning so that every child realizes his or her educational potential.

Selection Process

Marketing and recruitment activities seek to draw strong assistant principals, teacher-leaders and other promising individuals who meet the requirements. LAUNCH asks current 

principals and other administrators to nominate applicants 

who have demonstrated leadership potential. In addition, 

during its most recent recruitment campaign, LAUNCH sent 

3,200 brochures to attract prospective applicants. 

LAUNCH eligibility requirements include a master’s degree 

in education, at least six years of experience as a teacher, 

an Illinois Type 75 Administrative Certificate in Supervision 

and Administration, and some prior leadership experience. 

Beginning in November 2003, the program posted its online 

application and requirements on the CLASS Web site. Applicants must submit a completed application packet by the 

date specified for a particular cohort. 

* LAUNCH is one of three preparation programs chosen by CPS to 

ready principals for district schools. The other two are the University of Illinois at Chicago and New Leaders for New Schools, which 

is also featured in this guide.
42

A careful screening process by program directors and mentor 

principals seeks to identify the best possible candidates. The 

process considers a range of factors: thoroughness of application; coherence of ideas; recommendations for leadership 

potential; self-awareness; passion for improving student 

learning; and knowledge of leadership and school improvement and of instructional improvement research and literature. About 30 percent of applicants move forward to the 

interview process.

LAUNCH staff invite selected candidates to participate in 

panel interviews with three-person teams of experienced 

principals, administrators and representatives from the 

foundation community. Building on the application analyses, these probing interviews focus on candidates’ ability to 

clearly state personal theory of leadership; self-awareness; 

passion for improving student learning; understanding of 

how to work through adults to achieve school improvement; 

knowledge and ability to articulate instructional improvement strategies; and ability to work as an effective team 

member. Also considered is the coherence and articulateness 

of candidates’ verbal responses.

As a result of the 2004–05 application process, which began 

in November 2003, 21 candidates were accepted for the program out of an applicant pool of 175. 

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

LAUNCH fellows participate in a rigorous educational program designed to accelerate, intensify, and deepen the 

knowledge, skills, and experience of principal candidates. It 

includes three integrated components: a Summer Leadership 

Academy, a yearlong internship, and the Urban Network. 

The Leadership Academy is a five-week intensive program at the James L. Allen Center of the Kellogg Graduate 

School of Management on the campus of Northwestern 

University. Fellows benefit from the expertise of LAUNCH 

staff, faculty from the Kellogg Center, and nationally recognized researchers, authors, leaders, and educators from 

across the country and Canada. (The Kellogg Center provides its faculty and conference facilities to LAUNCH at no 

cost.) Fellows spend their first and last weeks on campus 

to develop a community of practice that will sustain their 

collegial interdependence.

The academy curriculum is aligned to seven leadership proficiencies directly related to Chicago’s Educational Improvement Plan, Every Child, Every School: school leadership; 

parent involvement and community partnerships; creating a 

student-centered learning climate; professional development 

and human resource management; instructional leadership 

(improving teaching and learning); school management and 

daily operations; and interpersonal effectiveness.

Fellows assess themselves on these proficiencies, using a 

rating system that includes Mastery, Competency, Learning, and No Experience. Based on this self-assessment, they 

create their own professional growth plan, which is used to 

guide the apprenticeship experience and to assess progress 

throughout participation in the program.

After completing the summer academy, LAUNCH fellows 

begin a semester-long, full-time paid apprenticeship, working with mentor principals recognized throughout CPS as 

extraordinarily successful leaders. (Mentor principals, selected through an application and screening process, attend 

the Summer Leadership Academy and Mentor Seminars on 

coaching and feedback.) During the apprenticeship, funded 

by the district, each fellow completes both an elementary 

and a secondary experience.

For each site experience, fellows and mentor principals complete an apprenticeship contract that clearly delineates each 

person’s responsibilities and roles. Fellows work to address 

proficiencies identified in their self-assessment and they 

maintain a portfolio that documents the planning and completion of pertinent proficiencies. During the apprenticeship, 

the group of fellows meets monthly for a full-day seminar 

with the LAUNCH staff and other members of the summer 

academy faculty.

Finally, the Urban Network provides ongoing professional 

development, support, and networking opportunities for 

LAUNCH fellows. The network is a dynamic and vibrant social structure that sustains fellows’ commitment to LAUNCH 
43

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

goals, serving as a source of accurate information, expertise, 

assistance, and collegial interactions. It brings together fellows across all cohorts to participate in two-day seminar retreats each quarter—two at the Kellogg Center and others in 

similar conference settings. Fellows also participate in other 

events, such as issues meetings, career forums, and reunion 

dinners. The strength and liveliness of the Urban Network 

distinguishes LAUNCH from other principal preparation programs because it is a continuing source of professional support throughout the careers of its graduates. It also publishes 

an online newsletter that keeps fellows connected to one 

another and provides them with information updates, meeting schedules, and a resource directory.

Fellows graduate in June following their year-long apprenticeship, and are then eligible to apply for school leadership 

positions in Chicago schools. Fellows make a commitment to 

stay with the Chicago Public Schools for four years following 

their involvement in LAUNCH. 

Success Factors

Over 188 individuals have completed the program, and of 

those, 65 currently serve as principals, while 64 are assistant 

principals. Because of the strong connection between LAUNCH 

and CPS’s Every Child, Every School improvement strategy, 

CPS continues to support the program financially. Since 1999, 

CPS has invested over $4.8 million in LAUNCH. Other LAUNCH 

funding partners have included the Chicago Public Education 

Fund ($545,000 since 2000), the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and Northwestern University. 

LAUNCH aspires to develop transformational leaders capable of turning ineffective schools into successful organizations that work for all students. It has translated the 

ISLLC standards into its own Principal Competencies, which 

form the foundation of the program’s standards-based curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The five standards 

and 24 performance indicators represent the goals that 

successful candidates will achieve. To facilitate candidates’ 

success, LAUNCH provides candidates with a self-assessment tool they are expected to utilize throughout their 

program experience. To support its use, LAUNCH has created 

an assessment guide that lays out its five standards and 

24 performance indicators in a page-by-page format. Each 

page includes one of the five standards, its performance 

indicators, a description of each indicator at the highest 

performance level, a list of competency-based learning opportunities, and a four-stage rubric that describes developmental stages of competency, from rudimentary to transformative. This document enables candidates to continuously 

assess their progress, and it also provides a focus for coaching and mentoring. Candidates use this feedback to develop 

a professional growth plan, and then use that plan as a tool 

for setting developmental goals. Candidates document their 

work in a professional portfolio that is assessed by LAUNCH 

staff members, coaches, mentors and others, using a rubric 

that is well known to the candidates. 

