In recent years, educational administration programs have come under increased national scrutiny as their effectiveness in preparing highly effective school leaders has been questioned (Darling-Hammond, et.al., 2007; Levine, 2005). Those questioning the efficacy of leadership preparation programs are expecting educational administration professors to ensure that their graduates, many of whom are entering administration with minimal years of teaching experience, are well prepared to assume sophisticated leadership positions.

This attention is well warranted. As scrutiny of educational leadership programs grows, so does the recognition that well prepared principals are a vital element in school and student success. In fact, research data are confirming the link between effective principal leadership and both school improvement and increased student achievement (Davis, et al., 2005; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Murphy, 2002; Schmoker, 2001; Davis, Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson, 2005; Leithwood, Seashore Lewis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004).

Although educational leadership preparation encompasses many facets, one area of particular focus in Illinois is the administrative internship. Various professional, governmental, and state-supported organizations such as the Commission on School Leader Preparation, Illinois Council of Professors of Educational Leadership, and the Wallace Foundation have focused a great deal of attention on the internship experience. In fact, the Illinois General Assembly recently received a report from the Illinois School Leader Task Force (2008) which contained recommendations to improve the quality of school leadership programs, especially the administrative internship. For many, the internship experience is viewed as a vital component of school-level leadership preparation because it is during the internship that aspiring administrators begin to connect theory with practice.

Although a variety of Illinois educational, business, and political leaders continue to weigh in on the leadership preparation debate and particularly the role of the internship experience, the voices of many public school principals have not been widely heard. These practicing school-level leaders, most of whom have participated in administrative internships during their administrative preparation programs, may be able to provide valuable insights into not only into what types of knowledge, skills, and dispositions are essential to effective administrative internship programs, but also recommendations to improve them.

The sense of urgency to accelerate the redesign of principal preparation programs is growing as principal accountability has escalated, particularly related to school improvement (Southern Regional Education Board, 2005; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003; Brown, 2006). This suggests that aspiring principals must have both theoretical and authentic experiences in curriculum, instruction, and assessment that address student achievement if they are to be truly effective leaders.

The Southern Regional Education Board (2005) (SREB) has identified several related essential competencies for principals which include:

These competencies point to the principal as instructional leader and are grounded in research which shows that principals contribute a measurable amount of influence on school effectiveness and improvement (Hallinger & Heck, 1998). According to Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom (2004), administrative leadership is second only to classroom instruction in its impact on student achievement.

Principal responsibilities in the area of school improvement have been well documented. In their quantitative synthesis of the research, the Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) identified 21 categories of principal behaviors that are correlated to student achievement. Among the 21 principal responsibilities were willingness to challenge the status quo as a change agent, establishment of effective communication with and among teachers and students, development of clear goals, demonstration of flexibility to meet the needs of the situation, and direct involvement in curriculum, instruction, and assessment (Marzano, et. al 2005).

The need to align educational administration course curriculum and program requirements with principal responsibilities must focus on not only traditional coursework but also the administrative internship, often the culminating experience prior to obtaining a principalship. Universities need to ensure that theory is clearly aligned with practice through the internship to allow students to demonstrate their skills in these areas.

Recently, the internship experience has come under scrutiny as the examination of administrative preparation programs has heightened in response to concerns raised about the quality of school leader preparation (Levine, 2005). Calls for improvement of meaningful clinical experiences have challenged educational administration professors to evaluate current practices and restructure internship components (Illinois State Board of Education, 2006). Most often these improvement recommendations have focused on curricular coherence, rigor, pedagogy, and the blend of course work with “on the job” training obtained through field experiences, primarily during the principal internship (Jackson & Kelley, 2002; Southern Regional Education Board, 2005).

In addition, the Commission on School Leader Preparation in Illinois Colleges and Universities in their report, School Leader Preparation: A Blueprint for Change (2006), recommended several areas for inclusion in internship requirements. These were:

Furthermore, the Illinois Council of Professors of Educational Administration (ICPEA) has noted that the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) program approval requirements include internship standards that can provide guidance in re-designing administrative internship programs (Illinois Council of Professors of Educational Administration, 2007).

