Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.

12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

Schools Need Leaders - Not Managers:

It's Time for a Paradigm Shift
Les Stein, Ed.D.
Adjunct Professor of Leadership and Education
Northeastern University
Boston, Massachusetts
Concordia University
Portland, Oregon
[email protected]

Abstract
In the world of public school education everything depends on good leadership. Sadly, many
of our schools administrators can't differentiate the difference between leading and managing; far
too many of them don't know the first thing about fundamental leadership principles. In short, they
don't understand the fundamentals of Mission Oriented Leadership, the need for top-down
leadership, or the critical differences between leadership and management. A cursory review of the
selection process for school administrators, and the graduate level curriculums for those who seek a
degree in school administration, clearly supports the contention that policymakers and educators are
under the misconception that anyone can be taught or trained to be an effective school leader.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Introduction
This paper begins and ends with a fundamental premise: in order to become more competitive
with their global counterparts American schools need to be led rather than managed. In a 2010
report to the Wallace Foundation, Karen Seashore Louis and a team of researchers argued that, "In
developing a starting point for this six-year study, we claimed, based on a preliminary review of
research, that leadership is second only to classroom instruction as an influence on student learning.
After six additional years of research, we are even more confident about this claim. To date we have
not found a single case of a school improving its student achievement record in the absence of
talented leadership" (p. 9).

Children are often told by parents and teachers alike not to be completely satisfied with their
accomplishments until they can honestly say that they have done their best. Why doesn't this apply
to our nation's public school system? Why are we settling for second place against countries like
Finland, South Korea, Canada, Singapore, and more than twenty other industrialized nations? In
short, is the United States truly committed to a first class educational system? If so, then we need to
take the Wallace Foundation's report seriously and begin to look for ways to locate, cultivate, and
mold the most talented people into educational leaders.

Our K-12 schools are being led by people who can readily recite and clearly espouse
management principles; unfortunately, this is not enough to effectively run a school. School leaders

21
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

need to understand the crux of human nature and what motivates people; they need to have a firm
handle on the true meaning of collaborative working relationships; and they need to understand the
differences between participative, directive, and autocratic leadership styles. In essence, they need
to know which style works best under which circumstances.

The unstructured process currently used for locating and selecting school leaders, coupled with
the mediocre quality of education leadership courses provided by our colleges and universities make
it clear that policymakers and educators are under the misconception that almost anyone can be
taught or trained to be an effective school leader. This goes a long way in explaining why so many
of our public schools are either failing or simply not performing at acceptable levels.

In his seminal work on leadership, James McGregor Burns (1978) said that, "Leadership is one
of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth" (p. 2). Far too many people in
education and business believe that leaders and managers are interchangeable. It is not surprising,
therefore, that our public school systems often seek good managers rather than good leaders. What
they fail to understand is that management is the application of social scientific principles with a
focus on planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. Leadership, on the other hand, is an art
that certainly includes the fundamentals of management but goes much further by taking on the
vastly more important and difficult task of influencing people and inspiring them to succeed.

We need to abandon the long held misconception that locating a good manager to run a school
is the same as finding a good leader - this mindset is not only erroneous but counterproductive and
even dangerous to the future of our educational system. The research clearly shows that failing
schools are the result of failed leadership at the institutional levels. Diane Whitehead, executive
director of Childhood Education magazine (2009), argued that “School leaders, whether of a
preschool, primary school, middle school, or high school, seemed to be the keystone to the school
being able to realize and reach its goals…effective school leadership was, in all probability, the sole
factor that determined school success or school failure” (p. 32B). In their research on turning
around failing schools, Murphy and Meyers (2009) clearly stated that "In nearly all situations,
leadership is seen as a central variable in the equation of organizational success" (p. 138).

