Lessons Learned from an Experimental Evaluation of a Principal Professional Development Program

Meeting Paper

In recent years critics have argued that leadership preparation in this country often fails to prepare future school leaders for the modern realities of running a school (Levine, 2005; AACTE, 2001; Elmore, 2000). Peterson (2002) argues that professional development for principals holds promise for addressing some gaps in principals’ preservice preparation. There are increasing numbers of available professional development programs for principals and an emerging consensus about the ideal qualities and content of such programs (Davis, DarlingHammond, LaPointe, and Meyerson, 2005). However, there is very little research on the effectiveness of professional development programs for principals (LaPointe Meyerson, and Darling-Hammond , 2006).

At the same time critics have debated the quality of principal preparation, a debate has ensued among educational researchers and policymakers about the role of “scientifically-based” research in evaluating the efficacy of educational practices and programs. As part of this debate, some researchers and federal policymakers have advocated for a greater use of randomized experiments. For example, through the NCLB legislation and the legislation authorizing the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the federal government has encouraged greater use of randomized experiments to determine the efficacy of educational practices and programs (NRC, 2002; Eisenhart and Towne, 2003). Among the educational research community, randomized experiments have both strong advocates (see for example Slavin, 2002; Boruch, 2002; Cook, 2002) and strong critics (see for example Howe, 2005). Despite the robust debate, which in large part turns on whether experiments should hold a special place of prominence among a broader range of possible research approaches, there remains considerable support among researchers and policymakers that this research approach can provide strong causal evidence of program effectiveness.

Download:
Publication date: 
January 2007