Several external evaluations have reported the progress and 

outcomes of LAUNCH in relation to its goals. The Chicago Public Education Fund supported several studies by the Consortium of Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago. 

Early data suggest that LAUNCH principals perform at higher 

levels of effectiveness than their counterparts, have a deeper 

understanding of the school district’s improvement plan, and 

are more effective in aligning their school improvements with 

the district’s goals. Anecdotal data from district administrators describe LAUNCH principals as being able to step into the 

principalship and begin solving problems like a veteran.

The Broad Foundation selected LAUNCH as a showcase program in its benchmarking study. Broad plans to hold a twoday conference to highlight the findings of the study to allow 

other districts to learn from the knowledge and experiences 

of Chicago and then, with Broad support, accelerate the use 

of that knowledge to increase gains in student achievement 

by increasing the level and quality of school leadership.

One 1999–2000 fellow said she takes pride in being able to 

identify herself as “a LAUNCH leader” because the program’s 

reputation is that it produces well-trained principals. She 

stated that the best thing about the program is, “Once you 

finish, you’re not really finished. You always come back. As 

a principal, I’m always [facing dilemmas] that have no clear 

answers. If I have a problem or a question, I can call other 
44

principals from my cohort and we pool our expertise [to 

resolve the issue].”

LAUNCH staff and participants cite the following factors as 

key to the success of the program:

›› A vision of a new model of school leadership focused 

on instructional improvement and student learning;

›› A strongly held core belief that all children can and will 

learn when the principals of their schools are effective, 

knowledgeable instructional leaders;

›› An authentic, research-based, job-embedded curriculum;

›› Attention to adult learning conditions and personalized professional development plans;

›› Alignment of the curriculum with state and local 

leadership standards and performance indicators;

›› Consistent use of data and feedback to strengthen the 

program; 

›› Direct and frequent feedback to candidates from 

faculty, field supervisors, and mentors; and

›› Tight articulation among standards, curriculum, 

instruction, and assessment.
45

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

NJ EXCEL (New Jersey Expedited Certification for Educational 

Leadership), Monroe Township, N.J.

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

N.J. Principal and Supervisors 

Association, Foundation for Education Administration, N.J. State Action 

for Educational Leadership Project 

(Wallace), N.J. Department of 

Education

2003 Master’s degree; 

five years teaching experience; 

requirements specific to 

four different models

(2005) 100

(2004) 109

(2003) 66

2004

Gender: 76% female

Ethnicity: 83% White, 

8% African American, 

8% Hispanic,

1% Asian Am. 

Twelve, 15, or 18 months that 

include: yearlong internship; 

instruction in summer, weeknights 

and Saturdays—225 hours 

(Model 1), 285 hours (Model 2), 

350 hours (Model 3), 105 hours 

(Model 4 field-based internship).

Certificate of Eligibility for 

Principal (Models 1 and 2), 

Certificate for Supervisor and 

Principal (Model 3), Certificate 

for School Administrator (superintendent) Model 4 (American 

Council on Education)

New Jersey Expedited Certification for Educational Leadership 

(NJ EXCEL) emerged as a response to the shortage of highly 

qualified principal applicants across the state. Surveys of district superintendents conducted by the New Jersey Department of Education (NJDOE) in February 2001 found that 70 

percent of the superintendents reported difficulty in filling 

principal positions with qualified candidates. Not surprisingly, 

shortages were more acute in districts with many low-performing schools. The NJDOE survey also identified a serious 

lack of diversity among the highly qualified candidates.

In response to the crises in number and quality of principal 

applicants, the New Jersey Principal and Supervisors Association (NJPSA) and its nonprofit Foundation for Educational Administration (FEA) created a broad-based initiative of related 

strategies entitled “The 3 Rs for School Leadership: Recruit, 

Retain, and Revitalize.” NJ EXCEL, part of a continuum of programs run by the FEA, focuses on recruitment and preparation of high-quality school leaders. However, before NJ EXCEL 

could be initiated as an alternative pathway to certification, 

some legislative barriers needed to be addressed. 

In April 2001, NJPSA submitted a proposal to NJDOE requesting revisions in the New Jersey Administrative Code that 

would authorize an expedited alternative to the traditional 

university-based master’s degree required for principal certification, allowing entities other than institutions of higher 

education to provide a principal certification program. NJDOE 

approved the revisions in May 2002. The FEA then initiated the 

first NJ EXCEL cohort in January 2003. The program’s mission 

is to increase, diversify, and improve the caliber of the school 

leader candidate pool in New Jersey by providing innovative, 

high-quality preparation in expedited pathways to certification for supervisor, principal, and school administrator.

Five core beliefs guide all of NJ EXCEL’s work:

›› All children can and must learn;

›› School leadership and the quality of teaching are 

the two most critical factors in the improvement of 

student learning, and they are inextricably linked;

›› Effective school leadership is the key to an individual 

school’s success and to maximizing learning for all 

students;

›› As the school’s instructional leader, it is the principal 

who sets the tone, creates an environment that guides 

and supports learning for all those in the school 

community, and ultimately has the greatest impact on 

student performance; and

›› It is the superintendent who sets the tone and direction for the district and supports the schools in their 

efforts to continuously improve teaching and learning 

for all students.

Selection Process

Recruiting participants for NJ EXCEL takes place in several 

ways. The most productive approach is through word-of- 
46

mouth by current and previous candidates. Colleague-tocolleague marketing is attracting most new applicants. 

NJ EXCEL also recruits through the publications of its parent 

organization. A third recruitment approach now emerging 

as a good source involves superintendents: They are identifying teacher-leaders in their district and supporting their 

participation in NJ EXCEL with tuition and release time for 

coursework and internships. The program is developing additional recruitment strategies to identify and attract applicants from underrepresented groups.

Most NJ EXCEL participants self-select into the program; 

however, a formal application and selection process ensures 

that all candidates meet established criteria. Applicants 

typically come from such positions as instructional supervisor at a school or in a district office, high school deans and 

counselors, and teachers. All participants hold a master’s degree in education and some hold doctoral degrees. 

The completed application packet must include copies of all 

state certifications and graduate degrees, the applicant’s job 

description, a current resume, and evidence of authorized 

sponsorship and commitment from the applicant’s school 

district. At a formal interview with NJ EXCEL staff, applicants 

complete a writing sample and present a professional portfolio or work samples that exemplify both their leadership 

and supervisory practice and their knowledge of curriculum, 

instruction, assessment, and learning. After the interview, 

NJ EXCEL notifies successful applicants of their acceptance, 

and they begin the program in appropriate cohorts. 

