Journal of K-12 Educational Research 41 Methodology The current study is a sequential mixed-methods study which employed a phenomenological approach to explore assistant principals’ experiences in an aspiring principal program. Quantitative data were collected through a District-developed pre-assessment and postassessment, collaboratively completed by assistant principals and their principals, to measure growth across 21 leadership responsibilities. The Districtdeveloped assessment was based on Marzano et al.’s (2005) 21 leadership responsibilities, a meta-analysis looking for specific principal leadership behaviors. Each leadership behavior correlates with student academic achievement. A dependent samples t-test was conducted to determine whether significant differences existed in perceived leadership competence before and after program completion. Reliability of the assessment instruments was established using Cronbach’s Alpha. Following the quantitative analysis, qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with nine of the 10 program participants. Interviews explored participants’ perceptions of the principalship, their learning within the program, and the impact on their leadership development. Member checking was used to ensure the accuracy of transcripts. The integration of quantitative and qualitative findings provided a deeper understanding of how the program influenced assistant principals’ leadership competencies and perceptions of the principal role. Data Analysis The quantitative data was received in a spreadsheet format and then exported to SPSS to run statistical analyses. One spreadsheet organized data by participant number and the ratings on the pre-assessment and post-assessment for each of the 21 leadership responsibilities. This data was used for the dependent samples t-tests. A second spreadsheet included participants and their responses on only the pre-assessment. This data was used for reliability testing. A third spreadsheet included participants and their responses on only the post-assessment. This data was also used for reliability testing. Since the preassessment and post-assessment were district-developed assessment instruments, Cronbach’s Alpha was used to determine the reliability of the assessment. Dependent samples t-tests measured the pre-assessment and postassessment data to determine significant differences in all 21 leadership responsibilities. A qualitative analysis of responses was completed using NVivo 15 to identify emerging themes and to further explain the quantitative data and any perceived changes in behavior as a result of participating in the aspiring principal program. The following research questions explored participants’ perception of the principal role and their readiness, and if their learning is impacting their current leadership behaviors in their current role; essentially, are participants actively applying their learning in preparation for the school principal role, and do they have an accurate perception of the role of today’s school principal. Research Question 1 (RQ1) Is there a difference in assistant principals’ perceived level of competence after completing the aspiring principal program? H10–H210: There is no difference in the assistant principals’ perceived level of competence after completing the aspiring principal program. µpre-assessment = µpost-assessment H1–H21: There is a difference in assistant principals’ perceived level of competence after completing the aspiring principal program. µpre-assessment ≠ µpost-assessment Dependent samples t-tests measure pre-assessment and post-assessment data to determine significant differences using a 0.05 significance level in SPSS. This required 21 hypotheses and dependent samples t-tests; one set for each competency: 1. Affirmation 2. Change agent 3. Communication 4. Contingent rewards 5. Culture
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx