<< Chapter < Page Chapter >> Page >

Expectations of the advanced certification

The idea of a national certification to recognize successful and effective principals provides a consistent and reliable way to measure the attributes of effective principals (NBPTS, n.d.a). Currently, the field of school leadership lacks this consistency due to the fact that principal licensure differs from state to state (Maxwell, 2009). The common standards ascribed for the advanced certification include:

  1. three years of experience
  2. 18-month review process
  3. assessment tools that include school surveys, a portfolio of examples of student achievements, videos, evidence of a principal’s reaction to real-world scenarios, and personal interviews (Tirozzi, 2011, p. 2).

Maxwell (2009) also reports that there are nine core components identified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards that encompass school leadership. The skills are grouped according to similar themes:

  1. culture, learners and learning, and instruction
  2. leadership, vision, and management
  3. advocacy, equity, and ethics

From these core concepts, the National Board Certification for Educational Leaders will develop the assessment tools and the evaluation instrument for the advanced certificate. Those principals who achieve this certificate will be recognized as school leaders who exemplify excellence, lead successful learning initiatives, and possess the leadership attributes to promote and sustain student learning.

Role of university preparation programs

Understanding that principals are a pivotal force in school and student success, the preparation future school administrators receive in order to handle the many responsibilities associated with daily school operations must be relevant to the needs of their campuses and student populations. With this said the person who can and should ensure student success remains a well-prepared and competent principal. The primary means of that preparation rests in the hands of university leadership programs.

Therefore, because university preparation programs still remain the most common means of acquiring the principalship, these programs need careful examination of their course content, the development of instructional capabilities of their candidates, and an increased awareness of current educational reform issues that impact instruction and instructional programs. Hess and Kelly (2007) state that “in this new era of accountability, where school leaders are expected to demonstrate bottom-line results and use data to drive decisions, the skills and knowledge of principals matters more than ever” (p. 244).

Arthur Levine in his 2005 report “Educating School Leaders”, charges that preparation programs do little to actually prepare individuals for the job of the principalship. He raises valid concerns about the effectiveness of these programs in several areas but especially in the area of curriculum. He purposes that the existing curriculum is “irrelevant and incoherent” (Levine, 2005). Levine’s intent may have been to begin a discourse about the state of these programs but his words and accusations awakens a new awareness for university leadership programs to not only address current practices but sustained practices that will help future administrators seek the advanced certification, a certification that in fact will recognize their leadership efforts in leading successful learning initiatives.

Get Jobilize Job Search Mobile App in your pocket Now!

Get it on Google Play Download on the App Store Now




Source:  OpenStax, Education leadership review special issue: portland conference, volume 12, number 3 (october 2011). OpenStax CNX. Oct 17, 2011 Download for free at http://cnx.org/content/col11362/1.5
Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google Inc.

Notification Switch

Would you like to follow the 'Education leadership review special issue: portland conference, volume 12, number 3 (october 2011)' conversation and receive update notifications?

Ask