The Role of Principal Leadership in Increasing

Science Teacher Retention in Urban Schools

A Dissertation Defense

By

Karen Dupre Jacobs

April 14, 2009

Committee Members Douglas Hermond, Ph.D. (Dissertation Chair)

William A. Kritsonis, Ph.D. (Member)

David Herrington, Ph.D. (Member)

Michael McFrazier, Ed.D. (Outside Member)

OutlineI. Problem II. Purpose of StudyIII. Research Questions IV. MethodsV. Major FindingsVI. Review of LiteratureVII. Recommendations

The ProblemReasons for Science Teachers’ Job Dissatisfaction

(Ingersoll, 2000)

Low salaries

Student discipline and motivation issues

Lack of influence over school decision making

Lack of administrative support

Purpose of the Study To analyze the role of secondary principal

leadership in urban school settings to aid in increasing science teacher retention

To define administrative support as it pertains to science teachers, utilizing the perspectives of urban principals and science teachers working in urban schools

Conceptual FrameworkThe Four Framework of Leadership

Bolman and Deal (2008)

PoliticalPoliticalHuman Resource Human Resource

SymbolicSymbolic StructuralStructural

Research Questions

1. What are the specific support structures that science teachers are satisfied and dissatisfied with in urban schools?

2. What types of support do urban principals and science teachers believe are the most important factors in retaining science teachers at their schools?

Research Questions3. How do the support factors, as identified by urban principals and science teachers, impact science teacher satisfaction and retention?

4. How do urban principals determine if science teachers need additional support?

5. What criteria do urban principals use to determine when support is needed?

Research Questions

6. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies urban principals use to determine when support is needed?

7. How do urban principals measure the effectiveness of the support they provide to science teachers?

Methods•Type of Research:Qualitative (naturalistic inquiry)

•Design: Emergent research design was used to gain an in- depth look into how and which support structures are implemented by secondary principals that help in retaining science educators working at urban school settings in order to form grounded theory

•Data gathering: Open- ended interview questions developed utilizing the Charlotte Advocates for Education (2004) study

•Data Analysis:Descriptive statistics (only for demographic information) &line by line coding

Pilot Study

Participants Protocol

1. Urban principals

(Quantity: 5)

Urban Principal Open- ended Interview questions

2. Science teachers

(Quantity: 10)

Science teacher Open- ended Interview questions

Subjects of the StudySampling Method- Purposive sampling (Critical case)

Location Study Participants

Special Indicators

Demographic Data (Collected)

•One of the top 10 Urban School Districts in the US•12 schools (regular schools) were invited- the 1st 5 urban principals and 1st 10 science teachers to respond participated.

•Urban principals

(Quantity: 2)•5/5 responded, however, only 2 actually participated due to time constraints and demands of their jobs.

•Highest teacher retention rates in the district •Minimum 3 yrs. experience as an administrator at the same school

•Total yrs. Experience

(Teacher & Principal)•Certifications•Age group•Gender•Type of school•Ethnicity (optional)

•50% or greater of the student population qualified for free or reduced lunch/breakfast

•Science teachers

(Quantity: 4)•8/10 responded, however, 4 withdrew at member checking- reasons cited were the state of the current economy and job security.

•Minimum 3 yrs. experience as a science teacher.•Stayed at the same school for a minimum of 3 yrs.

•Total yrs. Experience

(Teacher)•Certifications•Age group•Gender•Type of school•Ethnicity (optional)

• >500 students

Analysis of Data

Urban Principals and Science Teachers Open- Ended Interview/

Focus Group Data

All qualitative data was analyzed using line by line coding from the

individual interviews/focus group interview to determine

emerging themes. .

Responses categorized

into emergent themes. These were presented

in tabular form showing the categories

withcorresponding

frequencies and percentages.

Grounded Theory formulated from the coded responses of the urban principals and science teachers.

Major Findings

Major Findings- Research Question #1 What are the specific support structures that science teachers are satisfied and dissatisfied with in urban schools?

Science teachers (ST2, ST3, and ST4) reported they were satisfied with leadership who provided curriculum, resources for labs, opportunities for mentorship, colleague support, and did not micromanage them. In a focus group, they reported:

“ Having a principal who did not micro- manage everything done in the classroom makes me satisfied.

We enjoy the freedom to take risks in the classroom and to think outside of the box to present new information. Our kids love innovation. It captivates and engages

them. Because I am not micro- managed in my school, I love the positive reinforcement I receive from doing a great job. I don’t go home feeling that I haven’t done enough.”

What types of support do urban principals and science teachers believe are the most important factors in retaining science teachers at their schools?  

