Dr. Brennon Sapp EdD

THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF PRINCIPAL BEHAVIOR:Improving Teacher Instructional Practices through

Principal-Teacher Interactions

Dr. Brennon Sapp EdD

Origin of the StudyPrincipals cannot directly control every aspect of their school, but they

can directly affect the way they interact with teachers. • Summer 2007

– Consulting district personnel– Investigate interventions– Research interventions

• Fall 2007 (Pilot Year)– Regular classroom visits by the principals– Data review of classroom grade distribution with teachers

• Spring 2008 – Assess the execution, effect, and teacher perception of these

interventions– An extensive review of the literature– Two additional teacher interactions added

Page 7

So. . .

• We wanted to:– Change the way we interacted with teachers– Increase performance (Teachers & Students)

• What we did:– Research, design, & define four specific principal-

teacher interactions– Implement treatment with fidelity– Measure some performance indicators

To discover how a specific set of principal-teacher interactions affect:

Teacher Instructional Practices Student Performance Frequency & Focus of Teacher Conversations

Page 11

Goal of the StudyKe

y Co

nstr

ucts

Research Questions

Page 11

RQ-1 How will the treatment of principal-teacher interactions affect teachers’ instructional practices?

RQ-2 How will changes in teachers’ instructional practices, initiated by the set of principal-teacher interactions, affect student performance?

RQ-3 How will changes in principal-teacher interactions affect the frequency and focus of teacher conversations with principals, students, and other teachers?

Conceptual Framework

Page 8-11, Figure 1

Literature Review• The Role of Principal (Page 12-15)

(Halverson, Kelley & Kimball, Cochran-Smith, Hirsch, Leithwood & Mascall, Marshall, Reeves, Wagner & Kegan, Whitaker, Zepeda)

• Principal-Teacher Interactions(Page 16-19)(Frase &Hetzel, Halverson, Kelley, & Kimball, Marshall, Toch & Rothman)

• High Quality Principal-Teacher Interactions (Page 20-24)(Downey, Ginsberg, Marshall, Ritchie and Wood)

• Effective Ways to Measure the Quality of Teacher Instructional Practices (Page 33-38)

(Danielson, Kelley & Kimball)

• Student Performance (Page 33-38)

(Adams, Ginsberg , Jimerson, O’Connor)

• Frequency and Focus of Teacher Conversations (Page 33-38)(Danielson, Kelley &Kimball)

Principal-Teacher Interactions(Treatment)

Snapshots Principals visiting classroom regularly and becoming part of the educational

process Collaborating with teachers on instructional practices

Data Reviews Grades (teachers, department, school) Discipline (teachers, department, school)

One Hour Summer Meetings Principal-Teacher discussion Past/Future performance Growth Plans

Teacher Self Reflection of Instructional Practices Quality Instruction Rubric (Rubric based instrument to assess the quality of instructional practices) Beginning of the year and at the end of the year

Page 66-70

MTW Th F M T W Th F M T W Th F M T W Th F

# of

Visits

8/13/2007

8/14/2007

8/13/2008

8/14/200

8

8/15/200

8

8/18/200

8

8/19/200

8

8/20/200

8

8/21/200

8

8/22/200

8

8/25/200

8

8/26/200

8

8/27/200

8

8/28/200

8

8/29/200

8

9/1/2008

9/2/2008

9/3/2008

9/4/2008

9/5/2008

Teachers Teacher 1 19 k kl b Teacher 2 19 k L b k b Teacher 3 21 k b L Teacher 4 12 k L L Teacher 5 38 lk L b Lt b k kTeacher 6 30 kL L k k Teacher 7 30 b b b k k kTeacher 8 45 Lb lkb b b tb kb b b kL bTeacher 9 26 k k k Lt L Teacher 10 23 L kb bL b kb b b Teacher 11 20 k Lb k t k Teacher 12 22 L k b b Teacher 13 25 k k k k k Daily Totals 17.3267 34 32 29 24 28 33 32 9 30 15 3 14 21 31 23 5 18Standard Dev for Daily 10.0011 Mean Visits for year 25.9313 Standard Dev for year 9.79159 Kim 480 Larry 510 Tom 109 Brennon 554 Total visits 1653

Current Data on Snap Shots

% of A % of B % of C % of D % of F0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Grade Distribution 07/08 3rd Tri

% of A % of B % of C % of D % of F0%

10%20%30%40%50%


% o

f A

% o

f B

% o

f C

% o

f D

% o

f F

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


% o

f A

% o

f B

% o

f C

% o

f D

% o

f F

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50% Grade Distribution 07/08 3rd Tri

Teacher 1

Teacher 14

Discipline Infractions – Most to Least

% of A % of B % of C % of D % of F

Discipline Infractions

(Total) Teacher34% 28% 20% 14% 4% 47 Teacher 134% 24% 15% 9% 18% 31 Teacher 254% 29% 5% 8% 5% 28 Teacher 346% 19% 16% 6% 13% 28 Teacher 425% 29% 14% 16% 17% 25 Teacher 541% 30% 15% 2% 13% 24 Teacher 641% 25% 14% 15% 5% 24 Teacher 727% 28% 20% 13% 12% 24 Teacher 852% 20% 13% 9% 7% 22 Teacher 9

33% 34% 19% 9% 5% 22 Teacher 1032% 29% 15% 15% 10% 20 Teacher 11

30% 30% 23% 8% 9% 19 Teacher 1237% 34% 10% 11% 10% 17 Teacher 13

37% 27% 25% 6% 6% 16 Teacher 1423% 40% 17% 12% 9% 16 Teacher 15

14% 23% 20% 34% 9% 15 Teacher 16

Failures-Most to Least

% of A % of B % of C % of D % of F

Discipline Infractions

(Total) Teacher25% 20% 23% 13% 19% 3 Teacher 4334% 24% 15% 9% 18% 31 Teacher 225% 29% 14% 16% 17% 25 Teacher 551% 20% 9% 3% 16% 0 Teacher 5519% 34% 25% 8% 14% 6 Teacher 3546% 19% 16% 6% 13% 28 Teacher 441% 30% 15% 2% 13% 24 Teacher 627% 28% 20% 13% 12% 24 Teacher 823% 23% 29% 14% 10% 12 Teacher 2123% 26% 24% 16% 10% 7 Teacher 3237% 34% 10% 11% 10% 17 Teacher 1332% 29% 15% 15% 10% 20 Teacher 1123% 40% 17% 12% 9% 16 Teacher 1530% 30% 23% 8% 9% 19 Teacher 1221% 29% 21% 19% 9% 11 Teacher 2214% 23% 20% 34% 9% 15 Teacher 1641% 29% 18% 4% 8% 8 Teacher 31

Back Treatments & Behaviors

QIR-Likert Scale

1-Unsatisfactory 2-Beginning3-Developing 4-Proficient 5-Exemplary

Did Instruction Improve?Teacher Completed QIR

Pretest (Fall 08) Posttest (Spring 09)Change

Preparation & Planning 3.536 3.707 0.171

Learning Environment 3.678 3.823 0.145

Instruction 3.496 No Statistical ChangeAssessment 3.304 No Statistical Change

Overall 3.504 3.607 0.103Principal Completed QIR

Pretest (Fall 08) Posttest (Spring 09) Change

Preparation & Planning 3.130 No Statistical Change

Learning Environment 3.261 No Statistical Change

Instruction 2.835 3.089 0.253Assessment 2.685 2.978 0.293

Overall 2.978 3.139 0.161

How Did Teacher Ratings Compare to Principal Ratings?

Teacher Ratings Principal Ratings DifferencePretest

Planning & Preparation 3.56 3.16 0.40Learning Environment 3.69 3.26 0.43

Instruction 3.51 2.84 0.67Assessment 3.30 2.69 0.61

Overall 3.52 2.98 0.54

PosttestPlanning & Preparation 3.74 3.20 0.54


Instruction 3.58 3.09 0.49

Assessment 3.39 2.98 0.41

Overall 3.64 3.14 0.50

Grouping Teachers into Performance Levels

Hig

h Pe

rfor

min

g Te

ache

rs(C

hang

e in

the

Qua

lity

of In

stru

ctio

nal P

ract

ices

)

Pretest Postest Improvement Teacher Ratings

Planning & Preparation 3.60 3.85 No Statistical Change


Instruction 3.60 3.77 No Statistical Change

Assessment 3.34 3.48 No Statistical Change

Overall 3.56 3.76 0.20

Principal Ratings





Overall 3.56 3.85 0.29

Med

ium

Per

form

ing

Teac

hers

(Cha

nge

in th

e Q

ualit

y of

Inst

ruct

iona

l Pra

ctic

es)



Learning Environment 3.77 3.86 No Statistical Change



Overall 3.59 3.56 No Statistical Change

Principal Ratings





Overall 3.15 3.21 No Statistical Change

Low

Per

form

ing

Teac

hers

(Cha

nge

in th

e Q

ualit

y of

Inst

ruct

iona

l Pra

ctic

es)


Planning & Preparation 3.43 3.70 0.27




Overall 3.41 3.61 0.20

Principal Ratings





Overall 2.31 2.50 0.19

How did Teacher Ratings Compare with Principal Ratings?