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

The goal of NJ EXCEL is to prepare eligible educators to meet 

state requirements for New Jersey supervisor, principal, and 

school administrator certification. Intended program outcomes 

are that these candidates will demonstrate the knowledge, skills, 

and dispositions required in the areas of visionary, instructional, 

and community leadership, as well as strategic management. 

To meet this goal, the program offers four models designed 

to match the individual’s educational and professional experience and to offer an expedited path to three areas of state 

certification. The four models are:

Model #1: Certificate of Eligibility for Principal—designed for 

practicing supervisors with five or more years of supervisory 

experience (12 months; 225 instructional hours plus 60-hour 

school-based internship);

Model #2: Certificate of Eligibility for Principal—designed 

for classroom teachers and educational specialists holding a supervisor certificate OR practicing supervisors with 

zero to four years of supervisory experience (15 months; 

90-hour school-based internship and guided inquiry into 

supervisory practice);

Model #3: Supervisor Certificate and Certificate of Eligibility for Principal—designed for classroom teachers and educational specialists (18 months; 350 instructional hours and 

30-hour supervisory internship, plus 90-hour school-based 

internship); and

Model #4: Certificate of Eligibility for School Administrator (Superintendent)—designed for individuals who have a 

certificate of eligibility or standard certification for principal (6–12 months plus 105-hour project-based districtlevel internship).

NJ EXCEL’s program design, curriculum, and assessments are 

aligned with the New Jersey Professional Standards for School 

Leaders and national Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA). These standards provide a framework for the 

knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of effective school 

leaders. The standards also establish NJ EXCEL’s expectations 

for candidate performance in four interrelated areas of school 

leadership: Visionary Leadership, Instructional Leadership, 

Community Leadership, and Strategic Management.

Addressing each of the four areas, the program’s problembased curriculum structures job-embedded and internship 

projects that emphasize the action research process, datadriven decision making, and technology-driven research 

applications. Ten themes spiral through the entire program 

curriculum: educational leaders as agents of change and 

continuous improvement; legal and ethical behavior; systems 

thinking; strategic planning and management; creating and 

managing the learning community; using research, data, and 

technology to improve schools and learning for all students; 
47

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

accountability for high academic achievement for all students; ongoing self-assessment, reflection, and professional 

growth; systematic inquiry into leadership and instructional 

practice; and application of research-based leadership and 

instructional improvement strategies in authentic contexts.

All candidates participate in regional Inquiry Groups, which 

meet regularly and also communicate online to discuss readings, problem-based activities, and day-to-day challenges. In 

addition, the members of each group support one another 

with peer reviews and feedback related to action research and 

school-based projects. Each Inquiry Group has an e-Mentor 

who facilitates the group’s activities and serves as its primary 

advisor. Cohort advisors, seminar instructors, internship mentors, and field supervisors provide additional support related 

to program requirements and individual candidate needs 

through NJ EXCEL’s online learning community, which enables 

candidates and faculty to easily interact with one another as 

a collaborative learning community of practitioners. 

The required field experiences build on candidates’ prior experiences and involve them in real tasks and problems that 

district and school leaders encounter. Each candidate receives 

at least one on-site visit by an NJ EXCEL field supervisor who 

observes him or her in the performance of specific job-embedded activities and provides feedback and additional support 

through one-on-one conferencing. All candidates must also 

participate in a supervised internship in a district or school 

other than their own. Each candidate’s district must commit 

to providing release time or equivalent time accommodation 

in order for the candidate to participate in the internship. 

Candidates’ internships are guided by exemplary school and 

district leaders—mentors selected and oriented by NJ EXCEL. 

Key Success Factors 

The NJ EXCEL program is financially self-sustaining as a result 

of tuition fees. The costs for candidates is less than state university tuition and, in most cases, candidates’ school districts 

are willing to pay all or some of their fees.

The success of the New Jersey Principal and Supervisors Association in mobilizing the state to revise the administrative 

code to accommodate a new pathway to administrative 

certification was the initial achievement that made NJ EXCEL 

possible. In the two years since the first cohort of participants 

began the program, NJ EXCEL has demonstrated great success 

in attracting and preparing excellent school leaders. 

Testimonials from participants, past and present, also speak 

to its impact. Many report that the culture of the program 

builds their confidence and commitment. In fact, many participants do not want the program to end, even after they 

earn certification. “This program has changed my life,” says 

one. “I’m much more passionate about student learning.” For 

another, the program “removed the barriers I felt to becoming a principal. Because of the program, I can be the kind of 

instructional leader I want to be.” Anecdotal evidence also 

suggest that candidates’ action research projects have had 

an impact on improving student achievement scores. In fact, 

in one case a candidate’s project resulted in student scores 

increasing by 30 percent.

The NJ EXCEL staff and participants identify the following 

factors as contributors to the success of the program: 

›› The vision of a new model of school leadership focused 

on instructional improvement and student learning;

›› A strongly held core belief that all children can and will 

learn when the principals of their schools are effective 

and knowledgeable instructional leaders;

›› An authentic, research-based, job-embedded curriculum;

›› Attention to adult learning conditions and personalized professional development plans;

›› Alignment of the curriculum with state and national 

leadership standards and performance indicators;

›› The consistent use of data and feedback to strengthen 

the program; 

›› The direct and frequent feedback to candidates from 

faculty, field supervisors, and mentors; and

›› The tight articulation among standards, curriculum, 

instruction, and assessment.
48
49

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

New Leaders for New Schools, 

New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Memphis, 

and San Francisco Bay Area 

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

School Districts: Chicago, Memphis, New York City, San Francisco 

Bay Area (Aspire charter school 

program), Washington D.C.; Broad 

Foundation; New Schools Venture 

Fund; Boeing; New Profit

2000 Bachelor’s degree; five years 

professional experience; 

two years k–12 teaching 

experience; demonstrated 

leadership

(2005) 90

(2004) 56

(2003) 52

(2002) 31

(2001) 13

2004

Gender: 60% female

Ethnicity: 60% African 

American, 30% White, 

7% Hispanic, 3% Asian Am.

Three years that include: 

5–6 week summer intensive; 

yearlong, full-time residency; 

4–5 day sessions during residency; 

2 years of coaching and support 

following placement.

