Is there a typology of teacher and leader responders to CALL, and do they cluster in different types of schools? A two-level latent class analysis of call survey data

Teachers College Record

Volumn 119, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 1-66

  Bowers, Alex J ^a   Blitz, Mark ^b   Modeste, Marsha E ^c   Salisbury, Jason ^d   Halverson, Richard ^b  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^c PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85017376251     PISSN: 01614681     EISSN: 14679620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (153)

1. Abrutyn, L. (2006). The most important data. Education Leadership, 63(6), 54-57.
2. Anderson, S., Leithwood, K., & Strauss, T. (2010). Leading data use in schools: Organizational conditions and practices at the school and district levels. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9(3), 292-327. doi:10.1080/15700761003731492
3. Atwater, L. E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F. J., & Fleenor, J. W. (1998). Self-other agreement: Does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 51(3), 577-598.
4. Barnes, C. A., Camburn, E., Sanders, B. R., & Sebastian, J. (2010). Developing instructional leaders: Using mixed methods to explore the black box of planned change in principals' professional practice. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 241-279. doi:10.1177/1094670510361748
5. Barnyak, N. C., & McNelly, T. A. (2009). An urban school district's parent involvement: A study of teachers' and administrators' beliefs and practices. The School Community Journal, 19(1), 33-58.
6. Biddle, B. J., & Saha, L. J. (2006). How principals use research. Education Leadership, 63(6), 72-77.
7. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2004). The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability (103rd Yearbook of the National Society of the Study of Education). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Blitz, M., Milanowski, T., & Clifford, M. (2011). Content validity as a window to a richer understanding of leadership practice. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
9. Blitz, M., & Modeste, M. (2013). The degree of discrepancy across distributed leadership practices by school position according to the comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning (CALL). Paper presented at the University Council for Educational Administration, Indianapolis, IN.
10. Blitz, M., Salisbury, J., & Kelley, C. (2014). The role of cognitive validity testing in the development of call, the comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(3).
11. Bowers, A. J. (2007). Grades and data driven decision making: Issues of variance and student patterns. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
12. Bowers, A. J. (2008). Promoting excellence: Good to great, NYC's district 2, and the case of a high performing school district. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(2), 154-177.
13. Bowers, A. J. (2009). Reconsidering grades as data for decision making: More than just academic knowledge. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(5), 609-629. doi:10.1108/09578230910981080
14. Bowers, A. J. (2010a). Analyzing the longitudinal K-12 grading histories of entire cohorts of students: Grades, data driven decision making, dropping out and hierarchical cluster analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation, 15(7), 1-18.
15. Bowers, A. J. (2010b). Toward addressing the issues of site selection in district effectiveness research: A two-level hierarchical linear growth model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(3), 395-425. doi:10.1177/0013161X10375271
16. Bowers, A. J. (2015). Site selection in school district research: A measure of effectiveness using hierarchical longitudinal growth models of performance. School Leadership & Management, 35(1), 39-61. doi:10.1080/13632434.2014.962500
17. Bowers, A. J., Shoho, A. R., & Barnett, B. G. (2014). Considering the use of data by school leaders for decision making. In A. J. Bowers, A. R. Shoho, & B. G. Barnett (Eds.), Using data in schools to inform leadership and decision making (pp. 1-16). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
18. Bowers, A. J., & Sprott, R. (2012a). Examining the multiple trajectories associated with dropping out of high school: A growth mixture model analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 105(3), 176-195. doi:10.1080/00220671.2011.552075
19. Bowers, A. J., & Sprott, R. (2012b). Why tenth graders fail to finish high school: A dropout typology latent class analysis. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 17(3), 129-148. doi:10.1080/10824669.2012.692071
20. Bowers, A. J., & Urick, A. (2011). Does high school facility quality affect student achievement? A 2-level hierarchical linear model. Journal of Education Finance, 37(1), 72-94.
