KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name EDL 9360: Beyond Policy: Reforming Schools Through LearnerCentered Education and Leadership
Department
Educational Leadership
Degree Title (if applicable) EdD in Leadership for Learning
Proposed Effective Date
Fall 2011
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
xx New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a
new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new
program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the
program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Faculty Member
Approved
_____
Date
Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Department Chair
Date
College Curriculum Committee
Date
College Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate College
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
Approved
Not Approved
President
Date
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number __ EDL 9360:
Course Title _____ Beyond Policy: Reforming Schools Through
Learner-Centered Education and Leadership _____
Credit Hours Three (3) credit hours
Prerequisites Admission to Doctoral Program in Leadership for
Learning
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
Exploration and investigation of emerging research on learning, leading, and change
which when considered in combination provide a framework for understanding and
leading schools as continuously evolving, living systems. Using a learner-centered
leadership paradigm, students critically analyze the industrial, corporate and business
models of education which historically focus on standards, narrowing of curriculum and
high stakes tests as sole measures of achievement and develop a vision for and/or create
learner-centered educational systems.
III.
Justification
The course is framed within Distributed School Leadership Practice (DSLP), one of the
leading authors of which is James Spillane of Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois.
Early in 2006, Spillane rejected the commonly held notion that leadership was either the act
of a heroic individual or of several individuals who shared leadership responsibilities. In his
book, Distributed Leadership, Spillane postulates that “…leadership…is a practice…that is
the product of joint interactions of school leaders, followers and aspects of their situation
such as routines and tools” (p. 3).
The course is taught by faculty with expertise in school leadership, collaboration, and
diversity. Topics are presented in an integrated manner, such that school transformation is
seen as whole school reform initiative where performance-based practice is the hallmark
(Leithwood, Day, Sammons, Harris, & Hopkins, 2006) and the tenets of Distributed School
Leadership Practice (Spillane, 2006), therefore, are embedded within all activities.
Program design supports team building and connections among school districts (building
and system), universities, and beginning leadership candidates. This design is consistent
with the Bagwell College of Education goal of providing a collaborative framework for
developing expertise in teaching, learning, and leadership within the EdS and EdD program.
It is anticipated that participants will mirror this expectation in their future organizational
settings. Residency module activities are problem-based and assist individuals in developing
an internal focus and disposition to meet the challenges and opportunities within leadership
practice in their respective career paths and organizational settings.
Beyond Policy: Reform Through Learner-Centered Principles
This course provides teachers and administrators a means for deepening their
understanding of learner-centered principles and how leadership guided by these
principles provides a means for transforming schools by supporting student growth,
development and achievement. The course is appropriate for EdS and EdD candidates.
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor: TBA
Text:
McCombs, B. L. & Miller, L. (2009) The School Leader’s Guide to Learner-Centered
Education: From Complexity to Simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lambert, N.M & McCombs, B. L. (2000) How Students Learn: Reforming Schools Through
Learner-Centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
(Ground-breaking publication)
Prerequisites:
Admission to Doctoral Program in Leadership for Learning
Objectives:
EDL Course Objectives (KSD)
EdS/EdD
GLISI Leader
PTEU
Roles
Performance
Outcomes
Students will:
Curriculum,
1. Develop an understanding of the American
3
Assessment, &
Psychological Association’s 14 Learner-centered
Instruction
principles and the research base which supports
them. (KS)
Performance
2. Develop an understanding of the tools and
1,5
Performance
practices of learner-centered leadership and
demonstrate efficacy in their use. (KS)
Process
Improvement
3. Evaluate current educational and leadership
3, 4
practices using a learner-centered paradigm and
Change
provide rationale and justification for continuing
their use or make recommendations for change.
Performance
4. Analyze current accountability measures
(standards based assessments, criterion
referenced tests, EOC tests and other NCLB
benchmarks) and design alternatives (real or
hypothetical) which are learner-centered. (KS)
5. Identify leadership challenges in creating
learner-centered schools and propose solutions.