Principal certification 

(partner with local 

universities to ensure 

credentialing)

New Leaders for New Schools is a national, New York Citybased nonprofit organization whose mission is to foster high 

academic achievement for every child by recruiting and developing the next generation of outstanding leaders for the 

nation’s urban public schools. It has already established successful partnerships with public school systems and charter 

schools in New York City, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Memphis, and the San Francisco Bay Area, and plans call for expansion to additional urban areas each year. 

New Leaders is the brainchild of three passionate co-founders: a former education policy advisor for the Clinton administration, an education reform advocate specializing in 

charter schools, and a former management consultant. In 

early 2000, New Leaders became the first nonprofit to win an 

award in the Harvard Business School’s annual business plan 

contest. Funding offers followed, and in June New Leaders 

began operation. Five core beliefs undergird and drive every 

aspect of its work: 

›› Every child can reach high levels of academic excellence, regardless of background;

›› Adults are accountable for building and maintaining 

systems to ensure that all children excel academically. 

Adults can and must do more to unlock the potential 

of each and every student;

›› Delivering high-quality public education to all children is a cornerstone of our democracy, economy, and 

society, and it is critical to sustaining a just society 

that affords every child the full range of opportunities in life;

›› Great principals lead great schools, coaching and 

inspiring teachers to reach and teach every child and 

collaborating with students’ parents, families, and 

communities to make schools work; and

›› With access to outstanding public schools, all children 

will develop the competence, critical thinking, and 

social and civic skills to reach their highest potential in 

the classroom and in life.

Selection Process

New Leaders aggressively recruits nationwide, seeking extremely talented people to become urban school principals. 

Recruitment for its 2004 candidates began in September 

2003 with a campaign that included an executive-searchstyle approach of creating local and national nominator 

networks that extended to 17 education and professional 

conferences across the country. Many of its presentations 

were targeted to attract individuals outside the traditional 

education–based candidate pool. New Leaders received over 

2,600 applications for its first 150 fellowships, representing a selection rate of 6 percent. Many applicants were also 
50

attracted to New Leaders from Teach for America and The 

New Teacher Project pools. 

A three-phase system is used to screen and select candidates 

based on nine selection criteria describing the qualities, values, and beliefs New Leaders seeks in its candidates. These 

criteria (along with descriptive indicators) are posted on the 

New Leaders Web site so potential applicants can assess their 

own readiness for the program: 

›› An unyielding belief in the potential of all children to 

excel academically;

›› Persistence and determination;

›› Problem-solving skills;

›› Project management skills to deliver results;

›› Knowledge of teaching and learning;

›› Self-awareness and commitment to ongoing learning;

›› Excellent communication and listening skills;

›› The ability to build successful relationships; and

›› The ability to collaborate and build teams.

The first of four application steps is the online completion and submission of a substantive 14-page questionnaire designed to capture an applicant’s capacity on five 

of the selection criteria. (The remaining four criteria are 

assessed in following steps.) For example, one questionnaire item requires applicants to demonstrate a record of 

formal or informal leadership in bringing together diverse 

groups of adults to accomplish a common mission. Applicants must also have a bachelor’s degree (or preferably a 

master’s degree) and a minimum of five years of professional management or leadership experience in organizations such as nonprofits, military service, social services, 

and higher education and at least two years as a teacher. 

Approximately 50 percent of the applicants are screened 

out by the questionnaire. 

Those who make it through this first screening then participate in an hour-and-a-half interview, which gives candidates 

an opportunity to share their experiences and discuss their 

interests in becoming urban school principals. At this stage, 

each candidate is also asked to write a 15-minute analysis of 

a case study. Approximately 50 percent of those interviewed 

successfully make it through this stage.

Successful first-round applicants are invited to participate in 

the final phase of the selection process—a full-day interview 

session. Activities during this phase include a written assignment, one-on-one interviews, case studies, role-playing, and 

a presentation. Candidates have the opportunity to experience a day in the life of a principal. Throughout the interview 

process evaluators use a comprehensive set of rubrics that are 

aligned with the selection criteria to rate applicants. Those 

who advance to this phase must bring to the interview their 

official transcripts, teaching certificate(s), at least one formal 

letter of reference from a supervisor, and a brief essay stating 

preferences for a mentor principal and school. 

For the 2004 program, 56 candidates were admitted out of an 

initial pool of 1,100 applicants. New Leaders staff members 

assert that this acceptance rate of less than 6 percent demonstrates the rigorous and demanding design of the selection 

process and the aptness of the nine selection criteria. Over 

the last four years, New Leaders received over 2,600 applications for its first 150 fellowships.

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

New Leaders’ program includes five years of support, a sixweek intensive leadership training summer institute, a yearlong, full-time residency with a mentor principal, on-site 

coaching, and working directly with a leadership coach—an 

outstanding veteran of an urban school principalship. New 

Leaders’ curriculum content is closely aligned with the organization’s core beliefs, selection criteria, theory of educational leadership, and the New Leaders Principal Leadership 

Competencies. These 12 essential competencies reflect research on the practices of urban school principals who have 

successfully turned around low-performing schools. To complete the program, candidates must demonstrate proficiency 

in all 12 competencies. 
51

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

The program begins with a six-week Foundations Institute 

at the Wharton School of Management at the University 

of Pennsylvania. During this stage candidates attend university-level courses taught by outstanding principals, national education and leadership experts, and New Leaders 

staff. Courses focus on skill development in instructional 

and transformational leadership. This summer institute also 

helps to build a national community of peers focused on 

common goals.

Following the six-week summer institute, candidates are 

placed with carefully selected mentor principals at schools 

within partner districts for a full-time residency that spans 

the length of the school year. During this residency, candidates are expected to have direct responsibility for improving 

student achievement and teacher development and coaching. 

They also attend weekly seminars for ongoing professional 

development and peer support in their local districts, and 

they receive bimonthly visits from their leadership coaches. 

New Leaders coaches and field support staff lead the seminars and use participants’ authentic experiences as a concrete 

basis for discussing school leadership theory. Because state 

certification requirements vary (e.g., some states have minimal requirements for teaching credentials while others have 

complex, multi-step requirements), New Leaders also creates 

opportunities for candidates to earn full state certification 

with a local university partner. 

During the residency there are also four five-day Foundation 

Seminars, continuing the transformational and instructional 

leadership concentrations that began during the summer 

Foundations Institute. Held in program cities and attended 

by all residents, these seminars provide an opportunity for 

the national community to reconvene, share experiences, and 

provide peer support.

