https://doi.org/10.46767/kfp.2016-0029

ABSTRACT

School principals are responsible for supervising STEM teachers, yet many principals did not teach in the STEM fields and have limited training in STEM content, process and practice. This presents a challenge for principals when they observe STEM classrooms and provide feedback to teachers. In this paper the authors describe a study about principals’ views of STEM classrooms and the observational feedback principals provide to those teachers. The results of the study suggest principals need a deeper understanding of reform minded STEM process and practice, and alternative approaches to providing teachers with observational feedback. Building on the results of the study, the authors present a collaborative model (Innovating Teaching and Learning Leadership (iTALL)) for preparing pre-service principals and pre-service STEM teachers and describes training in the STEM process and practice. Observational exercises are discussed and changes in observational protocols when conducting classroom walk-throughs are described.

Key Words: Instructional Leadership; Principal Education; Supervision; STEM Process and Practice

PDF

REFERENCES

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2012). Leverage leadership: A practical guide to building exceptional schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3‐11.

Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: challenges and opportunities. Arlington, Virginia: National Science Teachers Association.

Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

DuFour, R. & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last. Bloomington, IN; Solution Tree.

Duke, D., Carr, M., & Sterrett, W. (2013). The school improvement planning handbook: Getting focused for turnaround and transition. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Golrdon, J. M. (2001). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., and Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2010). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (8^th ed). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P.; and Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2013). The basic guide to supervision and instructional leadership. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision: Special methods for the supervision of teachers. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Grissom, J.A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective instructional time use for school leaders: Longitudinal evidence from observations of principals. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 433–444.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J (1987). Assessing and developing principal instructional leadership. Educational Leadership, 45 (1), 54-61.

Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L. C. & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 169–202.

Kachur, D. S., Stout, J. A., & Edwards, C. S. (2013).  Engaging teachers in classroom walkthroughs. Alexandria, VA:  ASCD.

Leithwood, K. A. (1992). The Move Toward Transformational Leadership. Educational Leadership, 49(5), 8-12.

Lochmiller, C. R. (2016). Examining administrators’ instructional feedback to high school math and science teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51 (1), 75-109.

Matthews, L. J.; and Crow, G. M. (2010). The principalship: New roles in a professional learning community. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Moss, C. M, & Brookhart, S. M. (2015). Formative Classroom Walkthroughs: How principals collaborate to raise student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

NGSS Lead States, (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Myers, A., & Berkowicz, J. (2015). The STEM shift: A guide for school leaders.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (2018). ATLAS Cases. Available: https://atlas.nbpts.org/about.

National Science Board. (2007). Moving forward to improve engineering education (NSB-07-122). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsb07122/nsb07122.pdf.

National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education, Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Sterrett, W. (2011). Insights into action: Successful school leaders share what works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). ASCD Premium Member book for 2011.

Sterrett, W., Rhodes, G., Kubasko, D., & Fischetti, J. (2018). A different “noticing;” Examining principal perceptions of STEM instruction. American Journal of Educational Science, 4 (4), 180-187. http://www.aiscience.org/journal/paperInfo/ajes?paperId=4253 Sullivan, S. & Glanz, J. (2013). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Wallace Foundation (2012). The school principal as leader: Guiding schools to better teaching and learning. New York: The Wallace Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/school-leadership/effective-principal- leadership/Documents/The-School-Principal-as-Leader-Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and- Learning-2nd-Ed.pdf.