Emergent Themes Urban Principals (2) Science Teachers (4) Resources for labs 50% 100%

Mentorship __ 50%

Collaboration with __ 100% colleagues

Encouragement __ 100%

Appreciation __ 75%

Celebration of 50% 100% successes

Discipline __ 50% 

Professional 50% __ development

 

Major Findings- Research Question #2

Major Findings- Research Question #3

How do the support factors, as identified by urban principals and science teachers, impact science teacher satisfaction and retention?

Emergent Themes Urban Principals(2) Science Teachers (4)

Resources available 100% 100%

Professional development 50% __

Encouragement __ 100%

No micromanagement __ 75%

____________________________________________

Major Findings- Research Question #4

How do urban principals determine if science teachers need additional support?

  Emergent Themes Urban Principals (2) Science Teachers (4)

Classroom walkthroughs/ 100% 100% observations

Assessment Data 50% 100%

Teacher- student 100% 50% relationships 

Open door policy 50% 25%

___________________________________________________________________

Major Findings- Research Question #5

What criteria do urban principals use to determine when support is needed?

Emergent Themes Urban Principals (2) Science Teachers (4)_

Classroom walkthroughs 100% 100%

Student Engagement 100% 100%

Analysis of Assessment Data 50% 100%

Departmental Meetings 50% __

Teacher- student relationships 100% 75%

__________________________________________________________________

Major Findings- Research Question #6

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies urban principals use to determine when support structures are needed?

Emergent Themes Urban Principals (2) Science Teachers(4)__ Strengths

Classroom observations 50% 100%

Teacher- student 50% ___ relationships  

Timely assistance 50% ___

Weaknesses ___ ___

_______________________________________________________________________

Major Findings- Research Question #7

How do urban principals measure the effectiveness of the support they provide to science teachers? 

Emergent Themes Urban Principals (2) Science Teachers(4)__

Classroom walkthroughs 50% 50%

Data 50% 75%

School climate 50% __

Retention rate of 50% __ science teachers ___________________________________________________________________

Review of Literature

Review of LiteratureI. Significance of the Research

Author(s)/Year Findings

USA Today, 2006

Urban schools are performing the worst in science. The top ten urban school districts had average scores below the national average.

Author(s)/Year Findings

The U.S. Education system does not have a strong record for producing students who are well- prepared for careers in math and science.

Coble and Allen, 2005

Review of LiteratureII. Present Status of Science Teacher Retention

Author(s)/Year Findings

Author(s)/Year Findings

Teachers without science backgrounds are being asked to fill the science teacher shortage. These under- qualified teachers are not remaining in the field.Students that attend high – poverty, urban schools have a 50% chance of getting teachers in science that are unqualified.

Sterling, 2004

Ingersoll, 2000

Science teachers turnover at a rate of 16% compared to the 14% of all teachers.The main reason science teachers leave is because of job dissatisfaction due to low salary, lack of support from their administration, student discipline problems, lack of student motivation, and a lack of influence over school decision- making.

Review of LiteratureIII. Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction

Author(s)/Year Findings

Job satisfaction is a major predictor of teacher retention. Causes of job dissatisfaction were a lack of parental support and resources, lack of administrative support, poor student behavior, time pressures, low salaries, and limited influence over decision- making at the campus level.

Author(s)/Year Findings

Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstron, 2004

Leadership is second only to classroom instruction in all related factors that contribute to what students learn in schools.Transformational leadership involves a broader range of school and classroom conditions that may need to be changed if learning is to improve.

Thornton, 2004

Review of LiteratureIV. Specific Types of Leadership/ Teacher Expectations of

Leadership

Author(s)/Year Findings

.

Author(s)/Year Findings

Peltier- Glaze, 2005

Teachers expect urban principals to be 1) caring listeners, 2) supportive advocates, 3) respectful colleagues, 4) open- minded team players, and 5) enthusiastic facilitators.

EPE Research Center, 2008

Administrative support occurred in schools where teachers felt influential or supported to help establish curriculum, set performance standards for students, determined their own professional development, set discipline policies, hired teachers for their department, decided how their budget is spent, and helped evaluate teachers.