During the residency, candidates receive mentoring from a 

leadership coach, recruited from a pool of principals who 

have retired after successful careers leading excellent urban 

schools. New Leaders has developed a coaching-skills curriculum, and it brings the national cadre of coaches together 

for training four times a year. The coaches also participate 

in both the summer Foundations Institute and the four 

Foundations Seminars throughout the year. Coaches visit 

each resident and mentor principal at the residency site at 

least once a week to help structure the resident’s working 

relationship and leadership responsibilities with the mentor 

principal. They also help residents define a personal leadership development plan and construct a professional portfolio of their accomplishments during the residency, and they 

serve as the faculty of record for residents’ coursework and 

assignments. Coaches are also responsible for conducting 

formal assessments of residents’ progress to evaluate each 

resident’s readiness for the principalship.

All candidates are required to make a long-term commitment to the partner school district in which they are placed. 

In addition to completing their paid residency, they commit 

to spending a minimum of three years as a principal or an 

assistant principal in the district. Each successful new leader 

receives job-seeking support. They also receive at least two 

years of coaching and mentoring during their first principalship, along with opportunities for collaboration and problem 

solving with other new leaders.

Key Success Factors

New Leaders for New Schools has generated significant 

support from a wide variety of partners, including strategic 

consulting firm Kirkland and Ellis. Active funders of the New 

Leaders preparation program include several of the nation’s 

leading venture philanthropists, such as the Boston-based 

New Profit, Inc., the Silicon Valley-based New Schools Venture Fund, and the Los Angeles-based Broad Foundation.

New Leaders’ core philosophy and theory of action emphasize 

the use of data analysis as a means of determining personal, 

professional, organizational, and program effectiveness. Because the program is still relatively new, extensive success 

data is not yet available. However, program staff have been 

tracking placement rates since the beginning and that rate 

for successful residents is 95 percent, including 60 percent as 

principals and 35 percent as assistant principals. Close to 100 

“new leaders” have emerged from the program and are now 

serving in urban schools around the country. 
52

The New Leaders staff identify the following factors as important to program success:

›› A commitment of the founders and staff to the 

program’s vision, mission, and theory of action about 

ensuring that urban schools are environments in which 

all children achieve at high levels;

›› A coherence between core beliefs, vision, mission, 

selection criteria, and principal competencies that provides a scaffold for everything the organization does;

›› Rigorous application, screening, selection, and 

admission processes;

›› Alignment of the curriculum with the selection criteria 

and principal leadership competencies;

›› A culture of honesty, transparency, and feedback;

›› A consistent use of data and feedback to strengthen 

the program;

›› Direct and frequent support, feedback, and expertise 

from leadership coaches;

›› The continuing leadership and ability of the national 

team to secure funding, streamline organizational 

operations, and monitor program coherence and 

quality; and

›› Partnerships across the public and private sectors in 

each city—including the school district, corporations, 

foundations, and government.
53

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Principals Excellence Program, Pike County, Ky.

Partners

Program 

Initiated Admission Requirements

No. of 

Participants

Participant 

Demographics

Length of 

Instructional Program

Certification, 

Credits Earned

University of Kentucky, Ky. Department of Education, Ky. Association 

of School Administrators, AEL, 

U.S. Department of Education

2002 Holds or is eligible to hold 

principal certification 

(2004) 15

(2003) 15

2004

Gender: 33% female

Ethnicity: 100% White

Twelve months that include: 

one day each week over 

academic year; one-week 

summer intensive.

18-21 UKY credits toward 

Level II Principal or 

Supervisor of Instruction 

certification

The Principals Excellence Program (PEP) is a partnership between the University of Kentucky and eastern Kentucky’s rural 

Pike County School District, in cooperation with Morehead 

State University, which historically has trained most of the 

district’s teachers and administrators. The program aims to 

enhance the leadership skills of practicing and aspiring principals in high-need Appalachian schools. Its overarching goal is 

to develop and refine a model for improved school leadership 

that ensures learning for rural school students considered at 

risk of academic failure. Its specific objectives are to:

1. Create a new generation of skilled instructional leaders and nurture a culture of learning that influences 

recruitment, preparation, and selection of future 

school leaders;

2. Institutionalize a grow-your-own strategy for empowering instructional leaders throughout the local community and within the school community of students 

and parents; and

3. Model and evaluate a program of preparation, professional development, and reculturation of school 

leadership to ensure learning for struggling students, 

utilizing a partnership among the local high-need 

rural school district, the state’s larger land-grant 

university, and the regional public university that 

provides preservice preparation.

The PEP program consists of an interconnected series of 

seminar-workshops, field-based experiences, and structured 

reflections aimed at developing a professional community 

of principals who are able and willing to be change agents—

reflective practitioners committed to lifelong learning and 

the use of data to drive decision-making. As a critical part of 

this advanced leadership development program, participants 

engage each semester in a field-based practicum intended 

to support situated learning under the guidance of carefully 

selected mentor principals and to develop participants’ ability 

to conduct collaborative action research. 

Selection Process

PEP’s recruitment and selection processes are aimed at finding the best possible leadership candidates. PEP requires that 

each candidate be nominated by an administrator or other 

staff member who perceives the candidate’s leadership potential. Participants must be practicing principals, classroom 

teachers, or other education personnel who qualify to receive provisional administrator certification and who sign 

an agreement to complete the training and seek a position 

as a school leader. Recruitment guidelines identify specific 

characteristics needed by Pike County school leaders who will 

effectively serve children and youth considered at risk of academic problems. The candidate must:

›› Understand Kentucky’s Learning Goals;

›› Believe that all children can learn at high levels;

›› Have a thorough knowledge of curriculum 

and assessment;

›› Demonstrate instructional leadership within his or her 

school community;

›› Show evidence of being a master teacher;

›› Work well as a team member;

›› Show evidence of being a lifelong learner; and 

›› Understand the teaching and learning process. 
54

PEP initially set out to identify and recruit from Pike County 

and other regional school districts two 15-member cohorts 

of practicing and aspiring school leaders for advanced leadership development. Candidates had been identified by Pike 

County district leaders as having the potential to become 

effective principals or assistant principals in the district’s 

schools. While large geographically, Pike County has a small 

population, with most people living in little pocket communities. As a result, district administrators tend to know teachers 

and principals very well. This familiarity enables them to select good candidates. The first PEP cohort (January-December 

2003) of 15 participants included eight practicing principals 

or assistant principals and seven aspiring principals who held 

administrator certification but currently served as classroom 

teachers, curriculum coordinators, deans or media specialists. 

The second PEP cohort (January-December 2004) included 

nine administrators and six teachers.

