Home

Stimulus Priority on Leadership

 THE STIMULUS BILL EXPLICITLY RECOGNIZES that effective teaching must be coupled with effective leadership. States looking for guidance can find key considerations, critical questions, and accompanying links to state examples in the high-leverage areas of preparation programs, principal evaluation, teacher leadership, and tiered licensure on a new page of NASBE's leadership site, About Linking Leadership to Stimulus Funds.


About Linking Leadership to Stimulus Funds:
High-Leverage Areas at www.nasbe.org/leadership

On average, one-fifth of states' entire general fund budgets are devoted to "human capital"--teachers and leaders--employed in K-12 public schools. Leadership is second only to teaching among school-related factors that impact student achievement.

In today's political environment, states must see return on their investment in cohesive leadership systems. Indeed, the metrics in the assurances of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) explicitly recognize that effective teaching must be coupled with effective leadership and require states to report the number and percentages of:

  • teachers in the highest-poverty and lowest-poverty schools in the state who are highly qualified;
  • teachers and principals rated at each performance level in each local education agency (LEA)'s teacher evaluation system; and
  • LEA teacher and principal evaluation systems that require evidence of student achievement outcomes.

The ARRA highlights the important role of states and districts in crafting policies and procedures to raise standards, enhance data systems, improve teacher effectiveness, and support effective intervention strategies. This cannot be done efficiently and effectively without intentional investments in school leadership. The Obama administration's $10 million increase in the fiscal year 2010 budget for school leadership competitive grants is designed to link leadership to student performance. The money would support:

  • developing and implementing incentives for principals with demonstrated effectiveness to take positions in low-performing schools;
  • and providing training and mentoring to highly effective teachers to encourage them to becomes principals in high-need schools.
Indeed, there are virtually no documented instances of troubled schools being turned around without intervention by a powerful leader. Moreover, the quality of leadership has an impact on where teachers work and how long they stay in the profession. Principals develop and manage how well staff delivers the most effective instructional practices to serve the most vulnerable populations, close achievement gaps, and meet global demands for a well-educated citizenry. So, how can states be strategic in leveraging their broad authority for strengthening the standards, training, support, and performance of education leadership, along with the conditions and incentives that affect their success?
 
www.nasbe.org/leadership offers a rich compendium of resources as well as examples of state policy approaches and progress thus far in each of these high-impact areas. The key considerations, critical questions and accompanying links to state examples below will help you to quickly navigate to relevant material in the areas of preparation programs, principal evaluation, teacher leadership, and tiered licensure--all popular levers states use to see return on their investments in leadership.
 
 
NASBE'S  About Linking Leadership to Stimulus Funds