Evaluation, Supervision, and Staff Development under Mandated Reform: The Perceptions and Practices of Rural Middle School Principals

Charlotte King Eady, Sally J. Zepeda

Abstract


The perspectives of three rural middle school principals as they implement Georgia’s A Plus Education Reform Act of 2000 were investigated in this study. A case study approach was used, employing both within case and cross case analyses. Three interviews were conducted with each of the three participants, resulting in a total of nine interviews. Five perspectives emerged from the data: (1) Evaluation of teacher effectiveness can be indicated only by the results of standardized tests, (2) Supervision consists of classroom visits and observations, (3) Ruralness affects how staff development is delivered, (4) Lack of funding limits the effectiveness of the staff development component of teacher evaluation, and (5) Implementation of A Plus adversely affects the traditional middle school schedule.

References


A Plus Education Reform Act of 2000. et seq.

Allen, R. (December 2000). Education in the headlines: When schools are front-page news. Education Update, 42.

Bogdan, R. C., & Bicklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Chance, E. W. (1993). The Trojan horse of education reform: A look at one state’s experience and the perspectives of selected school administrators. The Rural Educator, 14(4), 23-26.

Cornett, L., & Bailey, A. A. (2003). Focus on “highly qualified” teachers: SREB states take action. Retrieved from http://www.sreb.org/scripts/Focus/Reports/Highly_qualified.pdf. November 29, 2005.

Glickman, C.D., Gordon, S.P., & Ross-Gordon, J.M. (1998). Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Jacobson, L. (2001, May 2). GA governor acts fast to turn up the heat on schools. Education Week, p.8.

Kannapel, P. J., Coe, P., Aagaard, L., & Reeves, C. A. (1999). Mandated achievement in rural Kentucky: Contrasting responses. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 15(1), 5-15.

LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J., with Tesch, R. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. (2nd ed.). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Lewis, A. C. (1992). An invisible minority. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(9), 660-661.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Schwartzbeck, T. D., & Prince, C. D. (2003). How are rural districts meeting the teacher quality requirements of No Child Left Behind? Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/files/PDFs/Policy/Rural_Teacher_Quality_Study.pdf November 29, 2005.

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research : A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.

Simmons, B. J. (2005). Recruiting teachers for rural schools. Principal Leadership (High School Ed.), 5(5), 48-52.

Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2000) Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. California: Corwin Press.

Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Zepeda, S.J. (2004). The principal as instructional leader: A handbook for supervisors. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Publication of the National Rural Education Association - http://www.nrea.net

Report problems or questions about to the website to jshedd@library.msstate.edu