21. Bowers, A. J., & White, B. R. (2014). Do principal preparation and teacher qualifications influence different types of school growth trajectories in Illinois? A growth mixture model analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 705-736. doi:10.1108/ JEA-12-2012-0134
22. Boyce, J., & Bowers, A. J. (2013). Examining the evolving research on instructional leadership from 25 years of the schools and staffing survey (SASS). Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA), Indianapolis, IN.
23. Boyce, J., & Bowers, A. J. (2016) Principal turnover: Are there different types of principals who move from or leave their schools? A latent class analysis of the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing Survey and the 2008-09 Principal Follow-up Survey. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15(3), 237-272. doi:10.1080/15700763.2015.1047033
24. Boyce, J., & Bowers, A. J. (2016). Different levels of leadership for learning: Investigating differences between teachers individually and collectively using multilevel factor analysis of the 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Survey. International Journal of School Leadership. doi:1 0.1080/13603124.2016.1139187
25. Brocato, K., Willis, C., & Dechert, K. (2014). Longitudinal data use: Ideas for district, building, and classroom leaders. In A. J. Bowers, A. R. Shoho, & B. G. Barnett (Eds.), Using data in schools to inform leadership and decision making (pp. 97-120). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
26. Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
27. CALL. (n.d.). Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning. Available at http:// www.leadershipforlearning.org/
28. Camburn, E., & Salisbury, J. (2012). Examining the validity and reliability of the comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning (CALL) formative leadership assessment tool: Pilot study results. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Education Research Association, Vancouver, BC.
29. Cawelti, C., & Protheroe, N. (2001). High student achievement: How six school districts changed into high-performance systems. Educational Research Service: Arlington, VA.
30. Coburn, C. E., & Turner, E. O. (2012). The practice of data use: An introduction. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 99-111. doi:10.1086/663272
31. Collins, L. M., & Lanza, S. T. (2010). Latent class and latent transition analysis: With applications in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
32. Condon, C., & Clifford, M. (2012). Measuring principal performance: How rigorous are commonly used principal performance assessment instruments? A quality school leadership issue brief. Chicago, IL: Learning Point Associates.
33. Corcoran, C., Peck, C. M., & Reitzug, U. C. (2013). Exiting school improvement sanctions: Accountability, morale, and the successful school turnaround principal. In B. G. Barnett, A. R. Shoho, & A. J. Bowers (Eds.), School and district leadership in an era of accountability (pp. 63-83). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
34. Covay Minor, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Goldring, E., Cravens, X., & Elloitt, S. (2014). A known group analysis validity study of the Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education in US elementary and secondary schools. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 1-20. doi:10.1007/s11092-013-9180-z
35. Cusick, P. A. (1983). The egalitarian ideal and the American high school: Studies of three schools. New York: Longman.
36. Darling-Hammond, L. (2009). Recognizing and enhancing teacher effectiveness. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 3, 1-24.
37. Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M. A., Meyerson, D., & Orr, M. T. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute, Stanford University.
38. Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
39. Desimone, L., Smith, T., & Phillips, K. (2007). Does policy influence mathematics and science teachers' participation in professional development. Teachers College Record, 109(5), 1086-1122.
40. Devine, J. F., & Cohen, J. (2007). Making your school safe: Strategies to protect children and promote learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
41. Drago-Severson, E. (2012). New opportunities for principal leadership: Shaping school climates for enhanced teacher development. Teachers College Record, 114(3), 1-44.
42. Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 31(1), 15-24.