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal

Completed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

PRETEST-HIGH PERFORMING TEACHERS

PRETEST-MEDIUM PERFORMING TEACHERS

PRETEST-LOW PERFORMING TEACHERS

Planning & Preparation

3.60 3.83

No Significant Difference

3.66 3.28 0.380 3.43 2.41 1.020

Learning Environment

3.68 3.79 3.77 3.47 0.300 3.64 2.59 1.050

Instruction 3.60 3.34 3.53 2.99 0.540 3.42 2.23 1.190

Assessment 3.34 3.28 3.40 2.85 0.550 3.15 2.02 1.130

Overall 3.56 3.56 3.59 3.15 0.440 3.41 2.31 1.100

POSTTEST-HIGH PERFORMING TEACHERS

POSTTEST-MEDIUM PERFORMING TEACHERS



3.85 4.09 No Significant Difference

3.68 3.26 0.420 3.70 2.45 1.250


3.93 4.03 3.86 3.38 0.480 3.78 2.62 1.160

Instruction 3.77 3.71 3.38 3.17 0.210 3.60 2.52 1.080

Assessment 3.48 3.56 3.32 3.01 0.310 3.37 2.41 0.960

Overall 3.76 3.85 3.56 3.21 0.350 3.61 2.50 1.110

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal

Completed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference





3.60 3.83


3.66 3.28 0.380 3.43 2.41 1.020


3.68 3.79 3.77 3.47 0.300 3.64 2.59 1.050

Instruction 3.60 3.34 3.53 2.99 0.540 3.42 2.23 1.190

Assessment 3.34 3.28 3.40 2.85 0.550 3.15 2.02 1.130

Overall 3.56 3.56 3.59 3.15 0.440 3.41 2.31 1.100






3.68 3.26 0.420 3.70 2.45 1.250


3.93 4.03 3.86 3.38 0.480 3.78 2.62 1.160

Instruction 3.77 3.71 3.38 3.17 0.210 3.60 2.52 1.080

Assessment 3.48 3.56 3.32 3.01 0.310 3.37 2.41 0.960

Overall 3.76 3.85 3.56 3.21 0.350 3.61 2.50 1.110

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal

Completed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference





3.60 3.83


3.66 3.28 0.380 3.43 2.41 1.020


3.68 3.79 3.77 3.47 0.300 3.64 2.59 1.050

Instruction 3.60 3.34 3.53 2.99 0.540 3.42 2.23 1.190

Assessment 3.34 3.28 3.40 2.85 0.550 3.15 2.02 1.130

Overall 3.56 3.56 3.59 3.15 0.440 3.41 2.31 1.100






3.68 3.26 0.420 3.70 2.45 1.250


3.93 4.03 3.86 3.38 0.480 3.78 2.62 1.160

Instruction 3.77 3.71 3.38 3.17 0.210 3.60 2.52 1.080

Assessment 3.48 3.56 3.32 3.01 0.310 3.37 2.41 0.960

Overall 3.76 3.85 3.56 3.21 0.350 3.61 2.50 1.110

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal

Completed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference





3.60 3.83


3.66 3.28 0.380 3.43 2.41 1.020


3.68 3.79 3.77 3.47 0.300 3.64 2.59 1.050

Instruction 3.60 3.34 3.53 2.99 0.540 3.42 2.23 1.190

Assessment 3.34 3.28 3.40 2.85 0.550 3.15 2.02 1.130

Overall 3.56 3.56 3.59 3.15 0.440 3.41 2.31 1.100






3.68 3.26 0.420 3.70 2.45 1.250


3.93 4.03 3.86 3.38 0.480 3.78 2.62 1.160

Instruction 3.77 3.71 3.38 3.17 0.210 3.60 2.52 1.080

Assessment 3.48 3.56 3.32 3.01 0.310 3.37 2.41 0.960

Overall 3.76 3.85 3.56 3.21 0.350 3.61 2.50 1.110

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal

Completed

Difference

Teacher

Completed

Principal Complet

ed

Difference





3.60 3.83


3.66 3.28 0.380 3.43 2.41 1.020


3.68 3.79 3.77 3.47 0.300 3.64 2.59 1.050

Instruction 3.60 3.34 3.53 2.99 0.540 3.42 2.23 1.190

Assessment 3.34 3.28 3.40 2.85 0.550 3.15 2.02 1.130

Overall 3.56 3.56 3.59 3.15 0.440 3.41 2.31 1.100






3.68 3.26 0.420 3.70 2.45 1.250


3.93 4.03 3.86 3.38 0.480 3.78 2.62 1.160

Instruction 3.77 3.71 3.38 3.17 0.210 3.60 2.52 1.080

Assessment 3.48 3.56 3.32 3.01 0.310 3.37 2.41 0.960

Overall 3.76 3.85 3.56 3.21 0.350 3.61 2.50 1.110

Did Grades and Discipline Improve?

Figure 6Page 97

d

Figure 7Page 100

Figure 8Page 101

Figure 9Page 102

Conceptual Framework

Page 8-11, Figure 1

Did Teacher Conversations Change?

Frequency and Focus of Teacher Conversations

• According to teacher surveys, the frequency of principal-teacher conversations improved, but the focus remained unchanged.

• According to teacher surveys, the frequency and focus of teacher-teacher conversations improved during the pilot year and maintained in the year of full implementation.

• According to student surveys, the frequency and focus of teacher-student conversations remain unchanged.

Pages 103-108 & 122

Findings

• Teacher instructional practices improved according analysis of QIR data.

• Student performance increased according to the analysis of student grade distributions and discipline.

• Freq & Focus of some teacher conversations changed according to analysis of teacher and student surveys.

Pages 109

Unintended Outcomes

• Exiting Teachers• Principal-Student Relationships• Principal-Parent Discussions• Increased Job Satisfaction for the Principals

Page 130-132

Thank You

Brennon Sapp Kim Banta

www.bsapp.com

http://www.bsapp.com/

Documents

Dr. Brennon Sapp EdD