The Management vs. Leadership Paradox

In their highly regarded study on leadership, Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus (1985) argued that
"Leadership is what gives an organization its vision and its ability to translate that vision into reality.
Without this translation, a transaction between leaders and followers, there is no organizational
heartbeat" (p. 20). They make it clear that "The problem with many organizations, especially the
ones that are failing, is that they tend to be overmanaged and underled. They may excel in the ability
to handle the daily routine, yet never question whether the routine should be done at all" (p. 21).
School principals and even district superintendents generally seek to improve, or even optimize,
existing systems and processes; however, many fail to understand that the most critical needs of
their schools or school systems often lie in validating their visions and either redefining or
reevaluating their organizations' missions, to include the associated strategic and operational
objectives. Those who are leaders rather than managers look beyond the present, focusing on laying
a foundation for the future.

22
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

In his extensive research on the differences between managers and leaders, Toor (2011)
concluded that there are three significant themes: "First, leadership pursues change that is coupled
with sustainability, while management endeavors to maintain order that is tied with the bottom line.
Second, leadership exercises personal power and relational influence to gain authority, whereas
management banks on position power and structural hierarchy to execute orders. Third, leadership
empowers people, whereas management imposes authority" (p. 318). It is no coincidence, therefore,
that America's highest performing schools are the products of good leadership as opposed to
effective management.

In discussing the differences between management and leadership, John Kotter (2001) argues
that “Management is about coping with complexity…Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with
change.” Using a military analogy, Kotter states that “No one yet has figured out how to manage
people effectively into battle; they must be led” (P. 86). Few will argue that today's school leaders
must cope with complexity; however, their schools' success will more often depend on how well
they deal with change. School leaders must be able to understand and support the needs of a diverse
and ever changing landscape of learners; they need to locate and hire the best and most qualified
teachers; they need to appreciate the full impact of broken homes and family disputes on their
students' learning; and they must be able to effectively use the various social agencies that often play
such an important part in the lives of many urban students. Much of this requires leaders that have a
unique and compelling vision for their schools. Kotter also makes it clear that “for leadership,
achieving a vision requires motivating and inspiring – keeping people moving in the right direction,
despite major obstacles to change, by appealing to basic but often untapped human needs, values,
and emotions” (p. 86).

Leadership from the Top

Burns (1978) made a compelling point when he stated: "One of the most universal cravings of
our time is a hunger for compelling and creative leadership" (p. 1). As the former principal of two
K-8 schools I can readily say that most teachers - especially those in low performing schools - want
principals who are willing to take charge and are not afraid to make decisions.

In recent years, some educators have challenged the notion that principals should bear sole
responsibility for leading their schools. For instance, Gordon Donaldson (2006) argues that “The
now widespread assumption that public schools need to change has thankfully brought our classical
notions about leadership fully under the microscope. As schools have explored empowerment,
participatory decision making, teacher leadership, re-culturing, and improving from within, we seem
now to be able to appreciate fully the limitations of our past notions of leadership as administration”
(p. 43). Much of the recent literature on the subject of school leadership argues that the classical
models of leadership, which emerged from the classical theories of management, no longer serve the
best interests of our schools, if they ever did. In some circles there is widespread support for
leadership through collegiality and collaboration rather than the older hierarchical models that place
one decision-maker at the top of the pyramid.

Kenneth Leithwood (1992) makes it clear that schools, not unlike businesses and industries,
have shifted from type A to type Z organizations, thereby moving from the more centralized
decision-making structures to more participative structures that emphasize a greater level of

23
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

collegiality in the decision-making process (p. 8). The full implications of collaborative leadership
have also been investigated by Spillane, Halveson, and Diamond (2004), who favor the idea of
“distributed leadership.” They argue that “Leadership is not simply a function of what a school
principal, or indeed any other individual or group of leaders, knows and does. Rather, it is the
activities engaged in by leaders, in interactions with others in particular contexts around specific
tasks” (p. 5).