(KSD)
3, 4
Data Analysis
ELCC/
PSC
Standards
BOR
Strands
2
1-3
2
1-4, 5
2
1-3, 5, 7, 9
2
4
2
5, 9
Performance
1, 2, 5
Process
Improvement
6. Analyze contextual factors which influence
classroom, school, district or state level
applications of learner-centered approaches and
link them to historical and political trends and
patterns in American education. (KS)
1
Data Analysis
2, 6
1-3, 5, 9
Change
Instructional Method
- The
candidates and university supervisor will use WebCT Vista for communication and course
management. Please check daily for postings, mail, and announcements. Instructional methods
may include, but are not limited to:





Problem-Based Learning
Proficiency Examination
Cooperative Learning
Document-Based Inquiry
Case Study Analysis
Method of Evaluation
-Grading:




Attendance and Participation
School Level Learner-Centered
Assessment Analysis:
Learner-Centered Leadership
Case-Study & Analysis
Literature Review on Contextual Factors
and Historical/Political Trends
Influencing Learner-centered Practices
10%
30%
30%
30%
A= 90% -100% B= 80% - 89%C= 70% - 79%F= 69% or lower
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
TOTAL
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
n/a
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
(Note: Limit 30 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus
EdD in Leadership for Learning
I.
COURSE: EDL 9360: Beyond Policy: Reforming Schools Through Learner-Centered
Education and Leadership
Credit: 3 Credit Hours
II.
INSTRUCTOR:
III.
IV.
Nita A. Paris, Ph. D.
Office: TP 3018/KH 3009
Phone: 770-423-6117
E-Mail: nparis@kennesaw.edu
Office Hours: 8-6 Mon-Friday
CLASS MEETINGS
Dates: TBA
Day/Times: TBA
Bldg/Room: TBA
TEXTS & READINGS:
Required Text:
McCombs, B. L. & Miller, L. (2009) The School Leader’s Guide to Learner-Centered
Education: From Complexity to Simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lambert, N.M & McCombs, B. L. (2000) How Students Learn: Reforming Schools Through
Learner-Centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
(Ground-breaking publication)
Supplemental Readings:
American Psychological Association (2010>. Publications manual of the American
Psychological Association (6th ed). Washington, DC.: American Psychological
Association.
APA Task Force on Psychology in Education (1993, January). Learner-centered psychological
principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Washington, DC: APA and MidContinent Regional Educational Laboratory.
Bennis, W. (2007) The challenges of leadership in the modern world. American Psychologist,
62(1), 2-5.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (2007) An epistemological problem: What if we have the wrong theory?
In P.D. Houston, A. M. Blankstein, & R.W. Cole (Eds.), Out-of-the-box leadership (pp.
49-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Other readings as assigned
V.
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION
Exploration and investigation of emerging research on learning, leading, and change which
when considered in combination provide a framework for understanding and leading schools as
continuously evolving, living systems. Using a learner-centered leadership paradigm, students
critically analyze the industrial, corporate and business models of education which historically
focus on standards, narrowing of curriculum and high stakes tests as sole measures of
achievement and develop a vision for and/or create learner-centered educational systems.
VI.
JUSTIFICATION
The course is framed within Distributed School Leadership Practice (DSLP), one of the leading
authors of which is James Spillane of Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois. Early in 2006,
Spillane rejected the commonly held notion that leadership was either the act of a heroic individual
or of several individuals who shared leadership responsibilities. In his book, Distributed
Leadership, Spillane postulates that “…leadership…is a practice…that is the product of joint
interactions of school leaders, followers and aspects of their situation such as routines and tools”
(p. 3).
The course is taught by faculty with expertise in school leadership, collaboration, and diversity.
Topics are presented in an integrated manner, such that school transformation is seen as whole
school reform initiative where performance-based practice is the hallmark (Leithwood, Day,
Sammons, Harris, & Hopkins, 2006) and the tenets of Distributed School Leadership Practice
(Spillane, 2006), therefore, are embedded within all activities.
Program design supports team building and connections among school districts (building and
system), universities, and beginning leadership candidates. This design is consistent with the
Bagwell College of Education goal of providing a collaborative framework for developing
expertise in teaching, learning, and leadership within the EdS and EdD program. It is anticipated
that participants will mirror this expectation in their future organizational settings. Residency
module activities are problem-based and assist individuals in developing an internal focus and
disposition to meet the challenges and opportunities within leadership practice in their respective
career paths and organizational settings.
Beyond Policy: Reform Through Learner-Centered Principles
This course provides teachers and administrators a means for deepening their understanding of
learner-centered principles and how leadership guided by these principles provides a means for
transforming schools by supporting student growth, development and achievement. The course is
appropriate for EdS and EdD candidates.
VII.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning & Leadership
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to
developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders
who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their
students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance
the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of
candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and
leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued
development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace
the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of
validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that
way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and facilitators of the
teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes values and demonstrates
collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the
community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public
and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of
assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Use of Technology: Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional
Standards Commission. Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated
throughout the program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student
learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates
will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will master use
of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and they will develop
the confidence to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
The students will be linked through WebCT Vista and via a listserv that will be utilized in
processing the comprehensive experiences of the doctoral program. The members of each cohort
will be linked in a similar way as they move through the program. The emerging technologies
will be utilized with the parallel expectation that participants demonstrate a high degree of
technological literacy in retrieving and sharing information and resources
Educational Specialist and Doctorate of Education
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the Doctorate of Education
program in the Bagwell College of Education reflect the unique aspects of this degree.
Collaboratively developed by faculty from across the university and in consultation with
community/school partners, these outcomes and proficiencies delineate the high expectations we
have for graduates who will be Leaders for Learning. Clearly, the proficiencies reflect the
complex nature of student learning in advanced degree programs leading to a terminal degree.
Consequently, many of the proficiencies listed below incorporate aspects of knowledge, skills
and dispositions within a single proficiency. These proficiencies are clearly linked to our
conceptual framework, The Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and
Leadership.
VIII. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND PTEU PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES:
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares school leaders who understand their
disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a result of
the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, participants will
demonstrate outcomes that embody the constructs of DSLP, the ten BOR Performance
Strands, the ELCC standards, the PSC standards for Residency, and the roles
recommended by Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement (GLISI). As
this course is outcomes-driven, successful individuals must provide evidence of meeting
the following complementary PTEU EdS/EdD Performance Outcomes:
1. Fosters an organizational culture that facilitates development of a shared
vision, school improvement and increased learning for all students.
2. Implements sustainable educational change and process improvement
3. Creates 21st century learning environments that advance best practices in
curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
4. Engages in applied research that supports data-driven planning and decision
making for the improvement of schools and learning.
5. Builds collaborative relationships, teams and community partnerships that
communicate and reflect distributed leadership for learning.
6. Embraces diversity by demonstrating intercultural literacy and global
understanding.
7. Facilitates professional learning and development that enhance and improve
professional practice and productivity.
8. Exercises professionalism and ethical practice.
http://www.gapsc.com/Rules/Current/EducatorPreparation/index.asp
http://www.npbea.org/ELCC/ELCCStandards%20_5-02.pdf
EDL Course Objectives (KSD)
EdS/EdD
GLISI Leader
PTEU
Roles
Performance
Outcomes
Students will:
Curriculum,
1. Develop an understanding of the American
3
Assessment, &
Psychological Association’s 14 Learner-centered
Instruction
principles and the research base which supports
them. (KS)
Performance
2. Develop an understanding of the tools and
1,5
Performance
practices of learner-centered leadership and
demonstrate efficacy in their use. (KS)
Process
Improvement
3. Evaluate current educational and leadership
3, 4
practices using a learner-centered paradigm and
Change
provide rationale and justification for continuing
their use or make recommendations for change.
Performance
4. Analyze current accountability measures
(standards based assessments, criterion
referenced tests, EOC tests and other NCLB
benchmarks) and design alternatives (real or
hypothetical) which are learner-centered. (KS)
5. Identify leadership challenges in creating
learner-centered schools and propose solutions.
(KSD)
3, 4
BOR
Strands
2
1-3
2
1-4, 5
2
1-3, 5, 7, 9
2
4
2
5, 9
2, 6
1-3, 5, 9
Performance
1, 2, 5
6. Analyze contextual factors which influence
classroom, school, district or state level
applications of learner-centered approaches and
link them to historical and political trends and
patterns in American education. (KS)
IX.
Data Analysis
ELCC/
PSC
Standards
Process
Improvement
1
Data Analysis
Change
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
Instructional Methodology:
The candidates and university supervisor will use WebCT Vista for communication and course
management. Please check daily for postings, mail, and announcements. Instructional methods
may include, but are not limited to:





Problem-Based Learning
Proficiency Examination
Cooperative Learning
Document-Based Inquiry
Case Study Analysis
Required Activities:
Attendance and Participation: Attendance and participation in all university and school/system
based activities is required for successful completion of module activities.
School Level Learner-Centered Assessment Analysis: Candidates will analyze school wide
assessment practices using the learner-centered principles as a guide. The candidate will report
his/her findings through a formal paper which will include a “Recommendations” section where
justification and/or rationale for continuing or discontinuing the assessment is presented.
Theoretical Framework Support:
McCombs, B. L. & Miller, L. (2009) The School Leader’s Guide to Learner-Centered
Education: From Complexity to Simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lambert, N.M & McCombs, B. L. (2000) How Students Learn: Reforming Schools
Through Learner-Centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. (Ground-breaking publication)
Assessment:
Objectives:
Rubric
1, 3, 4
Learner-Centered Leadership Case-Study & Analysis: Candidates will conduct a case-study
analysis of existing leadership practice within their own school or district. The candidate will
make recommendations of how to align current practices with learner-centered leadership while
identifying challenges and proposing solutions for implementation.
Theoretical Framework Support:
McCombs, B. L. & Miller, L. (2009) The School Leader’s Guide to Learner-Centered
Education: From Complexity to Simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lambert, N.M & McCombs, B. L. (2000) How Students Learn: Reforming Schools
Through Learner-Centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. (Ground-breaking publication)
Assessment: Rubric
Objectives: 1,2,3, 5
Literature Review on Contextual Factors and Historical/Political Trends Influencing
Learner-centered Practices: Candidates will conduct a thorough literature review on one or
more contextual factors which are currently influencing the application of learner-centered
principles. Candidates will be required to trace the historical and political underpinnings and
roots of the factor(s) and illustrate the linkages of the current contexts to these roots.
Theoretical Framework Support:
Numerous historical works.
Assessment: Rubric
Objectives: 1, 6
X.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Grading:




Attendance and Participation
School Level Learner-Centered
Assessment Analysis:
Learner-Centered Leadership
Case-Study & Analysis
Literature Review on Contextual Factors
and Historical/Political Trends
Influencing Learner-centered Practices
A= 90% -100%
B= 80% - 89%
C= 70% - 79%
10%
30%
30%
30%
F= 69% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of
investigation associated with college-level studies. All work submitted that requires
documentation should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof read to ensure accuracy
in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Rubrics will be shared with candidates as a means of
establishing an understanding of expectation of graduate study in the BCOE and at KSU.
Every effort will be made by the instructor to be fair and equitable in the assignment of grades
through multiple processes noted above. In the final analysis, the assigned grade will be based
on the best professional judgment of instructor.
XI.
TENTATIVE COURSE OUTLINE
Date
Week 1
Week 2-3
Week 4-5
Week 6-7
Week 8-9
Activity
Intro and Welcome, Why
Change?
What we know about learning
and leading and the link to
APA learner centered
principles and research base.
Industrial, corporate and
business paradigms ; brief
overview of contextual factors
Schools as living systems: an
ecological and learner-centered
paradigm
Leadership practice from a
learner-centered paradigm
Assignment Due
Reflective Journal (Part 1)
Literature Review on Historical and
Political Underpinnings of Contextual
Factors
Week 1011
Week 12
Week 13
Week 14
Week 15
Week 16
XII.