Similarly, the Southern Regional Education Board supported by the Wallace Foundation has identified “core conditions of redesign” that point to the internship component of school leadership programs. The conditions included:

The SREB also noted that field experiences and internships “add value” to principal preparation and play a significant role in integrating all course work to meaningful applications in school settings. A cohesive collaboration of the internship with school-based mentors is typically a critical component in internship redesign efforts.

States such as Illinois are responding to these recommendations by developing guidelines to assist departments of educational administration in their re-design efforts. In addition, they are expanding the state’s role to hold universities more accountable for substantive administrative preparation programmatic changes. In Illinois, this is defined as requiring universities to resubmit for program approval to state boards of higher education, and also increasing principal licensure requirements (Illinois School Leader Task Force, 2008).

Recently, in its report to the Illinois General Assembly, the Illinois School Leader Task Force (2008) suggested several additional recommendations to improve the quality of school leadership programs. Among these was a charge to “create meaningful clinical and internship experiences” that support the recommendations made in the School Leader Preparation: A Blueprint for Change (2006).

As calls for universities to appraise the quality of their school leader preparation programs, including the internship experience, grow, an important element of any program review process is consideration of various stakeholders’ views. Those who have both participated in administrative internships and are now school leaders can provide valuable insights to professors of educational administration who are responsible for ensuring that their school leader preparation programs prepare highly effective leaders.

As demands to increase the efficacy of educational leadership preparation programs, including the administrative internship continue, and political, governmental, and educational leaders debate how best to accomplish this, school administrators need to be included more directly in the discussion. Since school-level leaders play such a pivotal role in improving schools and increasing student achievement, their suggestions on ways to improve educational leadership internship programs will help to inform the debate.

This study, which was part of a broader study, focused on Illinois principals’ recommendations for improving the quality of administrative internships programs. Specifically, principals were asked to identify what experiences should be included in the internship. In addition, they were asked to offer advice to educational administration professors on how improve internship programs.

The first open-ended question asked principals to identifyexperiences which should be included in an administrative internship program to adequately prepare administrative interns for their first administrative position. Results of the first question are categorized under appropriate ELCC standard.

Standard 1. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a school vision of learning supported by the school community. Respondents afforded value to internship experiences that were authentic, had consequences, and dealt with the complexity of learning. Three sets of responses spoke to this standard’s emphasis on how a vision of learning can become more focused through the following activities. Interns should:

Standard 2. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by promoting a positive school culture, providing an effective instructional program, applying best practice to student learning, and designing comprehensive professional growth plans for staff. Respondents suggested that interns contribute to real curricular planning in the following ways. Interns should be:

Standard 3. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by managing the organization, operations, and resources in a way that promotes a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment. Standard 3 speaks to a wide range of administrative responsibilities needed to sustain an effective learning environment. Respondents’ recommendations reflected this range and suggested the following. Interns should:

Standard 4. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by collaborating with families and other community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources. Although the range of recommendations for engaging parental or community stakeholders was somewhat limited, respondents offered one general and one pointed suggestion for interns. Interns should:

Standard 5. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by acting with integrity, fairness and in an ethical manner. Interestingly, no respondents explicitly mentioned activities related to the ethics of “care,” “fairness,” or “integrity.”

Standard 6. Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context. Similar to Standard 5, none explicitly suggested internship-based activities within larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural frames.

