Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

Fullans Sustainability Elements as a Framework to Assess the Lasting Impact of Systemic Leadership Development Efforts

Tricia Browne-Ferrigno, PhD Project Director, Principals Excellence Program Assistant Professor, Educational Leadership Studies University of Kentucky, 111 Dickey Hall Lexington, KY 40506-0017 859-257-5504 tricia.ferrigno@uky.edu Lawrence W. Allen, EdD President, L. Allen Consulting, Inc. 204 Hawthorne Drive, Nicholasville KY 40356 859- 619-3083 lwa100@aol.com Brenda Maynard Director of Instruction, Pike County Schools P. O. Box 3097, Pikeville, KY 41502 606- 433-9250 brenda.maynard@pike.kyschools.us Jim Jackson, EdD Training Consultant, Educational Testing Service 1235 Kimbel Drive, Frankfort, KY 40601 502- 695-0793 jackson47j@aol.com Nancy Stalion Project Coordinator, Principals Excellence Program 270- 519-2308 nstal2@uky.edu

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

From Change Efforts to Sustained Innovation Using an extensive review of literature to support his proposition, Fullan (2005a) identified eight elements essential for leading sustainable innovation efforts. The elements are named and described consecutively in the following subsections. Educational leaders must ensure that all of these conditions are met to make reform efforts systemic and lasting. Element 1: Public Service with a Moral Purpose A publicly funded system of education is the the cornerstone of a civil, prosperous, and democratic society (Fullan, 2003b, p. 3); thus, educators must understand that the moral imperative of school leadership (p. 31) is a deeply ingrained, broadly shared understanding that learning is the core purpose of schooling. Every school must provide every student opportunities to achieve academically and develop requisite personal and social skills. Collective efforts are required to raise achievement expectations and close gaps in student learning, to ensure social justice for individuals and organizational justice for institutions, and to improve social environments within schools and districts. Element 2: Commitment to Changing Context at All Levels Setting achievement goals and mandating changes alter only parts of an education system. Changing the contextto create the potential for sustained innovationrequires broad and purposeful interaction within and across all levels. Moreover, educational leaders at every level must instill and maintain a shared moral purpose for the desired change. Element 3: Lateral Capacity Building through Networks Creating a system that sustains innovation requires leadership capacity building and collaborations with and among multiple stakeholder groups. Networks of like-minded

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

individuals sharing common visions about the future provide the requisite synergy to expand innovation and support its sustaining influences. Element 4: Intelligent Accountability and Vertical Relationships Change initiatives often create interconnected, systemic problems that must be appropriately identified and corrected. Openness in sharing problems, issues, and concerns requires communication avenues across and between all levels and shared commitment to that transparency through vertical relationships. Element 5: Deep Learning Collective problem solving, adaptation, and continuous improvement foster deep learning in systems that sustain innovation. Deep learning through collective problem solving necessitates expanded interactions between and across all levels. Adaptation and continuous improvement are risk-laden activities because failure occurs often during early attempts at change; yet without risk-taking and failed attempts, second-order change rarely happens. An innovation-supporting system allows intelligent failure, a concept embracing both forgiveness and remembrance. Element 6: Dual Commitments to Short-term and Long-term Results Innovation sustainability encompasses short- and long-term results; thus, educational change agents need to set incremental targets and take appropriate action to obtain early results. Attaining short-term benchmark goals is critical for sustaining goal achievement. Element 7: Cyclical Energizing A repeating pattern of energy expended toward implementation followed by stable periods to allow for adaptation and reflection generates sustainable innovation. Fullan (2005a) perceives cyclical energizing as a powerful new idea that needs to be a fundamental