It is disconcerting to think that while we debate the nature of educational leadership the
academic gains of our nation's K-12 students, as measured by the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP), have been disappointing at best. According to Rampey et al, since
1971 our students have shown little progress in reading, and only marginal improvements in
mathematics. Given our limited progress over the past 40 years, it should not come as a surprise
that many of our colleges and universities are forced to offer remedial reading and math programs to
their incoming freshmen. There is little doubt that these trends are due, in large part, to the poor
leadership of our K-12 schools. In his article titled The Impact of Leadership in Primary Schools,
Desmond Rutherford (2005) quotes from a 1998 report published by England’s Department for
Education and Employment, which states, “All the evidence shows that heads are the key to a
school’s success. All schools need a leader who creates a sense of purpose and direction, sets high
expectations of staff and pupils, focuses on improving teaching and learning, monitors performance
and motivates staff to give of their best” (p. 21). In essence, top-down leadership is pivotal to any
school's success.

Any discussion about educational leadership needs to take into consideration Burns' (1978)
foundational position that most people are followers, and do not aspire to the lofty roles and
responsibilities associated with leadership; they do, however, fervently seek good leadership (p. 1).
The true value of sound and effective leadership is that it serves to unite people by providing
opportunities for meaningful participation in the decision-making process; however, the final
decision always rests with the leader. Throughout this discussion it is important to keep in mind that
groups, unlike individual leaders, rarely take responsibility for their actions; this is especially true
when it comes to failure. How often have we heard of corporate or school boards being replaced en
masse due to their organizations’ or schools’ poor performances? Not often. It is not uncommon,
however, to hear that chief executive officers, corporate presidents, district superintendents, and
school principals have been replaced. The question, therefore, is not if our public schools should
have one leader at the top; more importantly, we should be asking what kind of leaders best serve
their needs.

To summarize, schools cannot operate by consensus; they require strong, hands-on leadership
from the very top. The challenge, of course lies in locating the right individuals to lead our schools.
The criteria for leadership must be both unyielding and uncompromising. Furthermore, we need to
do a far better job of selecting and training our institutional and instructional leaders. Once the
right school leaders have been selected they must be held responsible for creating a system-wide
learning environment that fosters and empowers success in the classrooms. Ultimately, the final
responsibility rests with the school leader.

In her review of a 2010 survey, conducted by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation of more
than 40,000 public school teachers in grades pre-K to 12, Sara Trabuchi emphasized the value of

24
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

leadership by showing that “fewer than half of teachers (45%) say higher salaries are absolutely
essential for retaining good teachers. More teachers say it is absolutely essential to have supportive
leadership (68%), time to collaborate (54%), and quality curriculum (49%).” Sadly, far too many
school leaders fail to take their responsibilities seriously. For instance, in the 2008 Met Life Survey
of the American Teacher, Donna Markow and Michelle Cooper show that only 19% of teachers said
that their principals had observed them in the classroom and provided feedback about their teaching
skills at least once a month (p. 93). The bottom line is that there is no substitute for sound,
fundamental leadership from the top.

The Need for Mission Oriented Leadership

Those who study organizational leadership and management practices readily agree that
responsibility, unlike authority, cannot be delegated. It makes no sense, therefore, to think that a
school could be run by committee. This is not to say that participatory leadership is not essential to
the success of any school; it does, however, say that responsibility cannot be assigned to four or five
different desks. In other words, we must never confuse participatory leadership with delegation of
responsibility. At the end of the day only one individual can stand at the top of the pyramid and
serve as the institutional leader: an individual whose primary motivation is the success of the school,
someone who uses power not for personal gain but, as Bennis and Nanus (1985) said for its
“capacity to translate intention into reality and sustain it” (p. 17). Such qualities are essentially
embedded in the ideals associated with mission-oriented leadership, whereby “leaders communicate
a clear, optimistic and attainable picture of the organization's [sic] future, encouraging subordinates
to develop ‘beyond the norm’ so that the organization [sic] can also grow and develop” (Sarros and
Santora, 2001a). These characteristics of good leadership effectively define “mission-oriented
leadership.”

