State-Mandated Educational Leadership Program Redesign: A View From New Jersey

• In Event: Roundtable Session 85
  In Roundtable Session: Promoting Active Agency in Educational Leadership-Preparation Policy Making: Furthering Discussion in the Professoriate

Abstract

(While this session will use papers produced in the five case studies as a discussion starting point, this interactive symposium is intended to stimulate further discussion about others’ experiences with program redesign. A summary of the context of each case study is provided in this proposal, and full papers will be distributed at the session.)

In December 2004, 17 New Jersey colleges and universities offering educational leadership program faculty were invited to participate in a Critical Friends Review (CFR) process. Implicit in this invitation was the expectation that faculty would revise their programs to reflect the ISLLC standards and include “best practices” in educational leadership preparation programs. With state approval of these programs contingent upon completion of the CFR process, New Jersey Department of Education staff assured each institution that these efforts were intended as a catalyst for program reflection and review, not evaluation, and that the results of the CFR process would not become part of the public record. With a six-month deadline for approval, speculations about “hidden agendas” embedded in the request prompted a state-wide meeting of program coordinators to develop a preemptive strategy to block, or at least, manage future state requests, and a state chapter of the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration was chartered. Subsequently, state budget deficits resulted in considerable downsizing in the DOE, and communication between state institutions remained at a standstill for several years. Additionally, election of four new governors, three different Commissioners of Education, and faculty retirements from leadership preparation programs have contributed to policy fragmentation and program drift and have left programs uncertain about which program reforms to implement and who was available to help them update curriculum. In addition to updating their programs, multiple institutions now have to contend with standards, accreditation issues, and the growing challenge of comprehensive education reforms in the state focused on teacher tenure and teacher/student evaluations.

Author

• Virginia Doolittle, Rowan University