The second question asked principals to offer advice to professors of educational administration about how to improve administrative internship programs. Many of the recommendations spoke to the improving general rhythms of the internships; significant numbers of specific recommendations were also offered. Summarized below are the most frequently mentioned recommendations. Each of these responses speaks to ELCC Standard 7 that emphasizes how interns should apply knowledge learned during formal stages of their preparation preceding the internship. Principals said that internships should include:

Given this set of responses, principals seemingly support specific internship activities that align with and reflect ELCC guidelines. Principals voiced concerns about the types, depths, assessment, and meaningfulness of specific internship activities. Principals called for interns to be more immersed in highly-structured, standards-based, authentic learning opportunities that place the onus of responsibility for performance upon the intern. Furthermore, they noted that these opportunities should be collaboratively fashioned by the intern, supervisor, and well-informed professor of educational administration who has established a presence within the school setting. Lastly, it seems this triad should, at the very least, be in regular contact so formative performance-based assessments and candidate reflections may reviewed and adjusted if needed.

The authors also found it interesting that the first synthesized response under Standard 3 recommended that interns be given additional exposure to fiscal and budget management activities. Two of the authors, both veterans administrators, wondered why respondents placed such emphasis on budgeting since from their personal experiences, principals did not devote a substantial portion of their time dealing with school finance. Conversely, the authors found it interesting that explicit recommendations regarding the ethics of integrity and fairness (Standard 5) as well as framing administrative and educational decisions within larger frameworks (Standard 6) were absent. Granted, each response about internship activities related to Standards 1 – 4 may have inherently incorporated an ethical and broader intellectual thought. Moreover, one could assume that ethical mindedness would inform how interns communicated and collaborated with parents and created a culture of learning for students. But based on the collective silence around Standards 5 and 6, and what they represent, respondents seemingly emphasized that interns should be mostly involved in the business of leading faculty and managing a school.

One other silence also resounded loudly for the authors. None of the respondents mentioned the word computers, technology, or software anywhere in their recommendations. Although the use of technology in schools is extensive, it was not reflected in principals’ responses. Given the value schools place on technological tools for management as well as to communication with individuals or groups, its absence was highly noticeable.

Although 651 Illinois principals responded to the survey, caution should be exercised when drawing conclusions from the data since this represented only an 18.69% response rate. There is the possibility that those who did not respond may have responded differently. Also, principal responses may be somewhat inconsistent. Finally, since only Illinois principals were surveyed, generalizations beyond Illinois are limited. By replicating the study both in Illinois and in other states, transfer of findings may be possible.

It is well documented that educational leadership programs need to improve how theory is related to practice and embedded in the field-based internship experience (Cunningham & Sherman, 2008; Levine, 2005). However, the voices of many principals have not been heard. This research study sought to identify Illinois principals’ recommendations on how to improve administrative internship programs for aspiring school leaders. In particular, it focused on their suggestions regarding what experiences most critical to include in the administrative internship. In addition, it sought advice from principals on how professors of educational administration could improve the quality of the internship experiences they offer. The results of this study can provide valuable insights into ways educational administration professors can enhance both the substance and structural components of the administrative internship and ultimately improve the preparation of school level leaders.

“Research suggests that clinical activities led by practicing administrators and university coaches that are meticulously planned and arranged prove to be meaningful learning opportunities and experiences that interns highly value” (Cunningham & Sherman, 2008, p.312). Principals in this study echoed this research. Overall, they suggested that increased emphasis be placed on practical, hands-on management and “leadership” type experiences particularly related to ELCC Standards 1 – 4.

Specifically, respondents noted the more attention should be focused on budgets, hiring, personnel, student discipline, class schedules, and parent groups. One somewhat surprising result was the overwhelming numbers of responses that centered on finance and budgeting concerns. Although this study did not provide any direct insights into this area, the fact that future administrators were classroom teachers before assuming their principal positions and were most likely never required to contribute to the district or school finance/budgeting process may partially explain this result. None-the-less, the data suggest that principals highly recommend the need to include fiscally related experiences in the internship.

Respondents also highlighted the need for interns to experience several specific principal management duties including bus scheduling, supervision of after school activities, conducting efficient meetings, and preparing state required reports. They also noted that interns should have experience with special education, RtI, and 504 plan development. In addition, they suggested that internships be scheduled over the course of the school year and include the numerous tasks associated with the opening or closing of the school year.