Mission-oriented leadership is not a difficult concept to understand – however, it is a difficult

concept to apply – that is why leadership is an art rather than a science. Leadership is
reserved for those people who have the disposition to work collaboratively with others, are willing
to keep an open mind and possess active listening skills. They clearly understand that teamwork
epitomizes the definition of synergy and serves as a force multiplier within any organization. Above
all, however, leadership should be reserved for those who are not afraid to make a decision, no
matter how unpopular it may be. A school principal who is a mission-oriented leader will do the
following, in priority order:

 Focus on creating a positive school culture: Simply said - a school's culture is the product
of its leadership. School leaders must be able to bring together the disparate and often
diverse personalities within their schools and mold them into a functional team that is
focused on the school's mission and vision. In his famous treatise, The Art of War, Sun Tsu
made it clear that “He whose ranks are united in purpose will be victorious” (p. 83).
Attaining this goal is far from easy - it requires a leader who can unify people in "purpose."
A school leader who is focused on creating a culture of success will pay particular attention
to the four areas that have the greatest impact on a school's culture: staff morale, student
behavior and safety, esprit de corps, and parental support.

25
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

 Remove the poor performers: There are far too many teachers and staff members working
in our public schools who have absolutely no business in education; some do not have the
required pedagogical skills, others lack the motivation to be educators, and there are many
others who see teaching as simply a job rather than a profession and do only the bare
minimum. Teachers that are not meeting acceptable performance standards are not only
doing a disservice to their students they are also negatively impacting the school's morale
and undermining its culture.

Unfortunately, many school leaders are intimidated by non-performing teachers' often

abrasive personalities and tough demeanor. When a teacher or staff member is not
performing to acceptable standards they certainly need to be offered an opportunity to take
corrective action. They also need to be provided with the kind of support that will help them
become productive members of the school. However, if they cannot make the necessary
adjustments within a reasonable period of time, they need to be removed from the school.
This demands strong, discerning leadership.

 Prepare a clear mission statement: The school leader must communicate a clear and
realistic mission - one that every stakeholder can understand and accept. She or he must also
establish clear priorities for achieving success, which must be understood by the students,
their parents, teachers, and administrative staff. If priorities are not clearly delineated, or if
they do not highlight academic achievement and good citizenship, there is little reason to
believe that the school will ever achieve real success. The school's mission statement is
often the most visible marketing tool (both inside and outside the school), and as such it
must answer the following three questions: Why does the school exist? What is the school's
purpose? What does the school intend to achieve? The school's mission statement should
be: (1) Short, concise, and to the point; (2) Meaningful to all of its stakeholders; (3) Realistic
(can be implemented in a reasonable period of time); and, (4) Measurable (qualitatively, but
more importantly, quantitatively).

 Serve as a change agent: Not unlike any dynamic organization, where no two days are ever
the same, schools need leaders who epitomize the importance of change and have the ability
to influence it. First and foremost, they need to make it clear to teachers, students, and
parents that the status quo is unacceptable. Next, they need to establish clear priorities for
everyone in the school, using the school's vision and mission as their guiding light. Last,
they need to remove any doubt that change, in the form of continuous improvements, will be
the school's mantra and that teachers and staff have a choice - they can either get on the train
or be left behind; there is no middle ground.

 Empower others: Organize the school so that it is focused on success. Not unlike corporate
leaders, school principals must be able to influence as well as manage the staff. They must
feel comfortable with empowering staff members to make decisions while never losing sight
of the simple fact that they will ultimately be responsible for their subordinates' decisions.
Again, authority and responsibility are not interchangeable concepts.

 High visibility: Lead by walking around. This is probably one of the most difficult aspects
of leadership because it is not only exhausting but also requires the principal to spend non-

26
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

school hours completing administrative responsibilities. In discussing Lee Iacocca’s

leadership style when he took Chrysler Corporation from bankruptcy to success, Warren
Bennis and Burt Nanus (1985) say: “Iacocca’s high visibility symbolizes the missing
element in management today (and much of management theory) in that his style of
leadership is central to organizational success” (p. 17). Although there is nothing new in this
concept my experience shows that far too many school principals fail to leave their office for
any significant amount of time during school hours. Teacher satisfaction surveys have
clearly demonstrated that the principal’s “presence” generally improves staff morale and
goes a long way in creating a positive school culture.