Conclusions

AdministrativeAdministrative

Support StructuresSupport Structures

Science Teachers NeedScience Teachers Need

CurriculumCurriculum

Resources for LabsResources for Labs

MentorshipMentorship

ColleagueColleague SupportSupport

NoNo MicromanagementMicromanagement

Criteria Used by Criteria Used by

Principals to Principals to

DetermineDetermine

NeedNeed

ClassroomClassroom Walkthroughs Walkthroughs

AssessmentAssessment of Data of Data

Student-Teacher RelationshipsStudent-Teacher Relationships

Open Door PolicyOpen Door Policy

Types of Support UrbanTypes of Support Urban

Principals & Science Principals & Science

Teachers Believe AreTeachers Believe Are

Important in IncreasingImportant in Increasing

Science Teacher Science Teacher

RetentionRetention

EncouragementEncouragement

CelebrationCelebration of Successesof Successes

ResourcesResources

Colleague CollaborationColleague Collaboration

MentorshipMentorship

No MicromanagementNo Micromanagement

How the EffectivenessHow the Effectiveness

of the Administrative of the Administrative

Support Structures Support Structures

Provided are MeasuredProvided are Measured

Classroom WalkthroughsClassroom Walkthroughs

DataData

School ClimateSchool Climate

Science Teacher Retention RateScience Teacher Retention Rate

RecommendationsDistrict and School InterventionsDistrict and School Interventions

Allocate time for colleague collaboration, mentoring, resource requests, and ensure that urban principals do not micromanage their science teachers.

Interventions should be planned for at and/or prior to the initiation of the academic year.

Allocate time for colleague collaboration, mentoring, resource requests, and ensure that urban principals do not micromanage their science teachers.

Interventions should be planned for at and/or prior to the initiation of the academic year.

Strategic Planning for the Science Department Strategic Planning for the Science Department

The strategic plan must include: the prior year (s) assessment data, goals for science achievement and urban principal-science teacher relations for the upcoming year, measurable outcomes and timely check points for goals, and a well- defined plan on how scientific rigor, research based high yield instructional strategies for the established curriculum, and staff development will be utilized throughout the academic year.

The strategic plan must include: the prior year (s) assessment data, goals for science achievement and urban principal-science teacher relations for the upcoming year, measurable outcomes and timely check points for goals, and a well- defined plan on how scientific rigor, research based high yield instructional strategies for the established curriculum, and staff development will be utilized throughout the academic year.

Utilizing Proven Educational Research Utilizing Proven Educational Research

Collaboration by urban principals and science teachers on the latest and proven educational research on the best instructional strategies.

Discussion and scientific discourse must be implemented in science department meetings and in classrooms throughout the year to build and sustain a high quality science instructional program.

Collaboration by urban principals and science teachers on the latest and proven educational research on the best instructional strategies.

Discussion and scientific discourse must be implemented in science department meetings and in classrooms throughout the year to build and sustain a high quality science instructional program.

Leadership Preparation Programs

Curriculum Changes

Leadership Preparation Programs

Curriculum Changes Urban principal leadership preparation programs

must include within their coursework a segment that discusses the needs of science teachers and what they deem as administrative support.

While cultivating their interviewing skills, future urban principals must be shown how to identify strong science teachers and develop interventions for science teachers who may be in need of support.

Future urban principals must be provided different scenarios within their coursework that identifies when science teachers may be in need of support.

Urban principal leadership preparation programs must include within their coursework a segment that discusses the needs of science teachers and what they deem as administrative support.

While cultivating their interviewing skills, future urban principals must be shown how to identify strong science teachers and develop interventions for science teachers who may be in need of support.

Future urban principals must be provided different scenarios within their coursework that identifies when science teachers may be in need of support.

Recommendations for Future Studies•A study should be conducted to determine if school leaders can identify support structures needed and implement these structures within their schools.

•A longitudinal study should be conducted to explore the implementation of the support structures identified and science teacher satisfaction over a three to five year period to determine if science teacher job satisfaction has improved.

•A study should be conducted to explore how the support structures identified in this study can be implemented and how they impact science teacher job satisfaction.

•A study should be conducted to determine if gender, ethnicity, or race play a role in the preferences for support structures provided by urban principals.

•A study should be conducted to determine if years of experience play a role in the preferences for support structures provided by urban principals.

•A study should be conducted to review science teacher retention rates and student academic performance in science in urban school settings.

Recommendations for Future Studies•A study should be conducted where administrative support surveys are created and given to a substantially larger population of science teachers working in urban schools.

•A study should be conducted that uses schools that have magnet or other specialized programs, charter schools, and/or elementary schools to determine if a difference exists in what science teachers and urban principals perceive as the particular types of administrative support needed to increase science teacher retention rates at their campuses.

•A study should be conducted to determine if science teachers working high achieving urban schools have different or similar perspectives on the types of administrative support needed in order to increase science teacher retention in comparison to low achieving urban schools.

The Role of Principal Leadership in Increasing Science Teacher Retention

Analyzing current support structures

Analyzing the criteria for how support is determined

Determining what support structures are needed

Increasing Science Teacher

Retention

Measuring the effectiveness of the types of support provided

Summary

The Role of Principal Leadership in Increasing

Science Teacher Retention in Urban Schools

A Dissertation Defense

By

Karen Dupre JacobsApril 14, 2009