Implications, challenges and
opportunities with learnercentered leadership
Presentation of Case Studies
Learner-centered Assessment:
Moving toward new student
and system level learner
centered outcomes;
Dilemmas, policy and reform
(cont)
Poster Session & Presentation
of Assessment Analyses
Sustaining Learner-centered
principles in an inhospitable
educational climate
Learner-Centered Leadership Case Study
Learner-Centered Assessment Analysis
Reflective Journal (Part 2)
Select and Load Artifact Into Program
Portfolio
POLICIES
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs
of the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as
well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective
instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is
raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause
candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in
employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age,
disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race,
religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style
differences provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons
defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities
within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students
must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual
assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required. Please be aware there are
other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of
the multicultural variables outlined above. The development of an appreciation of diversity as a
core organizational value and its use as a resource will give direction to the activities of the
doctoral seminar and of the whole doctoral program. Consideration will be given to diversity in
developing the membership of the cohorts in the interest of ensuring that the collaborative
cohort experience contributes to the development of such personal and organizational core
values.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their
academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs
abide by the policies and guidelines established by the university in their expectations for
candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and adhering to the guidelines of
academic honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to have
violated these guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action consistent with university policy.
For example, plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic Honesty policies
could result in a grade of “ F” in the course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary
Committee.
Papers should be a synthesis of information reported in your own words and with proper
documentation.
Professionalism- Participation/Attendance/Submission of Assignments/Use of Technology
During Class/Seminars: Part of your success in this course is related to providing peer reviews
and feedback to your colleagues regarding course assignments; participating and interacting in
course activities; collaborating and working equitably with colleagues; and treating colleagues
and the professor with respect both in and out of class. Furthermore, responding effectively and
appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor/supervisor is another measure of
your professionalism. Please be prepared by bringing all materials and readings to meetings and
seminars. All readings assignments must be completed prior to meetings and seminars. We
depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions.
Professionalism also includes appropriate audience behaviors during lectures and presentations.
When someone is speaking to the group or making a presentation, professionals do not engage in
conversations or other distracting behaviors that detract from the audiences’ attention to the
speaker.
Absences may be considered excused only in the case of personal or a professional emergency
and only if approved by the professor/supervisor in advance or as soon as possible after the
emergency event.
Using technology during class/seminar (laptops, cell phones, etc.) to check personal e-mail or
engage in activities not associated with course content is not acceptable and will likely result in a
reduction of course participation points. Engaging in personal conversations while
professor/supervisor or groups are presenting is not acceptable and will likely result in a
reduction of class participation points. A break will be provided for snacks and personal use of
technology.
In sum, a lack of professionalism will likely result in grade reduction.
XIII. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Classic:
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan.
Recent:
Benninga, J. S., Berkowitz, M. W., Kuehn;, P., & Smith, K. (2006) Character and academics:
What good schools do. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(6), 448-452.
Blankstein, A. M. (2007) Terms of engagement: Where failure is not an option. In A. M.
Blankstein, R.Wl Cole, & P.D. Houston (Eds.), Engaging every learner (pp.1-28)
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement (2008). Tools for planning and
improving leader performance.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002). Standards for advanced programs
in educational leadership.
Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice, New
York: Teachers Press, Columbia University.
Sternberg, R. J. (2007). A systems model of leadership. WICS. American Psychologist, 61(1),
34-42.
Websites:
http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/site/c.kjJXJ5MPIwE/b.1427855/k.FAA3/Welcome_to_
the_Center_for_Public_Education.htm (The Center for Public Education)
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/pea_board.aspx?PageReq=PEABoardRules (Georgia State Education
Rules and Policies)
http://www.gapsc.com/TeacherEducation/Rules/505-3-.58.pdfhttp:///www.doe.k12.ga.us
(Georgia Department of Education)