Program Design and Practical 

Learning Experiences

PEP is a practical, field-based, job-embedded leadership 

development program guided by leadership educators from 

the University of Kentucky and leadership practitioners 

from Pike County that is delivered through a closed cohort 

model. This cohort structure—a uniquely defined community of learners that remains intact throughout the entire 

program—is considered a key program element. Early and 

ongoing community-building strategies ensure the creation 

and maintenance of a risk-free learning environment within 

the cohort. PEP integrates multiple learning opportunities 

geared toward exposing participants to various situations 

and venues where diverse leadership skills can be developed. 

PEP includes: (a) biweekly full-day seminar-workshops; 

(b) biweekly clinical practicum during spring semester guided by elementary principal mentors; (c) biweekly clinical 

practicum during fall semester guided by secondary principal mentors; (d) ongoing Web-based activities; and (e) a 

summer institute involving all school administrators in the 

partnering district.

During the spring, PEP cohort members engage in a coordinated series of biweekly advanced educational leadership 

seminars and school-site action research activities. The 

seminars, delivered by University of Kentucky faculty in the 

Department of Administration and Supervision, focus on visionary and collaborative leadership practices. During alternative weeks, PEP participants work with mentor principals 

in selected elementary schools in Pike County, conducting 

action research to identify strategies to improve student 

learning. 

During the summer, PEP cohort members join all Pike County 

school administrators for an intensive, weeklong leadership 

academy. For the program’s first summer, a leadership consultant from the Kentucky Association of School Administrators Leadership Academy guided Pike County administrators 

in a review of the district’s P-12 curriculum and intensive 

action planning to meet targeted student achievement goals 

in mathematics and science. That fall, the biweekly advanced 

leadership seminars with university faculty focused on instructional and ethical leadership practices. Action research was 

conducted in three secondary schools within Pike County. 

The second cohort began the program in January 2004 and 

will continue through December 2004, following the same 

general pattern as the first, but in a more streamlined version that was developed based on feedback and program assessment. Nearby Johnson County became a partner for the 

second PEP cohort.

Pike County School District has developed and implemented 

a comprehensive model of administrator evaluation using the 

ISLLC standards performance indicators as the framework. 

Thus, to align with the district’s administrator performance 

framework, the PEP curriculum is structured on the four central and recurring themes within the ISLLC standards: 

›› A vision for success;

›› A focus on teaching and learning;

›› An involvement of all stakeholders; and

›› A demonstration of ethical behavior. 

Both formal and informal data inform and drive the actions 

of PEP’s instructional and leadership teams. Focus group 

interviews involving Cohort A members were conducted in 
55

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

March 2003 and October 2003. Additional focus group interviews for Cohort A were scheduled for fall 2004. An evaluation survey was administered at the close of the first training 

module and at the beginning of the third module; another 

post-survey was administered at the close of Cohort A in December 2003. Formal data collection for Cohort B is proceeding in the same way. 

Success Factors 

Although PEP formally began in January 2003, its impact 

on the community of administrative practice was becoming 

noticeable during the summer institute held in Pikeville during June 2003. Pike County district leadership team members 

who observed the summer institute noted marked differences 

in interactions among district administrators: The group appeared to be a more supportive, collaborative community 

of practice. One participant-observer noted participants’ 

increased displays of confidence and competence as educational leaders. According to the project director, practicing 

principals involved in PEP say, “they continue to learn more 

about the practice of educational administration through the 

PEP network—despite their breadth and depth of experiences 

as principals.”

PEP receives grant funding from the U.S. Department of Education’s School Leadership Development Program through 

September 2005 that allows for a formal program evaluation. 

Pike County School District hopes to be able to continue the 

program internally using district administrators as instructors. 

Reflecting on the progress and successes of the program, 

University of Kentucky faculty, Pike County School District 

administrators, and PEP participants identified the following 

contributing factors:

›› The collaborative partnership and shared vision 

between the Pike County School District—especially the 

superintendent—and the University of Kentucky faculty;

›› Seed funding to support start-up costs;

›› Shared responsibility between the university and the 

district for developing curriculum, monitoring PEP 

candidates’ progress, and planning for the logistical 

implementation of PEP sessions;

›› The integration of the curriculum with authentic tasks 

and reality-based examples from PEP participants’ 

experiences;

›› The ongoing assessment of cohort progress to ensure 

that program components were logically interconnected and delivered at relevant times to provide program 

coherence;

›› The strong commitment of university faculty and 

district leadership to “get the job done” and then 

celebrate publicly to acknowledge accomplishments; and

›› The consistent in-district monitoring of PEP activities by the district’s director of curriculum and 

instruction and a leadership consultant who also 

provides on-site coaching support for new principals.
56

Boston Principal Fellowship

School Leadership Institute

Boston Public Schools

26 Court Street

Boston, MA 02108

http://www.bostonsli.org/

Rachel Curtis

Executive Director

First Ring Leadership Academy

Cleveland State University

2121 Euclid Avenue, KB 1508

Cleveland, OH 44115

http://www.csuohio.edu/coe/

Overview/academic_Departments/

CASAL/firstRingLeadership.html

Deborah Morin

Executive Director

LAUNCH (Leadership Academy 

and Urban Network for Chicago)

Chicago Principals and 

Administrators Association (CPAA)

221 North La Salle Street, Ste. 1550

Chicago, IL 60601

http://www.cpaa.cps.k12.il.us

Faye Terrell-Perkins

Executive Director

NJ EXCEL (New Jersey

Expedited Certification for 

Educational Leadership)

Foundation for Educational 

Administration

New Jersey Principals and 

Supervisors Association

12 Centre Drive

Monroe Township, NJ 08831

http://www.njexcel.org/

Eloise Forster

Executive Director

New Leaders for New Schools

30 West 26th Street, 2nd Floor

New York, NY 10010

http://www.nlns.org/

Jonathan Schnur

Chief Executive Officer

Matt Evans

Chief Information Officer

Principals Excellence Program

Pike County Schools and University 

of Kentucky

EDA 111 Dickey Hall

Lexington, KY 40506

http://www.uky.edu

Tricia Browne-Ferrigno

PEP Project Director

WestEd

730 Harrison Street

San Francisco, CA 94107

http://www.wested.org/ 

Glen Harvey

Chief Executive Officer

Nikola Filby

Associate Director, 

Regional Laboratory Program

Edvance

11044 Research Boulevard, Ste. B300

Austin, TX 78759

http://www.edvance.org/ 

Dean Nafziger

Chief Executive Officer 

Kristin Arnold

Project Director

Acknowledgments

The development of this guide was initiated and directed by 

Nina S. Rees, assistant deputy secretary in the Office of Innovation and Improvement at the U.S. Department of Education. Sharon Horn was project director. 

