Transforming the Preparation of Leaders into a True Partnership Model - Mary Devin

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by ahduag

Mary Devin, Professor of Educational Leadership at Kansas State University, explains how Kansas State University and partner school districts co-developed master’s academy leadership preparation models grounded in both theory and practice. Tracing the work back over fifteen years, the text describes why leadership became a priority during the accountability era, how teachers’ expectations reinforced the need, and how district and university leaders formed an ad hoc planning partnership. It details the research foundations and selection of ISLLC standards and NPBEA competencies to shape the new program structure.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages10

Reading Time25 min

AccessFree to download

The Context

The Importance of Leadership

A Story of Change Begins

Forming an Ad Hoc Planning Committee

Finding a Research Base for a New Approach to Preparing Leaders

ISLLC Standards (1996)

NPBEA Leadership Competencies (1993)

A former school superintendent who is now a university professor uses her experience in these partnership roles to describe how Kansas State University’s collaboratively designed master’s academy leadership preparation models merging theory and practice came about over fifteen years ago, and how it has evolved since then. Transforming the Preparation of Leaders into a True Partnership Model Mary Devin Dr. Mary Devin is Professor of Educational Leadership at Kansas State University and has been directly involved with master’spartnerships since the program began. She served as a school superintendent partner in the first two years of the model and as the university partner liaison for the last fourteen years. The Context In the early 2000s, as public education moved into the accountability era spawned by passage of No Child Left Behind in 2001, landmark research produced convincing evidence of the importance of leadership (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, K., 2004). These researchers found that among school-related factors, the influence of leadership on student success is second only to classroom instruction, and further, that leadership makes the most difference in schools with the greatest need. Even more attention-getting was that virtually no documented instances were found of troubled schools being turned around without intervention by a powerful leader. While other factors and positions were necessary in the process, leadership was found to be the catalyst. Teachers were also recognizing the importance of leadership. In 2006, 36% of respondents to the Kansas Teachers Working Conditions Survey selected leadership as the single factor most influencing the decision about staying in their school and 97% ranked support from school leadership as important or extremely important in influencing personal decisions about future plans (Miller, Devin, and Shoop, 2007). Prior to these affirming statements from research, practitioners in school districts were experiencing the need for quality leadership firsthand. Expectations of school leader position holders were changing, and district leaders responsible for hiring principals were finding that current preparation programs were not producing candidates ready to be successful in this new leadership setting. A Story of Change Begins Insightful chief district leaders in three neighboring Midwest school districts united with courageous faculty members from a nearby university to address leadership concerns in their area. They were superintendents from each of the three districts with their most immediate leadership teammates and the dean and senior faculty members from the department of educational administration at the nearby Educational Considerations 15 state university. In true partnership spirit, the participants came together as an ad hoc planning committee to find a common commitment, to collect resources available across all sources, and to put together a more effective design for preparation of school leaders. They quickly found they shared a vision of a more effective merger between theory and practice and that they were ready to commit their respective organizations to planning and implementing a new program consistent with that shared vision. Everyone agreed a new approach to curriculum was needed, but it must be one anchored firmly in research and designed to reflect a growing body of knowledge behind best practice in schools of today and the future. Finding a Research Base for a New Approach to Preparing Leaders This was just as the century changed and professional organizations and coalitions had gathered to produce guidelines related to successful leadership. After much deliberation over current professional activities and conversations, these planners chose two research-based components to form the structural framework for their new preparation program: • ISLLC Standards (1996). The Council of Chief State School Officials (CSSO) and the

FAQs

What problem motivated the partnership model for leader preparation?

District leaders and practitioners recognized that existing preparation programs were not producing candidates ready for new leadership expectations in an accountability-focused public education environment.

How did the partnership planning group form and organize its work?

Chief district leaders from three neighboring Midwest districts joined courageous university faculty to create an ad hoc planning committee, align on a shared vision, collect resources across sources, and design a more effective theory-practice curriculum.

Which research-based frameworks were chosen to structure the new program?

The planners selected ISLLC Standards (1996) and NPBEA Leadership Competencies (1993) to provide the structural framework for the academy curriculum, including leadership responsibilities tied to best practice research.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by ahduag