SAMS: Helping Principals Make Time for Instructional Leader

SAMS: Helping Principals Make Time for Instructional Leadership

Lloyd Kilmer, Western Illinois University

Bridget Sheng, Western Illinois University

Lora Wolff, Western Illinois University

Stuart

Y

ager, Western Illinois

University

2

Contact us at:Lloyd Kilmer, lc-kilmer@wiu.eduBridget Sheng, zb-sheng@wiu.eduStuart Yager, so-yager@wiu.eduLora Wolff, ll-wolff@wiu.edu

Lloyd

Bridget

Lora

Stuart

What is a SAM?

SAM = School Administration ManagerA SAM is designed to change the role of principal from a managerial leader to an instructional leader.

Source: School Administrators of Iowa, “Iowa Sam”

3

Why a SAM?

Principals spend 70% of their time managing…BusesBudgetBehaviorThat leaves 30% of their time for instructional issues

Source: SAM, I Am, The Principal’s Story video

4

What do SAMS do?

SAMs help principals use time/task data to reflect on their practice.SAMS help principals increase the time they spend as instructional leaders.SAMS help principals strengthen relationships with teachers, parents and students to improve teaching and learning.SAMs help principals distribute management responsibilities and work with classified and support staff to keep routine management administration work from pulling the principal away from instructional leadership.

Source: School Administrators of Iowa, “Iowa Sam”

5

Examples of Management Tasks

Student supervision (bus, lunch, recess, hallways)Student discipline (behavior management)Employee supervision (monitoring support staff)Employee discipline (work rules, warnings)Office work/preparation (copying, finding materials, agendas)Building management (maintenance, cleaning)Parents/guardians (attendance, illness)Decision making committees, groups, meetingsDistrict meetings, supervisorsExternal: officials, meetings (fire marshal, DHS)Celebrations

Source: “ASAS Time/Task Analysis”

6

How and when did the SAM Project begin?

2002 in Louisville, KY“Alternative School Administration Study” that examined the use of principal’s timeLooked at conditions that prevented principals from becoming instructional leadersNine Wallace partner states are participating in the SAM pilot—California, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, IOWA, Kentucky, Missouri, New York and Texas

Source: FAQ: National School Administration Manager Project

7

Background of the Study

Primary Investigator, Lloyd Kilmer

8

The Davenport Community School District Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of the School Administrative Manager (SAM) system implemented in the Davenport Community Schools. The first phase of the study was to conduct a survey of the teachers, who work in the schools where SAMs are part of the Administrative Team, on the managerial and leadership impact of the system. Phase Two included conducting focus group interviews with the SAMs and the principals to discover the advantages and disadvantages to the interaction with, and support offered, by the SAMs.

9

PORT COMMUNITY SCHOOLS AT A GLANCECommunities Served: DCSD serves the communities of Blue Grass, Buffalo, Davenport, and Walcott. This total land area covers 109 square miles.Facilities:4 High Schools4 Intermediate Schools2 K-8 Schools17 Elementary Schools4 Early Childhood Learning CentersBudget: A highly trained staff of financial experts maintains a budget of over $200 million to ensure the effective use of funds. 

10

Student Enrollment (preschool-12th grade) – 15,841 students (October 1, 2012 – Official Enrollment Count Day)Student Diversity59% White18.7% Black of African-American12.1% Hispanic7.7% Multi-racial2% Asian0.4% American Indian or Alaskan Native0.1% Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

11

Participant Demographics (Survey Data)

12

Teaching Assignmentof Teachers’ Surveyed

Teaching AssignmentNumber of TeachersPercentageElementary23169.4%Middle School10230.6%High School00%Total333100%

13

Teaching Assignmentof Teachers’ Surveyed

Years of Teaching ExperienceElementaryMiddle School1-562236-10252911-15432016-202413Over 207518Total229103

14

Quantitative Results

Primary Statistician, Bridget Sheng

15

About the SAM Survey

Teacher perception of improvement and the extent of improvementTwo major areasManagement Instructional LeadershipFrequencyQuality MeasurementAgreement of improvement: SD, D, A, SA (strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree)Extent of improvement: none, a little, moderate, a lot

16

SAM Survey

Management Support staff efficiencyBuilding managementStudent supervisionDiscipline ManagementFacilitation of school Improvement processesInstructional LeadershipFrequencyQuality

17

SAM Survey

Instructional LeadershipFeedback on teaching from formal and informal observationsAdministrative support for student academic needsPositive reinforcement on staff performanceJob-embedded professional developmentFrequencyQuality – additional two itemsImplementing Iowa PD modelTeaching performance

18

SAM Survey Results

Majority teachers agree or strongly agree with improvement in management and instructional leadershipTeachers from intermediate schools gave overwhelming positive responses (75%-90%)Teacher responses from elementary schools are positive but less strong (58%-76%)For both groups, highest rating is in Management, top rated management aspect is Facilitation of school improvement processesLess positive in quality of instructional leadership, least positive responses are from teachers of elementary schools on effectiveness of implementing Iowa PD model (58%)

19

SAM Survey Results

In regards to the extent of improvement in Management and Instructional LeadershipMost teachers from intermediate schools perceive moderate to great improvement (56%-80%)In management, over ¾ of intermediate school teachers perceive moderate to great improvement in student supervision (78%), discipline management (75%), and facilitation of school improvement processes (80%).In instructional leadership, over 2/3 of intermediate school teachers perceive moderate to great improvement in principal feedback (69-73%) and administrative support of student academic needs (68-70%).