An external advisory panel provided feedback to refine the 

study scope and prioritize issues to investigate. Members included Dick Flanary, National Association of Secondary School 

Administrators; Libia Gil, New American Schools; Betty Hale, 

Institute for Educational Leadership; Frederick Hess, American 

Enterprise Institute; Lynn Liao, Broad Foundation; Kent Peterson, University of Wisconsin at Madison; Terry Ryan, Fordham 

Institute; and Jon Schnur, New Leaders for New Schools. 

Staff in the Department of Education who provided input and 

reviewed drafts include Susan Sclafani, Tom Corwin, Michael 

Petrilli, Meredith Miller, Phil Rosenfelt, John Gibbons, Jeff 

Sims, Pat Gore, Peggy Zelinko, and Jacquelyn Zimmermann. 

This guide was written, designed, and based on a report by 

WestEd.

WestEd is a nonprofit research, development, and service 

agency committed to improving learning at all stages of life, 

both in school and out. WestEd has offices across the United 

States and also serves as one of the nation’s 10 regional educational laboratories.

WestEd’s partner in developing this series of research reports 

and innovation guides is Edvance. Created by the American Productivity and Quality Center, Edvance is a resource 

for process and performance improvement with a focus on 

benchmarking, knowledge management, performance measurement, and quality improvement initiatives in education.

The six programs cooperating in the development of this 

guide and the report from which it is drawn were generous 

with both their time and attention to the project. We would 

like to thank all those who were instrumental in coordinating 

and participating in the site visits that inform the report and 

this guide.
57

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

The research design and methodology for this project is an adaptation of the four-phase benchmarking process used by the American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC), along with general case 

study processes. This guide is based on a longer and more detailed report that includes individual case 

studies of each of the six study sites and a cross-site analysis of key generalizable findings. While classic benchmarking looks for best or promising practices using quantitative measures and comparisons 

among organizations, most of the innovative programs in this study are too new to fully support this 

methodology. A brief overview of this project’s adapted methodology follows.

Appendix A: 

Research Methodology

Develop Conceptual Framework

A study scope or conceptual framework was developed 

from an analysis of research and descriptive information 

about school leadership preparation, including alternative route programs. Experts in leadership development 

and alternative route approaches were recruited to serve 

on an external advisory panel that provided feedback to 

refine the framework and prioritize issues to investigate. 

The resulting study scope and guiding questions directed 

all aspects of the study (see figure 2 on page 7).

Site selection was a multistep process to ensure that the 

guide would feature an array of practices reflected in 

the elements of the study scope and would represent a 

variety of geographic locations and contexts with which 

district administrators, university faculty members, and 

other key stakeholders could identify. Initially, 60 potential sites were identified based on public documents, 

marketing materials, reports, and program Web sites using online search descriptors such as alternative leadership preparation, alternative principal certification, alternative licensure for school administrators, expedited 

certification, and accelerated certification. 

A screening process filtered the list to 18 sites. These 

second-round sites were selected based on four criteria: candidates are recruited into the program based on 

demonstrated leadership experience; the program offers an accelerated route to certification; the program 

is currently accepting candidates; and the program has 

evidence of promising practices in the 24 areas of the 

study scope, such as screening candidates using stated 

criteria, tailored, field-based programming, and strong 

mentor support. 

The 18 sites were then screened using a weighted criteria 

matrix based on the study scope (figure 2). The screen-
58

ing process was conducted through targeted phone 

interviews with program staff and thorough reviews of 

program materials including: recruiting and application 

procedures; selection criteria and screening process; 

curriculum scope and sequence; instructional manuals; 

residency experience; coaching; mentoring; participant 

evaluation and support; follow-through support; and 

program evaluation information. The selected six sites 

scored between 24 and 20 on a scale of 24 possible 

points and were ranked based on their weighted scores. 

In addition, they represented a range of geographic locations, contextual conditions, and types of programming.

Collect Data

Collecting detailed descriptive information from program staff, partners, funders, participants, and district 

leaders was key to understanding each program’s practices, the outcome or impact each achieved, and the 

lessons learned from which others could benefit. The 

major steps to this phase involved finalizing the site 

visit interview guide based on the study scope and arranging and conducting site visits to the programs.

Each of the six sites hosted a two-day visit that included 

interviews with administrators, program participants, and 

partners, as well as observation of events when scheduling permitted. During the site visits, these key personnel 

and stakeholders were asked questions from the site visit 

discussion guide tailored to their particular role group. 

In addition, artifacts from the sites, such as applications, 

planning tools, interview protocols, curriculum materials, 

and participant work were collected to provide concrete 

examples of program practices. The study team collated 

the information collected during the site visits and developed a case study for each site.

Analyze and Report

Once all the data were collected, the project team 

analyzed them to understand the promising practices 

uncovered throughout the benchmarking project, both 

within and across programs. 

Two products resulted from this research: a report of 

findings and this practitioner’s guide. The report provides a more detailed analysis of key findings across 

sites, a detailed case study of each site, a collection of 

artifacts, and key project documents. The practitioner’s 

guide is a summary of the report intended for broad 

distribution.

Adapt

This guide offers descriptive examples of new ways to 

prepare school leaders for the challenging work awaiting them. Ultimately, readers of this guide will need to 

select, adapt, and implement practices that meet their 

individual needs and contexts. The guide will be broadly 

distributed around the country through presentations 

at national and regional conferences, as well as through 

national associations and networks. The guide is also 

accessible online at http://www.ed.gov/admins/recruit/

prepare/alternative/index.html.
59

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Appendix B: 

Resources

The Broad Foundation works to improve k-12 urban 

public education through better governance, management, and labor relations. The foundation’s goals are 

to train a broad, deep bench of current and aspiring 

leaders in education; to redefine the traditional roles, 

practices, and policies of school board members, superintendents, principals, and labor union leaders to better 

address contemporary challenges in education; to attract and retain the highest quality talent to leadership 

roles in education; to equip school systems and their 

leaders with modern tools for effective management; 

to provide tangible incentives for educators to advance 

academic performance; and to honor and showcase 

success wherever it occurs in urban education. 

http://www.broadfoundation.org/

The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, based in 

Washington, D.C., supports research, publications, and 

action projects of national significance in elementary 

and secondary education reform, as well as significant 

education reform projects. In May 2003, the institute, 

along with the Broad Foundation, published Better 

Leaders for America’s Schools: A Manifesto. The document contends that American public education faces 

a “crisis in leadership” that cannot be alleviated from 

traditional sources of school principals and superintendents. Its signers do not believe this crisis can be fixed 

by conventional strategies for preparing, certifying, 

and employing education leaders. Instead, they urge 

that first-rate leaders be sought outside the education 

field, earn salaries on par with their peers in other professions, and gain new authority over school staffing, 

operations, and budgets.

http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/

The Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL) seeks 

to improve education—and the lives of children and 

their families—through positive and visionary change. 