 Set the right example: Exemplify those traits that have always been the hallmarks of
successful and admired leaders: strong work ethic, a positive, can-do attitude, and the highest
level of integrity. Today, more than ever before, our elementary and secondary students
need the best role models. In essence, every student should want to grow up and be like his
or her school principal.

Selecting and Preparing School Leaders

America's educational system is ill served by its current methods for locating and preparing
school leaders. For instance, just because someone is a good teacher does not necessarily imply that
she or he would make a good institutional leader; people with good organizational skills do not
always transition into effective leaders; and managing people is often a far cry from leading them.
First, and most importantly, administrators need to identify the characteristics and skills that best
support successful school leaders, i.e. which ones are personal, intuitive traits (that can rarely be
taught) and which are the trainable skills. In all, understanding the true differences between
management and leadership would go a long way to identify the right individuals for training and
preparation.

According to Cunningham and Cordeiro (2009) "Educational leadership preparation programs

throughout the United States are under intense scrutiny and criticism" (p. 5). It should not come as
any surprise that school administration and leadership graduate programs focus on managing rather
than leading. This has led to a lack of transformational leaders in education and it explains why so
many school principals and district superintendents don't understand the various nuances associated
with situational leadership. The process for developing school leaders must be rigorous and
selective. The following model is intended to serve as a starting point:

 School districts should establish a standing leadership program for their aspiring principals
and assistant principals. The program should include an active leadership committee,
comprised of assistant superintendents, human resource professionals, school principals, and
lead teachers, who would review the background information of qualified candidates that
aspire to leadership positions. Individuals who meet the entry level criteria (favorable
evaluations, principal and peer recommendations, etc.) would then be placed on a list of
potential principals/assistant principals. Throughout their period of observation candidates
would be offered opportunities such as chairing committees and serving as instructional team
leaders to demonstrate their leadership skills within their schools and districts.

27
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

The district leadership committee would periodically evaluate whether the candidates
possess the requisite leadership skills to be successful school principals/assistant principals.
For instance, candidates would be evaluated on their oral and written communication skills,
initiative, motivation, ability to accept constructive criticism, performance under pressure,
and willingness to go the extra mile on behalf of their school and students. Additionally,
their annual evaluations would include very specific information about their leadership skills
and successes. This pool of leadership candidates would then be considered for selection to
a one year internship program that would prepare them for assignments as future principals.
Only the best and most capable leaders should be offered the opportunity to serve as interns.

 The educational leadership programs at America's colleges and universities, where they
exist, often lack substance and fail to meet the true needs of school leaders. The
overwhelming majority of graduate programs in education effectively teach management
rather than leadership principles, often by people who have never led a school or school
system. A truly noteworthy school leadership curriculum will include detailed instruction in
team-building, time management, effective communication, working with diverse groups,
and budgeting. Such instruction can legitimately be provided only by those who have been
in the field and had first hand experiences. Today, far too many of our college and
university professors that teach classes in educational leadership either lack meaningful and
practical experiences in the field or have been out of the field for decades. Leadership
instruction is very different from teaching graduate courses in accounting, math, or history.
Our future school leaders need to hear from practitioners who have been in the trenches -
especially the successful ones.

 Leadership instruction should take full advantage of the case study method, and should be
taught by both university instructors (those with leadership experiences) and either existing
or retired school principals and district superintendents. Second only to the hands-on
experiences offered by internships, case studies and role play provide very effective means
of bringing simulated reality into the university classroom. Neil Cranston’s (2002) varied
research in the area of case studies shows that such methods provide professional
development opportunities that are, "dynamic and grounded in 'real-life' experiences
involving some of the myriad of highly complex challenges faced by school leaders" (p. 4).
His research on the value of case studies (2008) as important instructional tools in leadership
development also shows that:

o cases are grounded in authentic "real world" stories of the challenges facing
principals; and
o discussions at the workshops lead to creative and constructive exchanges concerning
leadership challenges (p. 581).