20

SAM Survey Results

Teacher responses from elementary schools in regards to the extent of improvement are less favorable compared to those from intermediate schools, but majority of them perceive some improvement.A third to half of them perceive moderate to great improvement (33%-51%). The exception is in student supervision where over 68% perceive moderate to great improvement.Half of them perceive moderate to great improvement in discipline management (50%), frequency and quality of feedback (50-51%).In improving support staff efficiency, building management, and in implementing Iowa PD model, more elementary school teachers perceive a little improvement than moderate to great improvement.

21

Qualitative Results--Principals

Stuart Yager

22

Analysis of Principal Focus Groups--Pros

Focused on detailed time monitoring with SAM encouragementAwareness of threshold/balance between instructional leadership and building management- so not to feel out of touch with the management of the buildingEstablished a useful, trusting, confidential partnership between the principal and the SAMOpportunity to model/do instructional leadershipImproved relationship with teachers - focused on improving instructionRealignment of job description/priorities -- order of contact -- not principal first

23

Analysis of Principal Focus Groups--Cons

Lack of principal involvement in selecting the SAMBeing out of touch with the operational/management side of the buildingPersonality differences/management style differences between principal and the SAMLack of contact with difficult parents/students and the perception not being traditional that you see the principal firstSlower (not directly involved with building and student problems) communication of management issuesThe SAM is not for all principals - it takes a certain leadership style/confidence to work with a SAM

24

Analysis of Principal Focus Groups--Overall

Lack of principal involvement in selecting the SAMBeing out of touch with the operational/management side of the buildingPersonality differences/management style differences between principal and the SAMLack of contact with difficult parents/students and the perception not being traditional that you see the principal firstSlower (not directly involved with building and student problems) communication of management issuesThe SAM is not for all principals - it takes a certain leadership style/confidence to work with a SAM

25

Qualitative Results--SAMs

Lora Wolff

26

Analysis of SAM Focus Groups--Pros

All of the SAMs had had previous leadership roles which made the transition somewhat easierPrincipals are now getting into the classroom more regularlyManage the principal’s daily calendar (scheduling)Office operations have become more efficientChange in operations--Parents ask to speak to the SAM rather than the principal

27

Analysis of SAM Focus Groups--Cons

Period of adjustment during the first year of the Principal/SAM relationshipCommunication was difficult—not all information was relayed to the principal/SAMPrincipals have varying levels of comfort in turning over responsibilities to SAMCommunication—Principal/SAM need to find the best modes to communicateOffice support staff needs to be trained in the process

28

Analysis of SAM Focus Groups--Overall

Need to learn about strict confidenceSo much to learn—processes, management, special education, evaluation, law, district policiesPersonality differences/management style differences between principal and the SAMLong hours—come early, stay lateBeing a SAM is “extremely rewarding”Gaining skills to be an effective administrator

29

Closing Remarks

SAM is a processRedefines the role of principal“We have not found a single case of a school improving its student achievement record in the absence of talented leadership.” (How Leadership Affects Student Learning)Next Steps: Analyze student achievement over time in schools where there is a SAM

30

Final Report

If you’d like a copy of the final report, please… leave a business card or include your email address on the sign-up up sheet oremail me (ll-wolff@wiu.edu)

31

Questions…….Comments

32

33

Contact us at:Lloyd Kilmer, lc-kilmer@wiu.eduBridget Sheng, zb-sheng@wiu.eduStuart Yager, so-yager@wiu.eduLora Wolff, ll-wolff@wiu.edu

Lloyd

Bridget

Lora

Stuart

Resources

Alternative school administration study. (2005, October). Leading Educational Achievement in Districts, a Wallace Foundation Initiative.ASAS time/task analysis. (2007). Fact sheet: National school administration manager project.Frequently asked Questions: National school administration manager project. The Wallace Foundation.Haslam, M. & B. Turnbull. (2011, August). Costs of participation in the school administration manager (SAM) process. NY: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.How principals manage their time is key to improving instruction in their schools. Retrieved from http://www.ernweb.com/public/1175print.cfmIowa SAM. Iowa School Administration Manager Program.Leithwood, K., K. Louis, S. Anderson & K. Wahlstrom. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. The Wallace Foundation.The School principal as leader: Guiding Schools to better teaching and learning. (2012, January). The Wallace Foundation.Shellinger, Mark. Getting Ready.Turnbull, B., R. White, and E. Arcaira. (2010, August). “Achievement trends in schools with school administration managers (SAMs). NY: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Turnbull, B., E. Arcaira, & B. Sinclair. (2011, August). Implementation of the national SAM innovation object: A comparison of project designs. NY: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Turnbull, B. M. Haslam, E. Arcaira, D. Riley, B. Sinclair, & S. Coleman. (2009, December). Evaluation of the school administration manager project. NY; Policy Studies Associates, Inc.

34