Through its School Leadership for the 21st Century Initiative, IEL has published several informative reports on 

the state of school leadership and the need for highly 

qualified leaders in America’s public schools. The task 

force report Leadership for Student Learning: Reinventing the Principalship (October 2000) suggests that 

the core mission of the principalship must be redefined 

as leadership for student learning. To “reinvent the 

principalship” for 21st century schools, communities 

must fill the pipeline with effective school leaders, support the profession, and guarantee quality and results. 

Guidelines and suggested questions are included for 

those who wish to start conversations on reinventing 

the principalship in their communities by bringing together diverse constituencies and empowering leaders 

with knowledge and applicable ideas.

http://www.iel.org/

The organizations listed below are provided as examples of resources that may be helpful to the reader. Their inclusion 

should not imply an endorsement by the Department. There also may be many other useful resources on this topic.
60

The National Center for Education Information

(NCEI) is a private, nonpartisan research organization 

in Washington, D.C., specializing in survey research 

and data analysis. NCEI is the authoritative source of 

information about alternative preparation and certification of teachers and school administrators. The Web site 

provides easy access to detailed information about policies and alternative certification routes in each state.

http://www.ncei.com/

The Haberman Educational Foundation, Inc. promotes research-based models for identifying teachers and principals—particularly educators who serve 

students at risk and in poverty. The Foundation’s “Star 

Online Administrator Questionnaire” and “Online PreScreener” identify candidates who are likely to succeed 

in alternative administrative certification programs.

http://www.habermanfoundation.org/

The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) 

is a nonpartisan, nationwide, nonprofit organization of 

public officials who head departments of elementary 

and secondary education in the states, the District of 

Columbia, the Department of Defense Education Activity, and five U.S. extra-state jurisdictions. CCSSO provides leadership, advocacy, and technical assistance on 

major educational issues. In its publication The Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium: Standards 

For School Leaders (1996), the ISLLC standards present a common core of knowledge, dispositions, and 

performances that link leadership to productive schools 

and enhanced education outcomes. The ISLLC standards have been used as a foundational source for the 

six programs in this guide.

http://www.ccsso.org/

The Education Commission of the States (ECS) 

is a nonprofit organization that provides information to state education policy leaders on many critical 

education issues. The ECS Web site offers data about 

what states are doing regarding alternative licensure 

and certification of principals and superintendents. 

Recent publications include: Licensure/Certification: What States Are Doing—Administrator License 

Requirements, Portability, Waivers and Alternative 

Certification, which contains information on license 

requirements, portability, waivers, and alternative certification for administrators and allows for comparing 

across states (April 2004), and Certification of Principals and Superintendents in the U.S., 2003, which provides information on school administrator certification 

requirements for each state. This document provides 

state-by-state information on regular path and alternate path certification requirements for school administrator certification. 

http://www.ecs.org/
61

Innovations in Education: Innovative Pathways to School Leadership

Notes

1

 Elaine McEwan summarizes 20 years of research on 

effective schools and discusses her analysis in The traits 

of highly effective principals: From good to great performance (Corwin Press, 2003).

2

 Murphy, J. and Louis, K. S. (1999). Handbook of research on educational administration. San Francisco: 

Jossey-Bass; Smith, W. F. and Andrews, R. L. (1989). 

Instructional leadership: How principals make a difference. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision 

and Curriculum Development; Glickman, C. D. (2002). 

Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed. 

Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; and Elmore, R. J. (2000). Building 

a new structure for school leadership. New York: The 

Albert Shanker Institute.

3

 Newmann, F. M., Smith, B., Allensworth, E., and Bryk, 

A. S. (2001). School instructional program coherence: 

Benefits and challenges. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

4

 For a perspective on the school community environment as a positive force for school reform, see Fullan, 

M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press, pp. 84–103.

5

 Feistritzer, E. (January 2003). School administrator 

certification in the United States, 2002. Washington, 

D.C.: National Center for Education Information.

6 The 11 states reporting that they have approved 

innovative pathways to administrative certification 

include California (new legislation), Idaho, Kentucky, 

Maryland (intended for people already in the education 

system), Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New 

Hampshire, Ohio (not used), Tennessee (not used), and 

Texas (only for people who have been teachers or principals). Although New Jersey, New York, and Oregon report having no alternate routes, they do have programs 

for non-traditional candidates to get into administrative 

jobs. Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, and Kansas have alternate routes for superintendents, but not for principals. 

Hawaii, which has only one school district, has an 

alternate route for principals. Florida passed legislation 

in 2002 giving local school boards authority to set their 

own alternative qualifications for persons wishing to 

become principals. Feistritzer, op.cit.

7

 Leithwood, K. and Duke, D. L. (1999). “A century’s 

quest to understand school leadership.” In Murphy, J. 

and Louis, K. S., Handbook of research on educational 

administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 45–72.

8

 Haycock, K. (1999). Dispelling the myth: High-poverty 

schools exceeding expectations. Washington, D.C.: The 

Education Trust; Barkley, S., Bottoms, G., Feagin, C. H., 

and Clark, S. (1999). Leadership matters: Building leadership capacity. Atlanta, Ga.: Southern Regional Education Board; Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the 

depths of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press.

9 http://www.ccsso.org/Projects/interstate_school_

leaders_licensure_consortium/standards_for_school_

leaders/562.cfm. See also WestEd. (2003). Moving 

standards into everyday work: Descriptions of practice. 

San Francisco: Author.
62

10 NAESP Fact Sheet/NAESP 2002 Survey at http://www.

naesp.org.

11 Knapp, M. S. et al. (1995). Teaching for meaning in 

high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College 

Press; Charles A. Dana Center. (1999). Hope for urban 

education: A study of nine high-performing highpoverty urban elementary schools. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Education; Blase J., and Blase J. 

(1999). “Principals’ instructional leadership and teacher 

development: Teachers’ perspectives,” Educational 

Administration Quarterly, 35 (3), 349–78.