Conclusion
America does not have the luxury of time when it comes to improving the quality of its K-12
public schools. Most, if not all, of the other industrialized nations have made it abundantly clear
that their futures depend on a well-educated populace. Second only to having the best and most
highly qualified teachers in the classrooms, America's schools need great school leaders at the helm.

28
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

We are in desperate need of leaders who are bona fide visionaries, mentors, coaches, motivators, and
team players; people who lead by walking around rather than from the comfort of their offices or
desks. The most effective and successful school leaders focus on their institution's mission and
vision, with an acute sense for situational awareness. Such leaders build effective relationships
within the local community, gain the trust of their staffs, and make every effort to "know" the
students and their parents. The hallmark of a true school leader rests with his or her ability to
develop personal relationships and to positively influence others.

America is at a significant crossroad relative to its K-12 educational system, and it must act
quickly. If we are truly serious about equipping our students to compete globally then we need to
locate and train institutional leaders rather than managers. For all practical purposes, our future
depends on this.

References
Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The Strategies For Taking Charge. NY: Harper & Row
Publishers.

Burns , J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Cranston, N. "Enhancing the skills of school leaders: leadership development via problem-based e-
learning."Unicorn on-line refereed article, ORA No. 16 (2002): 3-16.

Cranston, Neil. “The use of cases in the leadership development of principals; A recent initiative in
one large education system in Australia.” Journal of Educational Administration 46 no. 5
(2008): 581.

Cunningham, W., and Cordeiro, P. (2009). Educational Leadership; A Bridge to ImprovedPractice.

Boston, MA: Pearson.

Donaldson, G. (2006). Cultivating Leadership in Schools: Connecting People Purpose, and

Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Kotter, J. P. (December 2001). What Leaders Really Do. Harvard Business Review, 85-96.

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Leithwood, K. A. “The move toward Transformational Leadership.” Educational Leadership

(February 1992): pp. 8 – 12.

Markow, Dana and Cooper, Michelle. “The MetLife Survey of the American Teacher.” Met Life
Inc. (October 2008): 89 – 109.

Murphy, J. and Meyers, C. (2008). Turning Around Failing Schools: Leadership Lessons From the
Organizational Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

29
Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/I3 Volume 15 Issue 2 Idea

Rampey, B.D., Dion, G.S., and Donahue, P.L. (2009). NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress
(NCES 2009–479). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.

Rutherford, D. (2005). “The Impact of Leadership in Primary Schools.” Management in Education,

18(5): 21-26.

Sarros, J.C. and Santora, J.C. (2001a). "The transformational-transactional leadership model in
practice." Leadership & Organization Development Journal 22 no. 8: 383-93.

Seashore Louis, K. et al (2010). Learning from Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved
Student Learning. Final Report of Research to the Wallace Foundation.

Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: a
distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36 (1), 3-34.

Sun Tzu (1963) Translated by Samuel B. Griffin. “The Art of War. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

Toor, Shamas-ur-Rehman. (2011, October). Differentiating Leadership from Management: An

Empirical Investigations of Leaders and Managers. Leadership & Management in
Engineering. 11 (4), p. 310-320.

Trabucchi, Sarah. 2010. “40,000 Teachers Give Their Views on Education Reform in ‘Primary
Sources: America's Teachers on America's Schools.’" Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,
March 3, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/press-release.

Whitehead, Diane P. (Fall 2009) “Leadership Matters.” Childhood Education 86: 32B.

Author Biography
Les Stein is an Adjunct Professor of Leadership at Northeastern University, Boston,
Massachusetts and an Adjunct Professor of Education at Concordia University, Portland, Oregon.
He retired from the United States Marine Corps after almost 27 years on active duty and has since
been the principal of two K-8 public charter schools. He also works as an education consultant. His
scholarly interests are focused on the leadership requirements associated with failing or
underperforming schools.

30