4 williams

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL
VOLUME 26, NUMBER 3, 2009-2010

A SUPERINTENDENT’S RESPONSIVENESS
TO SCHOOL DISTRICT CULTURE

Henry Williams
Central Washington University
ABSTRACT
This article examines a Superintendent’s responsiveness to the school culture component
of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). An analysis of the
development of school culture by the late John Stanford, Superintendent of Seattle
Public Schools was the focus is the focus of the article. When he took over as
superintendent of Seattle schools, many complained that he had no knowledge of
education, he is a military person, and they cannot see how he will be able to work with
the largest school district in Washington State. To the amazement of everyone in Seattle,
during his short tenure in the school district, he was able to turn the down trodden
Seattle school district into something the students, staff, state legislatures and the
community embraced. The late John Stanford, was the cheerleader at rallies, the chef
for elementary school students and great communicator with all people. He had a vision
for self, staff and community, and to sustain it, he was always available.

Introduction

I nterstate School leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standard 2
states us that a school administrator is an educational leader who
promotes the success of all students by advocating, nurturing, and
sustaining a school culture and instructional program that is conducive
to student learning and staff professional growth. By addressing
culture in a standard, it is obvious that culture is important to those
charged with defining “good school leaders”. This standard speaks to
the need of a school leader to understand the importance of a positive
school culture and its impact on student learning.

Culture is based on common norms, values and beliefs. Culture
is the glue that holds schools together or keeps it in tatters. It defines
the group and gives it a sense of identity that sets it apart from other

36

37 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL__________

groups. Culture enhances the stability of the school district and it
establishes appropriate behavior standards for members of the group.
Culture can gives the members a sense of organizational mission.
The culture of a school district affects the outcomes for children, the
satisfaction of the staff and the perceptions of the community. There is
increasing evidence that a Culture of Trust promotes student
achievement and improvement, even after controlling for the
socioeconomic status of the school (Bryk and Schneider, 2002;
Goddard, Tschannen-Moran, 1999; Hoy and Tschannen-Moran, 2003;
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2000; Tschannen-Moran, 2003). While
creating a culture of trust may take work, it is certainly easier than
trying to change the socioeconomic of families or other such outside
factors.

Likewise, a culture of academic optimism in a school district
has strong positive impact on school achievement, even controlling for
socioeconomic factors, previous success and other demographic
variables (Hoy,Tarter, and Woolfolk-Hoy, 2006a, 2006b; McGuigan
and Hoy, in press; Smith and Hoy, 2006). Academic optimism creates
a culture with collective beliefs and norms that view teachers as
capable, students as willing, parents as supportive, and academic
success as achievable. By creating a culture of academics optimism,
schools can positively affect student achievement despite outside
factors.

Also, the culture of control in a school impacts the outcomes
for students. When schools with a custodial culture of control were
compared to schools with a humanistic culture of control research
showed that custodial school had more alienated students than
humanistic ones (Hoy, 1972). Humanistic schools provide healthy
social climates that lead to the development of more mature self
images for students (Diebert and Hoy, 1977). Additionally, there is a
positive relationship between students’ perception of their schools as
humanistic and their motivation, problem solving and seriousness to
learn (Lunenburg, 1983) as well as their positive perceptions of school
life (Lunenburg and Schmidt, 1989).

Henry Williams 38

The culture of efficacy of a school usually has a positive
impact student learning. Collective Efficacy is the shared perception
that school personnel in the school district are all striving to provide a
positive effect on students. In his study of collective teacher efficacy
and student achievement, Bandura (1993) discovered two key
findings: (1) student achievement was significantly and positively
related to collective efficacy and (2) collective efficacy had a greater
effect on student achievement than did student socioeconomic status.
Subsequent research has supported these findings (Goddard, Hoy and
Woolfolk-Hoy, 2000, 2004; Goddard, Sweetland and Hoy, 2000;
Goddard 2001; Goddard, 2002b; Hoy, Sweetland and Smith, 2002;
Hoy, Smith and Sweetland, 2002b; Goddard, Hoy and LoGerfo, 2003;
Goddard, LoGerfo and Hoy, 2004). By taking the time and making the
effort to create a culture of collective efficacy, the schools in the
district will have a positive impact on student achievement. So, how
can a superintendent be culturally responsive?

