Although the vast preponderance oI the Iaculty and staII support the new campus vision, a

handIul does not. What can be done to address the situation?

A vision statement assists stakeholders with outlining a plan to accomplish the school`s mission.
Institutions should use a collaborative process to apply data based decision making when school
staII, Iamilies, and community members create a school vision (Wilmore, 2002, p. 21). In this
situation, the school leader should invite all stakeholders to participate in working toward the
vision. EIIective school visions include community values. Administrators should interact with
the Iaculty and staII to determine what is important to them. Stakeholders should see the vision
in writing and witness activities that align with the vision statement. Daily activities, policies
and procedures, handbooks, newsletters, and other verbal and non-verbal messages provide
venues to communicate the campus vision. The principal could ask Ior anonymous Ieedback on
reactions to the vision.
Although district administrators have given you a directive to improve student perIormance,
once they hear some oI the planned campus strategies and activities, they raise a Iew concerns. In
this situation, what should the principal do as the liaison between the campus and the central
administration?
When developing a strategy to improve instruction and student learning the school leader should
consider staII interactions and methods to maintain a team concept. When stakeholders do not
properly maintain these relationships, this decision can jeopardize student learning. Teamwork
should Iocus on meeting the academic and social needs oI all students. Relationships among
administrators, educators, students, central oIIice staII, and community members are constantly
changing. Teams can collaborate to develop problem-solving strategies. Learners will be
engaged in exploring ideas that incorporate students` culture, experiences, and knowledge.
Teachers will be encouraged to design authentic learning tasks (Firestone, 2009). School leaders
should conduct a needs assessment to align resources with the organizational vision. Principal
Watson should inIorm the central oIIice oI the rationale Ior planning the school improvement
strategies and activities. Central staII should have an opportunity to provide Ieedback about the
plan while the principal is developing improvement techniques.
IdentiIy obstacles to eIIective communication and attempts at change. What could you do to
address these issues?
EIIective leaders develop a plan that allows Ior change. They understand that being deIensive
interIeres with learning. Failure to learn makes it likely Ior individuals or organizations to repeat
behaviors that were unproductive in past situations. Forming alliances and developing
preconceived notions could present obstacles to eIIective communication. BeIore change begins,
the leader should uncover constraining Iorces. Overt and covert rules determine how an
organization operates (Calabrese, 2002).

Administrators should determine the expectations oI individuals or groups who will inIluence a
school`s eIIectiveness. School leaders initiate and monitor eIIective change. Teachers, parents,
students, and community members have expectations Ior student learning and the process to
change. Leaders must determine the direction that an organization should take to achieve a
desired result. Administrators should clariIy the expectations oI individuals and groups to
determine the best course oI action. Sometimes a group might have a certain way that
individuals expect a leader to act in a given situation (Gorton & Alston, 2009). Principals should
support school staII during change.
What steps would you take to sustain and nurture the vision once it is articulated? (p. 26).
Once a school implements change, leaders should implement some strategies that will maintain
this new system. Principals should understand the change process beIore they begin to introduce
new policies and procedures. School reIorm begins with changes made by the principal,
assistant principals, and the leadership team members. According to Moore (2009), school
leaders must develop a high level oI emotional intelligence in order to nurture change.
Leadership is a primary element in change. Administrators are responsible Ior transIorming
schools into systemic thinking organizations. Restructuring schools accompanies resistance,
stress, anger, and other emotions. EIIective leaders understand and address the loss that people
experience during change. People are oIten aIraid to change how they view a system (Moore,
2009).
How does this case study address Specialization Outcome 1 and ELCC Standard 1?
According to Wilmore (2002), all leaders should serve as stewards and help to motivate staII to
make continuous improvement. Specialization Outcome 1 speciIies that analyzing theories and
evaluating the role oI an educational leader are categories Ior administrators to participate in
activities that demonstrate their competency toward Standard 1. ELCC Standard 1 explains that
school leaders are responsible Ior Iacilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and
stewardship oI a district vision oI learning supported by the school community. Ms. Watson
wanted to empower all stakeholders by collaborating to Iacilitate a school vision. She noticed
diIIerences in the academic perIormance oI some learners and decided that Iacilitating a shared
vision and developing common goals would assist with improving student perIormance and
increasing parental involvement.

ReIerences
Calabrese, R. L. (2002). The leadership assignment: Creating change. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Firestone, W.A. (2009). Accountability nudges districts into changes in culture. Phi Delta
Kappan, (90)9, 670-676.

Moore, B. (2009). Emotional intelligence Ior school administrators: A priority Ior school
ReIorm? American Secondary Education, 37(3), 20-28.

Wilmore, E. L. (2002). Principal leadership: applying the new educational leadership
constituent council (ELCC) standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.