In addition, principals recommended an increased focus on the supervision and evaluation of teachers. Also, more experience with curriculum, instruction, and student and program assessment including professional development were mentioned. Although these areas relate to school improvement initiatives, university professors should strategically collaborate with on-site mentors to design authentic experiences that place interns in a leadership roles focused on the specific implementation of projects designed to improve student achievement. Many internship programs may provide opportunities for observation or group participation, but fail to encourage and require the intern to lead important work related to school improvement (Southern Regional Education Board, 2005).

No finding was more surprising than the fact that no principal mentioned technology. This may be because technology is assumed to be integrated into the other responsibilities of the school-level leader or possibly not viewed as nearly as critical an element of school leader preparation as some might suspect. Lastly, it was noted that ethical decision-making (Standard 5) and focus on the larger context (Standard 6) were not directly indentified by principals. This exclusion may be related more to the need for novice administrators to focus on the management and leadership aspects of their roles if they are to be initially successful rather than reflect a de-emphasis of Standards 5 and 6 overall.

If educational leadership professors are to prepare highly effective school leaders, particularly at the principal level, an examination of what experiences should be included in the internship as well as what site supervisors and university professors can do to improve the administrative internship experience need to receive the highest priority. These will help to ensure that educational leadership preparations programs not only provide quality internship experiences but that these align with the growing needs of K-12 schools.

Berkowitz, S. 1997. Analyzing qualitative data.In J. Frechtling and L. Sharp (Eds.), User friendly handbook for mixed methods evaluations (pp. 4-22). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Bottoms, G., Presson, A., & Han, L. (2006). Students can’t wait: High schools must turn knowledge into action. Atlanta, Georgia: Southern Region Education Board. Available from http://sreb.org./programs/hstw/publications/2006pubs/06V19StudentsCantWait.asp

Brown, P. F. (2006). Preparing principals for today’s demands. Phi Delta Kappa. 87(7), 525-526.

Cunningham, W. G., & Sherman, W. H. (2008). Effective Internships: Building Bridges Between Theory and Practice. The Educational Forum. 72, 308-318.

Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr, M., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. Available from http://seli.standford.edu

Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals (Review of Research). Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.

Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (3^rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hallinger, P., & Heck, R.H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191.

Illinois Council of Professors of Educational Administration (ICPEA) Special Task Force. (2007, November). A foundation for change: A gap analysis of Illinois leadership preparation programs. Author: Charleston, IL.

Illinois School Leader Task Force. (2008, February). Report to the General Assembly. Available from http://www.isbe.org/SchoolLeadership/default.htm.

Illinois State Board of Education. (2006, August). School leader preparation: A blueprint for change. Author: Springfield, IL.

Illinois State Board of Education. (2008, May). General Administrative Endorsements Entitled by Institution. Paper presented at the meeting, Working Together to Prepare Illinois School Leaders, Bloomington, IL.

Leithwood, K., Seashore L. K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.

Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.

Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works from research to results. Arlington, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McMillan, J. H., & Wergin, J. F. (2006). Understanding and evaluating educational research (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Pearson.

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Murphy, J. (2002). Reculturing the profession of educational leadership: New blueprints. In J. Murphy (Ed.). The educational challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp.65-82). Chicago, IL: National Society of Education.

Ruiz, J. H., & Koch, C. A., (2009). Illinois state board of education annual report 2007. Springfield, IL: Illinois State Board of Education. Available from http://www.isbe.state.il.us/reports/annual08/report.pdf

Schmoker, M. (2001). The results fieldbook: Practical strategies for dramatically improved schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Southern Regional Education Board. (2005). The principal internship: How can we get it right? Atlanta, GA.: Author. Available from: http://www.sreb.org/programs/hstw/publications/pubs/05V02PrincipalInternship.asp

Waters, J. T., Marzano, R.J., & McNulty, B.A. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.