The superintendent and personnel must be positive role model.
Superintendents should be the one to develop the shared-vision, be
hardworking, and committed to achieving the utmost endeavor for
himself/herself and the people he/she is working with at the schools.
The superintendent should mirror pride in the school and everyone,
including the students to make suggestion and recommendations for
improvement. School district leaders must be effective
communicators. The superintendent should have the charisma and
power to move people toward set community goals. A good example
of a charismatic leader was the late John Stanford, Superintendent of
Seattle public Schools. When he took over as superintendent of Seattle
schools, many complained that he had no knowledge of education, he
is a military person, and they cannot see how he will be able to work
with the largest school district in Washington State. To the amazement
of everyone in Seattle, during his short tenure in the school district, he
was able to turn the down trodden Seattle school district into
something the students, staff, state legislatures and the community
embraced.


The superintendent was the cheerleader at rallies, the chef for
elementary school students and great communicator with all people.
He had a vision for self, staff and community, and to sustain it, he was
always available. The late superintendent had special communication
techniques delegating school functions. The superintendent proposes
that central-office staff spend one day a week helping in schools which
was generally adopted by the staff. As a leader, he was always in
contact with staff, faculty, principals and students, and demonstrates
understanding, loving, firmness, enthusiasm, plus a great sense of
humor.

Another important strategy to sustain change has to do with
planning. All staff members need to be aware of where the school
wants to be in five years and how their contribution is paramount. The
superintendent charge himself with the responsibility for making sure
that program goals are consistent with the vision of the school, the
district, and the community. In Seattle, the late superintendent’s dream
was to make sure that every child is able to read at his/her age level.
The superintendent proposed a community wide “reading offensive”
that prompted the donation of thousands of books to school libraries in
the district. He called himself a “child crusader.”

Teachers were empowered with a sense of ownership of the
programs to be implemented in the classrooms. Teachers were
expected to institute continues needs assessment of goal for student
achievement. The school district adopted a three-year contract that
promotes shared decision-making, treats teachers as valued
professionals, and links teacher evaluation to student achievement.
Community involvement was part of his plan and parents embraced it.
Based on the school district’s data analysis report, the superintendent
solicited parents input in planning, recognized their contribution, and
encouraged staff to enlist the support of parents for special needs.

Another factor to be cognizant of in cultural responsiveness
has to do with school wide values that support learning. In a cultural

Henry Williams 40

responsive organization, the parents, community, administrators, and
students can shape the learning environment and culture of the school.
If cultural responsiveness is to be sustained, there should be a clear
definition of appropriate behavior for teachers, students, school
leaders, and the community. Positive expectations from the parents
and community can bring extra boost to school culture. When the
administration attempts to build connections among the parents,
community, school personnel and students, the whole group feel that
these connections have enrich their decision-making, enhanced, and
sustained improvement possibilities in the school district. The late
superintendent established a clear vision, mission, and a
comprehensive strategic plan which outlines goals, expected
outcomes, and timeline for all of the major functions in the system.
The school district set quantifiable targets for student achievement and
defined exits standards for students in grades 5, 8, and 11. In other to
sustain the academic changes that are taking place in the school
system, the former superintendent lunched a citywide reading
campaign to make every child a reader in the city.

Ask for and expect cooperation from faculty and staff. The
best-intentioned leader can be undermined in efforts to improve school
district culture, if he/she does not have the cooperation and
collaboration of the classroom teachers and community. A district
leader may be determined and hopeful that his plans for improvement
succeed, but if he/she has personnel members behind him or her
“making faces” and feeling left out of the plan, or otherwise
disenchanted, the culture of improvement may be stifled. Efforts must
be made to invite cooperation and to solicit understanding and fairness
from the staff. In Seattle schools, a principal’s academy was
established to help principals become chief executive officers of their
schools. This plan got a boost with major business donation to help
train principals see themselves in new leadership role. To sustain the
reforms that were taking place, principals were moved to different
schools. The move became a key strategy to influence students, staff
and the community at large for school district academic improvement.
In one of the worst performing middle schools in Seattle, the late


superintendent offered the principal the freedom to select her own
staff, and allocated $310,000 from state magnet grant money to be
used for school improvement. The principal at the school had the
liberty in hiring staff. Opportunity to work in the school in which
changes were occurring attracted top teachers from other schools. In
this particular school, the principal, staff, and parents worked to put
forward a revised schedule for 80 minute classes a day instead of 50
minutes period. Because of the change, teachers have 90 students each
semester to work with.

The block scheduling enabled the students to participate in the
major subject areas as a group. The block schedule arranged the
students into “houses,” providing small-school feeling within the
larger school according to the principal. Advisement periods of 15-20
minutes with class size of 25 students. The advisement teachers were
the students advocate in school, and a first line of contact according to
the principal. To sustain the changes that were taking place in this
school, a family center room was created to provide refuge for
students and social service contacts for parents. The late
superintendent created school district/corporate compacts in
environmental education, work-to-school, the arts, technology and
international language and culture.

So, what did Seattle school district do to invigorate the
education system? Based on school district’s student performance
data results, it was made clear that changes are going to be made based
on the performance of principals and staff. Principals are strategically
placed in schools to work sustain the changes that are implemented in
the schools. The superintendent considered principals as the CEO’s of
their building. They created a school-based management and families
had the opportunity to choose what elementary schools to send their
children and end mandatory busing. According to the former acting
superintendent, the superintendent makes it clear that teachers,
principals and other district officials are fully responsible for student
achievement.

Henry Williams 42

Finally, a system of funding to provide more money for
students who are learning English or from low-income families was
implemented. The school district negotiated a new contract with the
teachers’ union that allows principals, in consultation with the
teachers, to hire teachers they want for their school.

The late superintendent developed a more positive classroom
and school culture by setting firm and effective standards. Student
responsibility increased through the cultivation of trust and respect for
authorities and school system. The school district established
expectations for teachers, students and parents. The whole community
strived to work successfully with troubled and undisciplined students,
and by striving to conceive a discipline program that increases positive
student pride and responsibility, while reducing teacher stress. Energy
was concentrated on development of a workable in-school suspension
programs that will support teachers and students while reducing the
necessity for out-of-school suspensions.


REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development
and functioning. Educational Psychology, 28, 117-48.
Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource
for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Diebert, J.P., & Hoy, W.K. (1977). Custodial high schools and self-
actualization of students. Educational Research Quarterly, 2,
24-31.
Goddard, R.D., (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in
the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93(3), 467-76.
Goddard, R.D., (2002b). Collective efficacy and school organization:
A multilevel analysis of teacher influences in schools. In W.K.
Hoy and C. Miskel (Eds.), Theory and Research in
Educational Administration (Vol. 1, pp169-84). Greenwich,
CT: Information Age Publishing.
Goddard, R.D., Hoy, W.K., & LoGerfo, L. (2003, April). Collective
efficacy and student achievement in public high school: A
path analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Goddard, R.D., Hoy, W.K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective
teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student
achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37,
479-508.
Goddard, R.D., Hoy, W.K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2004). Collective
efficacy: Theoretical development, empirical evidence and
future directions. Educational Researcher, 33, 3-13.
Goddard, R.D., LoGerfo, L, & Hoy, W.K. (2004). High school
accountability: The role of collective efficacy. Educational
Policy, 18(30), 403-25.

Henry Williams 44

Goddard, R.D., Sweetland, S.R., & Hoy, W.K. (2000a). Academic
emphasis and student achievement in urban elementary
schools. Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Association, New Orleans.
Goddard, R.D., Sweetland, S.R., & Hoy, W.K. (2000b). Academic
emphasis of urban elementary schools and student
achievement: A multi-level analysis. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 5, 683-702.
Goddard, R.D., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (2001). Teacher
trust in students and parents: A multilevel examination of the
distribution and effect of teacher trust in urban elementary
schools. Elementary School Journal. 102, 3-17.
Hoy, W.K. (1972). Dimensions of student alienation and
characteristics of public high schools. Interchange, 3, 38-51.
Hoy, W.K., Tarter, C.J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2006a). Academic
optimism of schools: A second-order confirmatory factor
analysis. In Wayne K. Hoy and Cecil Miskel
(Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Educational Policy and
School Outcomes (pp.135-57). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age.
Hoy, W.K., Tarter, C.J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2006b). Academic
optimism of schools: An important force for student
achievement. Ohio State University, Unpublished research
paper.
Hoy, W.K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The conceptualization
and measurement of faculty trust in schools. In W.K. Hoy and
C. Miskel (Eds.). Studies in Leading and Organizing
Schools (pp181-207).
Lilly, Dick (1998). School board determined to carry on Stanford’s
plans. The Seattle Times Company.
McGuigan, L., & Hoy, W.K. (in press). Creating a culture of
optimism to improve school achievement. Leadership and
Policies in Schools.


Smith, P.A., & Hoy, W.K. (2006). Academic optimism and student
achievement in urban elementary schools. Ohio State
University, unpublished research paper.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for
successful schools. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (2000). A multidisciplinary
analysis of the nature, meaning and measurement of trust.
Review of Educational Research, 70, 547-93.

4 williams

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to 4 williams

Similar to 4 williams (20)

4 williams