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

element of our sustainability strategizing (p. 27). After publication of his leadership and sustainability model, Fullan (2005b) introduced the concept of resiliency, borrowed from Abrahamson (2004) who posits that successful change adoption requires two seemingly conflicting forcesactivity and rest. Like individuals developing and maintaining athletic prowess, organizations engaged in innovation implementation require alternating periods of intense change movement and periods of stability creation, two counterbalancing phases essential to pacing successful systemic change. With energy consistently expended toward adoption of innovation, employee performance often remains at rudimentary levels. Initiative overload creates frustration, anger, and cynicism and leads to spin-off chaos hampering goal achievement. Conversely, during periods of stability, accomplishments are celebrated, new procedures and practices are institutionalized, and progress is monitored. Resisters have time to learn how to work in changed environments, while the needs and expectations of those outside the organization can be addressed (Abrahamson, 2004). Sustainability requires both perseverance and flexibility to develop organizational resiliency toward further change adoption. This necessary component of changecycles of activity and restis often misunderstood or ignored by educational change agents who fail to realize that true innovation adoption requires significant time commitment and energy expenditure. Those most closely affected by change need time dedicated to adaptation, reflection, and performance improvement about the new expectations. Element 8: The Long Lever of Leadership Sustainability of innovation requires leaders at all levels, not simply leadership by one individual or one group. Effective change agents build leadership capacity throughout their

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

organizations, beginning when innovation efforts are first considered. Leaders at all levels sustain successful innovation through their collective efforts. Methodology to Assess Sustainability of District Efforts This assessment is part of the evaluation of an advanced leadership development program supported by a grant from the US Department of Education. The program goals were aimed at reculturing school leadership and expanding the pool of principal candidates. Because both formative and summative evaluation was a condition for proposal funding, the case study design was used (Stake, 1995). Data collection began with commencement of learning activities in January 2003 and continued at regular intervals to June 2005 when the last program-evaluation group interviews were conducted. Perspectives of participants and supporters were captured at intervals throughout the study. Data Sources and Analysis Strategies Data used for evaluation were available from three sources. First, reflections by members of all participant and support groups (i.e., cohort members, mentor principals, district leadership team, cohort instructors) were collected through questionnaires, surveys, and group interviews. The second data sources were observations of participants during program activities (i.e., biweekly cohort meetings, three summer institutes, presentations to authentic audiences) and during school visits. The final data sources were documents (e.g., participants application materials and research reports, districts administrator evaluation protocol, school and district reports). Progressive analyses of questionnaire responses, interview transcriptions, and participant writing employed qualitative techniques (e.g., Kvale, 1996; LeCompte &

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

Schensul, 1999). Member checking by district administrators and cohort instructors ensured accuracy of numerous technical and research reports. Study Participants The federal grant supported the delivery and evaluation of intensive leadership development for two cohorts composed of principals, assistant principals, and teachers holding administrator certification. All 30 cohort members (diverse based on position, gender, professional experiences) provided insider perspectives about the impact of the program; outsider perspectives were gained from district administrators, mentor principals, and cohort instructors. A total of 41 individuals participated in this case study to evaluate the districts unique model of leadership development. Contextual Influences The high-need rural school district is located in eastern Kentucky, a region of Central Appalachia miles distant from any metropolitan area. The population of its service area is 98 percent white persons, not of Hispanic/Latino origin (US Census Bureau, 2000). High school graduates comprise 62% of the population over age 25, but only 10% within that group have completed a post-secondary degree despite availability of local colleges. Thirty-three percent of the households reported annual incomes under $15,000 during the latest census; approximately 30% of the children under the age of 18 live in poverty. Although the districts average rate of participation by students in free or reduced lunch programs is 69%, schools located in remote communities have participation rates above 90%. Article Framework What follows is our assessment of the districts efforts to transform the principalship into a model of learner-centered leadership to improve student and school performance. Once

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

again, Fullans (2005a) sustainability model serves as the framework. The number and descriptor of an element in the model followed by a component of the district initiative identify each section. Element 1: Service with Moral PurposeNew District Expectations The district began its service-with-moral-purpose transformation when a new superintendent was appointed in 1998. He inherited an educational system hindered by a $1.5 million budgetary deficit and complacent about student learning. The school board expected him to eliminate the deficit and transform the district. As a county resident and 40-year veteran educator, he understood well the challenges he faced. The superintendents first task was to decrease employment throughout the system by eliminating 350 positions, compounding the countys high unemployment rate. Although the department of education assigned monitors to assist with deficit elimination and the transition, the superintendent alone had to face the publics varied responses to his initial actions. School Accountability Demands: Learning by All Students The Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990 reconstructed the state system of P-12 public schooling and introduced school accountability. The previous superintendents ignored student learning, with the consequence that by 1998 the district ranked among the lowest performing of the 176 systems in the state. After addressing immediate budgetary issues, the superintendent turned his attention to improving teaching and learning. He invited other new district administrators to work with him as a leadership team to improve school and student performance. With a shared goal to transform the district into an exemplar of progressive growth, the team sought commitment by every employee to the belief that all children can

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

learn. This vision is embedded in the districts Success For All slogan adopted in 2000 that is still used. Preparing for Systemic Change: Transformation Challenges Among many elements in the district-initiated reform agenda was the creation and delivery of continuous professional development for principals that emphasized visionary instructional leadership to assure success for all students without exception. Seeds for a transformed principalship were sown, but two challenges to achieving success became apparent. First, a survey of then-current principals revealed that most viewed themselves as competent managers, not instructional leaders. Successful change adoption required principals with appropriate dispositions and skills for leading instructional programs. Second, the survey indicated projected principal vacancies in half the schools due to retirements within 5 years. Many teachers held administrator certification, but few aspired to be principals, motivated to earn graduate degrees in educational administration to increase their salaries, not change careers. Element 2: Commitment to Changed ContextReconceptualized Leadership The leadership team realized that it was going to ask principals to assume a role for which they were not prepared. The team then brainstormed what an ideal principal would know and be able to do, deciding that she or he (a) understands the states core content and learning goals, (b) believes that all children can learn at high levels, (c) has a thorough knowledge of curriculum and assessment, (d) demonstrates instructional leadership within the school community, (e) shows evidence of being a master teacher, (f) works well as a collaborative team member, (g) shows evidence of being a lifelong learner, and (h)

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework

understands the teaching and learning process. With this shared vision in mind the team began transforming the culture of administrative practice. Focused Outcomes: Student Learning and School Improvement The superintendent changed the monthly principals meeting to a leadership academy where, instead of spending the majority of time on management issues, the activities focused on discussions and activities about instructional leadership. This changed emphasis introduced new school-leadership expectations. A year later, the leadership team began developing principals skills in public relations and communication about instructional issues. After release of the state accountability results in October 2000, press conferences were introduced. Principals and their school-based governance councils were required to present their annual school improvement activities at school board meetings, sharing what they had done in the buildings to improve teaching and learning. These new expectations forced principals to demonstrate publicly their abilities as instructional leaders. Changing All Levels: Standards-based Leadership Practice In 1998 Kentucky adopted without modification the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards for School Leaders (Council of Chief State School Officers, 1996) as the framework to prepare and evaluate administrators. However, in 2001 most practicing principals had only limited understanding about the Standards. The district hired a leadership consultant to facilitate professional development activities and provide onsite coaching support for principals. One activity during an academy meeting had far-reaching impact. Small groups of principals and district administrators were formed and charged with developing examples of school-leadership performance for each indicator in the Standard. Although the groups struggled at first, they eventually became totally focused on instruction

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 10

and the Standards and asked if they could work with their school staffs to develop definitions for multiple performance levels. According to the leadership consultant, this activity provided a great opportunity for principals, teachers, and central office staff to talk about what the system expected, what good practice would look like, and how that would be implemented. This widespread effort disseminated the vision of a principalship emphasizing leadership for learning and resulted in a new administrator evaluation rubric. Achieving Critical Mass: External Catalyst Needed A sustained commitment to ensuring learning for all students, a new vision for school leadership, ongoing professional development, and collaboratively constructed performance expectations for principals introduced change. Although district leaders were pleased with initial results, they wanted to move the transformation to critical mass. The team designed a framework for a district principals excellence program and then sought help from professors who served as consultants. Element 3: Lateral Capacity BuildingPrincipals Excellence Program A team of professors refined and expanded the districts proposal into an advanced leadership development program incorporating recommended best practices in principal preparation (e.g., instructional teams of professors and practitioners, school-based research supported by mentor principals). A unique feature was the cohort composition: carefully selected principals, assistant principals, and teachers holding administrator certification. The program designers perceived that having diverse cohorts would achieve both primary goals: a recultured principalship and an expanded candidate pool. The partnership received a 3-year $500,000 federal grant in October 2002 to implement and evaluate its novel leadership development plan.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 11