43. Erickson, F. (2007). Some thoughts on "proximal" formative assessment of student learning. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
44. Fan, X. (2001). Parental involvement and students' academic achievement: A growth modeling analysis. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70(1), 27-61. doi:10.1080/00220970109599497
45. Fiedler, F. (1978). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 149-190). New York, NY: Academic Press.
46. Frattura, E. M., & Capper, C. A. (2007). Leading for social justice: Transforming schools for all learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
47. Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 157-171. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00072
48. Geiser, C. (2012). Data analysis with Mplus. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
49. Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 140-150. doi: 10.5465/ame.2000.2909846
50. Goff, P., Goldring, E., & Bickman, L. (2014). Predicting the gap: Perceptual congruence between American principals and their teachers' ratings of leadership effectiveness. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 1-27. doi:10.1007/s11092-014-9202-5
51. Goldring, E., Cravens, X., Porter, A., Murphy, J., & Elliott, S. (2015). The convergent and divergent validity of the Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education (VAL-ED). Journal of Educational Administration, 53(2), 177-196. doi:10.1108/JEA-06-2013-0067
52. Goldring, E., Grissom, J. A., Neumerski, C. M., Murphy, J., & Blissett, R. (2015). Making time for instructional leadership: New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.
53. Goldring, E., Huff, J., May, H., & Camburn, E. (2008). School context and individual characteristics: what influences principal practice? Journal of Educational Administration, 46(3), 332-352.
54. Goldring, E., Mavrogordato, M., & Haynes, K. T. (2015). Multisource principal evaluation data: Principals' orientations and reactions to teacher feedback regarding their leadership effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 5(4), 572-599. doi:10.1177/0013161X14556152
55. Goldring, E., & Pasternack, R. (1994). Principals' coordinating strategies and school effectiveness 1. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 239-253. doi:10.1080/0924345940050303
56. Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., & Cravens, X. (2009). Assessing learningcentered leadership: Connections to research, professional standards, and current practices. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 1-36. doi:10.1080/15700760802014951
57. Goodman, L. A. (2002). Latent class analysis: The empirical study of latent types, latent variables, and latent structures. In J. A. Hagenaars & A. L. McCutcheon (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 3-55). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58. Graham, J. W., Cumsille, P. E., & Elvira, E.-F. (2003). Methods for handling missing data. In I. B. Weiner, J. A. Schinka, & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Volume 2 Research methods in psychology (pp. 87-114). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
59. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352.
60. Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221-239. doi:10.1080/15700760500244793
61. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5-44. doi:10.1177/0013161X96032001002
62. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2002). What do you call people with visions? The role of vision, mission and goals in school leadership and improvement. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 9-40). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
63. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2011a). Conceptual and methodological issues in studying school leadership effects as a reciprocal process. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(2), 149-173. doi:10.1080/09243453.2011.565777
64. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2011b). Exploring the journey of school improvement: Classifying and analyzing patterns of change in school improvement processes and learning outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(1), 1-27. doi:10.1080/ 09243453.2010.536322
65. Halverson, R. (2004). Accessing, documenting, and communicating practical wisdom: The phronesis of school leadership practice. American Journal of Education, 111(1), 90-121. doi:10.1086/424721
66. Halverson, R. (2010). School formative feedback systems. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 130-146. doi:10.1080/0161956100368527
67. Halverson, R. (2014). Data-driven leadership for learning in the age of accountability. In A. J. Bowers, A. R. Shoho, & B. G. Barnett (Eds.), Using data in schools to inform leadership and decision making (pp. 255-267). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
68. Halverson, R., & Dikkers, S. (2010). Formative leadership for learning: Leveraging empirical studies of educational leadership for formative tools. Paper presented at the University Council for Educational Administration Annual Research Conference, New Orleans, LA.
69. Halverson, R., Kelley, C., & Kimball, S. (2004). Implementing teacher evaluation systems: How principals make sense of complex artifacts to shape local instructional practice. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration, policy and reform: Research and measurement research and theory in educational administration (Vol. 3). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.
70. Halverson, R., Kelley, C., & Shaw, J. (2014). A CALL for improved school leadership. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(6), 57-60.
71. Halverson, R., & Thomas, C. N. (2007). The roles and practices of student services staff as datadriven instructional leaders. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
72. Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2009). Assessing the contribution of distributed leadership to school improvement and growth in math achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 659-689.
73. Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2014). Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 653-681.
74. Henry, K. L., & Muthén, B. (2010). Multilevel latent class analysis: An application of adolescent smoking typologies with individual and contextual predictors. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17(2), 193-215. doi:10.1080/10705511003659342
75. Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: What we know and what we don't. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207-216. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001
76. Jacob, R., Goddard, R., Kim, M., Miller, R., & Goddard, Y. (2015). Exploring the causal impact of the McREL balanced leadership program on leadership, principal efficacy, instructional climate, educator turnover, and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(3), 314-332. doi:10.3102/0162373714549620
77. Jung, T., & Wickrama, K. A. S. (2008). An introduction to latent class growth analysis and growth mixture modeling. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 302-317. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00054.x
78. Kelley, C., & Halverson, R. (2012). The comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning: a next generation formative evaluation and feedback system. Journal of Applied Research on Children, 3(2), 4.
79. Kelley, C., Halverson, R., & Camburn, E. (2012). The design and validation of the comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning (CALL) formative school leader assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Finance and Policy Association, Boston, MA.
80. Knapp, M. S., Copland, M. A., & Talbert, J. F. (2003). Leading for learning: Reflective tools for school and district leaders. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
81. Krüger, M. L., & Scheerens, J. (2012). Conceptual perspectives on school leadership. In J. Scheerens (Ed.), School leadership effects revisited: Review and meta-analysis of empirical studies (pp. 1-30). New York, NY: Springer.
82. Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
83. Leithwood, K. (2013). Concluding synthesis and commentary. In B. G. Barnett, A. R. Shoho, & A. J. Bowers (Eds.), School and district leadership in an era of accountability (pp. 255-269). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
84. Lawrence, A. (1987). Classification of active galaxies and the prospect of a unified phenomenology. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 99(615), 309-334. doi:10.2307/40678901
85. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1990). Transformational leadership: How principals can help reform school cultures. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(4), 249-280. doi:10.1080/0924345900010402
86. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 496-528.
87. Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (2011). Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
88. Leithwood, K., & Montgomery, D. J. (1986). Improving principal effectiveness: The principal profile. Toronto, CA: OISE Press.
89. Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S. E., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Minneapolis, MN: Wallace Foundation.
90. Lo, Y. (2005). Likelihood ratio tests of the number of components in a normal mixture with unequal variances. Statistics & Probability Letters, 71(3), 225-235. doi:10.1016/j. spl.2004.11.007
91. Lo, Y., Mendell, N. R., & Rubin, D. B. (2001). Testing the number of components in a normal mixture. Biometrika, 88(3), 767-778. doi:10.1093/biomet/88.3.767
92. Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
93. Losen, D. J. (2011). Discipline policies, successful schools, and racial justice. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.
94. Louis, K. S., Marks, H. M., & Kruse, S. (1996). Teachers' professional community in restructuring schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 757-798. doi:10.3102/00028312033004757
95. Macmillan, R., & Hagan, J. (2004). Violence in the transition to adulthood: Adolescent victimization, education, and socioeconomic attainment in later life. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(2), 127-158. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.01402001.x
96. Mahlke, J., Schultze, M., Koch, T., Eid, M., Eckert, R., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2015). A multilevel CFA-MTMM approach for multisource feedback instruments: Presentation and application of a new statistical model. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1-20. doi:10.1080/10705511.2014.990153
97. Malderez, A., Hobson, A. J., Tracey, L., & Kerr, K. (2007). Becoming a student teacher: Core features of the experience. European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(3), 225-248. doi:10.1080/02619760701486068
98. Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2013). A systemic view of implementing data literacy in educator preparation. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 30-37. doi:10.3102/0013189x12459803
99. Marks, H. M., Louis, K. S., & Printy, S. (2002). The capacity for organizational learning: Implications for pedagogy and student achievement. In I. K. L. (Ed.), Organizational learning and school improvement. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
100. Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
101. Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
102. Mayoh, J., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2015). Toward a conceptualization of mixed methods phenomenological research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 91-107. doi:10.1177/1558689813505358
103. McCutcheon, A. L. (2002). Basic concepts and procedures in single-and multiple-group latent class analysis. In J. A. Hagenaars & A. L. McCutcheon (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 56-87). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
104. Mertens, S. B., & Flowers, N. (2006). "Middle Start's" impact on comprehensive middle school reform. Middle Grades Research Journal, 1(1), 1-26.
105. Mitgang, L. (2013). Districts matter: Cultivating the principals urban schools need. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.
106. Murphy, J. (2008). The place of leadership in turnaround schools: Insights from organizational recovery in the public and private sectors. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(1), 74-98.
107. Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A. C. (2007). Leadership for learning: A research-based model and taxonomy of behaviors. School Leadership & Management, 27(2), 179-201. doi:10.1080/13632430701237420
108. Murphy, J., Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2013). Leading via teacher evaluation: The case of the missing clothes? Educational Researcher, 42(6), 349-354. doi:10.3102/0013189x13499625
109. Muthén, B. O. (2004). Latent variable analysis: Growth mixture modeling and related techniques for longitudinal data. In D. Kaplan (Ed.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 345-370). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
110. Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 24(6), 882-891.
111. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables user's guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
112. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(4), 535-569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396
113. Odden, A. R., & Kelley, C. (2001). Paying teachers for what they know and do: New and smarter compensation strategies to improve schools (2nd ed.). Corwin.
114. Odden, A. R., Picus, L. O., Archibald, S., Goertz, M. E., Mangan, M. T., & Aportela, A. (2007). Moving from good to great in Wisconsin: Funding schools adequately and doubling student performance. Madison, WI: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
115. Pearce, C. J., & Conger, C. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
116. Piety, P. J. (2013). Assessing the educational data movement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
117. Printy, S. M. (2008). Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 187-226.
118. Printy, S. M. (2010). Principals' influence on instructional quality: Insights from US schools. School Leadership & Management, 30(2), 111-126. doi:10.1080/13632431003688005
119. Printy, S. M., Marks, H. M., & Bowers, A. J. (2009). Integrated leadership: How principals and teachers share transformational and instructional influence. Journal of School Leadership, 19(5), 504-532.
120. Quint, J. C., Akey, T. M., Rappaport, S., & Willner, C. J. (2007). Instructional leadership, teaching quality, and student achievement: Suggestive evidence from three urban school districts. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499788.pdf
121. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
122. Reynolds, C. R., Skiba, R. J., Graham, S., Sheras, P., Conoley, J. C., & Garcia-Vazquez, E. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools?: an evidentiary review and recommendations. The American Psychologist, 63(9), 852-862.
123. Riehl, C. J. (2015). Mostly unpunctuated disequilibrium: A commentary on new directions in research and practice in education leadership. In A. J. Bowers, A. R. Shoho, & B. G. Barnett (Eds.), Challenges and opportunities of educational leadership research and practice: The state of the field and its multiple futures (Vol. 6, pp. 225-248). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
124. Robinson, V. M. (2011). Student-centered leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
125. Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635-674.
126. Rowan, B. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. Review of Research in Education, 16, 353-389. doi:10.2307/1167356
127. Samuelsen, K., & Raczynski, K. (2013). Latent class/profile analysis. In Y. Petscher, C. Schatschneider, & D. L. Compton (Eds.), Applied quantitative analysis in the social Sciences (pp. 304-328). New York: Routledge.
128. Scheerens, J. (2012). Summary and conclusion: Instructional leadership in schools as loosely coupled organizations. In J. Scheerens (Ed.), School leadership effects revisited: Review and meta-analysis of empirical studies (pp. 131-152). New York, NY: Springer.
129. Scribner, J. P., Sawyer, R. K., Watson, S. T., & Myers, V. L. (2007). Teacher teams and distributed leadership: A study of group discourse and collaboration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 67-100. doi:10.1177/0013161x06293631
130. Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Choong-Geun, C., Rausch, M. K., May, S. L., & Tobin, T. (2011). Race is not neutral: A national investigation of African American and Latino disproportionality in school discipline. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 85-107.
131. Smith, K., & McLay, M. (2007). Curates' eggs? Secondary trainee teachers' experience of the Graduate Teacher Programme and the Postgraduate Certificate in education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(1), 35-54. doi:10.1080/02607470601098294
132. Smylie, M. A., & Wenzel, S. A. (2003). The Chicago Annenberg challenge: Successes, failures and lessons for the future: Final technical report of the Chicago Annenberg research project. Chicago: IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
133. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
134. Spillane, J. P., Diamond, J. B., Burch, P., Hallett, T., Jita, L., & Zoltners, J. (2002). Managing in the middle: School leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educational Policy, 16(5), 731-762. doi:10.1177/089590402237311
135. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. doi:10.1080/0022027032000106726
136. Steinberg, M., Allensworth, E., & Johnson, D. W. (2011). Student and teacher safety in Chicago public schools: The roles of community context and school social organization. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago.
137. Trujillo, T. (2013). The reincarnation of the effective schools research: Rethinking the literature on district effectiveness. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(4), 426-452. doi:10.1108/09578231311325640
138. Turner, E. O., & Coburn, C. E. (2012). Interventions to promote data use: An introduction. Teachers College Record, 114(11), 1-13.
139. Urick, A. (2012). To what extent do typologies of school leaders across the U.S. predict teacher attrition? A multilevel latent class analysis of principals and teachers. Ed.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio.
140. Urick, A. (2016). Examining US principal perception of multiple leadership styles used to practice shared instructional leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 54(2), 152-172. doi:10.1108/JEA-07-2014-0088
141. Urick, A., & Bowers, A. J. (2011). What influences principals' perceptions of academic climate? A nationally representative study of the direct effects of perception on climate. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 10(3), 322-348. doi:10.1080/15700763.2011.577925
142. Urick, A., & Bowers, A. J. (2014a). How does principal perception of academic climate measure up? The impact of principal perceptions on student academic climate and achievement in high school. Journal of School Leadership, 24(2), 386-414.
143. Urick, A., & Bowers, A. J. (2014b). How teacher and principal perceptions influence instructional leadership internationally: A multilevel factor analysis of the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2008. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia, PA.
144. Urick, A., & Bowers, A. J. (2014c). What are the different types of principals across the United States? A latent class analysis of principal perception of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(1), 96-134. doi:10.1177/0013161x13489019
145. Vermunt, J. K. (2003). Multilevel latent class models. Sociological Methodology, 33(1), 213-239. doi:10.1111/j.0081-1750.2003.t01-1-00131.x
146. Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2002). Latent class cluster analysis. In J. A. Hagenaars & A. L. McCutcheon (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 89-107). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
147. Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 458-495. doi:10.1177/0013161x08321502
148. Waitoller, F. R., Artiles, A. J., & Cheney, D. A. (2010). The miner's canary: A review of overrepresentation research and explanations. The Journal of Special Education, 44(1), 29-49. doi:10.1177/0022466908329226
149. Waters, T., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL).
150. Wayman, J. C., Cho, V., Jimerson, J. B., & Spikes, D. D. (2012). District-wide effects on data use in the classroom. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(25), 1-28.
151. Wayman, J. C., & Stringfield, S. (2006). Data use for school improvement: School practices and research perspectives. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 463-468.
152. Wilson, D. L. (2011). Successful educational leadership at high performing schools. USChina Education Review, 8(3), 393-398.
153. Young, M. D., Tucker, P. D., Mawhinney, H., Reed, C. J., Anderson, E., Crow, G., Whiteman, R. (2013). Leveraging what works in preparing educational leaders. Charlottsville, VA: University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA).