1. District of Columbia Public Schools | 1200 First Street, NE | Washington, DC 20002 | T 202.442.5885 | F 202.442.5026 | dcps.dc.gov
Proposals for the IMPACT
Leadership Framework for
Principals
June 2015

2. 2
Leadership Framework Revisions
 Why now?
 Based on feedback from instructional superintendents and school leaders, we
have identified a consistent desire to revisit content in the Leadership Framework
(LF).
 The current version of the Leadership Framework is in its fourth year of
implementation we want to reflect on whether it still accurately captures
leadership in DCPS.
 What is the timeline for revisions?
 The revision process will take place during the next year and will be implemented
in the 2016-17 school year.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools
I ad
top
“IM
it o
imp

3. 3
Previous Version of the Leadership Framework
Prior to the 2012-13 school year, a previous version of the Leadership
Framework included 11 standards.
Instructional Leadership (IL)
 IL1: Articulate a clear instructional vision
 IL2: Consistently implement school-wide instructional practices
 IL3: Create opportunities for ongoing learning and staff development
Organizational Leadership (OL)
 OL1: Execute results-focused school operations and resource management
 OL2: Purposefully develop and maintain a positive, collaborative school culture
 OL3: Consistently align human resources to school needs
Leadership for Increased Effectiveness (LE)
 LE1: Use data to drive decision-making
 LE2: Engage members of the school community
 LE3: Listen and communicate
 LE4: Strategically manage the change process
 LE5: Pursue professional growth and personal learning.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools

4. 4
Current Leadership Framework
 Each standard in the Leadership Framework contains key themes and
leadership actions.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools

5. 5
Current Leadership Framework
 Each standard also includes indicators and artifacts.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools

6. 6
Research Background
 Research for these revisions focused on leadership rubrics in other urban
districts, charter management organizations and the private sector.
 Key sources include:
 Example Individual, Sample Rubric of School Leadership
 Example organization, Sample School Leadership Rubric
 Source 3
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
I cr
ope
mo
fou
slid
sen
Wh
per
sen
the
incl

7. 7
Research Background
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
Framework for Principals
District of Columbia Public Schools 7
 Common themes among leaders based on the previously listed research:
professionalism, collaboration, technical and academic knowledge, creativity,
and resourcefulness
 Based on the previous research, I propose the following additions that could
improve the accuracy of IMPACT’s ability to capture school leaders’
performance.
Proposals:
 1. Reward and recognition of teachers (TAL)
 2. Celebration of success (TAL, SC)
 3. Networking outside the school walls (PL)
 4. Research on and staying up-to-date with current topics in education (PL).
Upd
com
des
“Co
com
pro
tec
reso

8. 8
1. Reward and recognition of teachers (TAL)
Current LF does not explicitly identify praise/acknowledgement of high-
performing teachers as part of the standards
 Recommendation based on The New Teacher Project’s The Irreplaceables:
Understanding the Real Retention Crisis in America’s Urban Schools
 Little difference between the retention strategies for low-performing
teachers and high-performing teachers  retaining teachers of both abilities
at similar rates
 Teachers of both abilities received positive recognition for their work at
similar rates  high-performers don’t feel valued, may leave school
 Recognition examples: verbal praise, acknowledgement of suggestions and
requests, monetary benefits, promotions
 Rewards for and recognition of good teaching would encourage high-
performers to remain at the school, without simply removing low-performers
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Pl
pe
co
se
Pl
w
pr
Pl
af
se
se
Bu
fo
di
st
te
te
re
at

9. 9
2. Networking outside the school walls (PL)
Current LF does not explicitly identify sources for cooperation, collaboration,
and decision-making
 KIPP’s Leadership and Competency Framework Model, Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Competency Framework
 Networking outside of the parameters of the school with organizations such
as other schools, district offices, individuals, companies, nonprofits
 Can advance both parties towards common goals and better outcomes
 Thinking outside the box – working with and getting information from other
industries and economic sectors can bring schools new strategies and ideas
example: for these proposals, I looked at evaluation systems in the medical
field, legal field, and consulting and financial industries.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Th
in
re
he
re

10. 10
2. Networking outside the school walls (PL)
Currently, the Leadership Framework does not explicitly identify sources for
cooperation, collaboration and decision-making.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Source Key Takeaway Benefit Potential LF Connection
• KIPP’s Leadership
and Competency
Framework Model
• Organisation for
Economic Co-
operation and
Development
(OECD)’s
Competency
Framework
Networking outside of
the parameters of the
school with
organizations such as
other schools, district
offices, individuals,
companies, nonprofits
Can advance both
parties towards
common goals and
better outcomes
Add language around
thinking outside the
box, such as working
with and getting
information from
other school leaders,
schools and districts
(if applicable).

11. 11
3. Research on and staying up-to-date with current topics in
education (PL)
Current LF does not identify the need for professional and scholarly expertise
in educational field
 The Illinois State Board of Education, Georgia Department of Education, Kim
Marshall of Boston Public Schools, JDocs, Lyle and Signe Spence’s
Competence at Work
 Continuous information-seeking and acting upon research in future plans
 Ensures that a principal remains ahead of the game and fully informed of
what the craft entails, and thus fit enough to pass on the new knowledge to
colleagues
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Plea
per
com
sen
Sim
first
rea
tha
reco
Plea
poi
bui
com
Lea
an e
info
on

12. 12
4. Celebration of success (TAL)
Current LF does not explicitly identify indicators of celebration of teachers,
students, or school as a whole
 Baltimore City Schools, Kim Marshall of Boston
 Celebration of teacher, student, school-wide success
 Value of celebration in even small ways
 Celebrating teacher’s or student’s success boosts their confidence and pride
in themselves and in the school
 No acknowledgement of success isn’t conducive to positive leadership
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Plea
per
com
sen
Sim
first
rea
tha
reco
Plea
com
out

13. 13
Conclusion
 IMPACT is a strong and equitable evaluation system for principals, but it
would be more effective with the proposals I have shared. A more effective
evaluation system would ensure that all schools are led by effective
principals.
Proposed Leadership Framework Revisions
District of Columbia Public Schools | September 2010
Bui
rob
hav
tha
the