Unique Development Strategies: Program Design Two 15-member cohorts engaged in weekly learning activities throughout a calendar year and worked with district and school administrators and teacher leaders during three summer institutes that focused on leadership for learning. The four recurring themes within the Standardsa vision for success, a focus on teaching and learning, an involvement of all stakeholders, a demonstration of ethical practice (Hessel & Holloway, 2000, p. 21)framed the curriculum. Every cohort member was released from work responsibilities one day each week to participate in program activities. On an alternating schedule, participating principals and teachers either (a) worked as small inquiry teams at their assigned mentors schools or (b) participated in a seminar-workshop facilitated by professors and administrators. Capacity Building: New Perceptions about School Leadership At the midpoint of each cohorts learning activities, participants were asked to share how participation was changing their perceptions about the principalship. A teacher aspiring to become an elementary principal noted that she had learned that being a leader involves more than just running the school. She realized that leaders must guide their staffs in identifying their own and their schools strengths and weaknesses, building on the strengths and finding ways to address weaknesses. She concluded, Its all about educating children in a caring and more productive way. For a first-year principal, the cohort activities made him aware of multiple required responsibilities, such as organizing, prioritizing, listening, and communicating, and helped him overcome his feelings of isolation and incompetence. He also learned that even the most experienced administrator is taxed for time and energy to deal with the many demands of a principalship.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 12

Veteran principals participating as cohort members indicated they had discovered things that changed their professional practices. For example, an elementary principal wrote he now realizes that changing school culture is not an overnight project. He also learned that it is not a sign of weakness for principals to acknowledge they are not all knowing or all doing and that using valuable human resources is critical. After participating in the program for 3 months, another veteran principal candidly admitted that at first he did not think he needed to participate. A few months later, he realized that he needed to make time to better his district, school, and self. Element 4: Accountability and RelationshipsResearch and Mentoring Cohort members conducted disciplined inquiry about student-learning concerns twice during the program, first in an elementary and then in a secondary setting. While investigating instructional programs in schools other than where they worked, cohort members developed collegial relationships among themselves and with their mentor principals. The cross-school, administrator-teacher interactions expanded professional networks and support systems throughout the district. Purposeful Work: Student Learning Accountability Near the close of their yearlong training, participants were asked to describe how the leadership development activities helped them understand accountability issues. An elementary principal described the program as a needs-based curriculum tailored to the district that stimulated her thinking about student-learning issues. Now she takes time to reflect about the role of social justice in her school. A Title I coordinator wrote about the importance of closing education gaps and noted the insights and strategies gained by participants to make learning equal for all students.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 13

According to a mentor principal, the field-based research not only gave cohort members opportunities to work in schools other than their own, but also provided valuable information to the host schools. Having a team come into the school, conduct research, gather and analyze data, and then share that information was useful to the principal and teachers in preparing next steps for improving instruction to increase student achievement. The [cohort members] brought an unbiased view to the school. Furthermore, her school used the recommendations to improve teaching and student achievement in her school. Lateral Capacity Building: Relationship Networks A novice principal benefited from developing collegial relationships with veteran districts in the district. Now when faced with challenging issues, she is comfortable asking [them] for advice or assistance. Additionally, several veteran principals participated as cohort members and also served as field-based mentors. One of them suggested that having cohort members work in schools throughout the district provided positive professional experiences. Accountability and Networking: Key Program Elements The program specifically focused on instructional-leadership practice, and the cohort instructors provided a variety of learning activities to stimulate thinking about accountability, relationship networks, and distributed leadership. The mentor principals were trained to guide inquiry teams in conducting action research; more importantly, they opened their schools to scrutiny. They were present when the inquiry teams shared their research findings to the entire administrative community during a luncheon at the close of each semester. The mentor

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 14

principals willingness to reveal problems in their schools exemplifies the deep learning that has developed within the district. Element 5: Deep LearningContinuous Improvement and Adaptation The instructors spent considerable time engaging cohort participants in perceptionbroadening activities that challenged them to explore issues systemically. Their intent was twofold: (1) to enhance collaboration and develop relational trust and (2) to stimulate thinking about districts as educational systems. In their survey responses near the close of each cohort, participants assessed how well the program developed school leaders able to promote learning success for children and youth in rural schools. A high school teacher selected to be an elementary school principal just before beginning the program reported that he learned to better delegate authority and be a successful instructional leader. A novice assistant principal perceived that participants perspectives about education were broadened and their abilities to be more reflective, make research-based decisions, and develop leadership skills in others were enhanced. Other respondents indicated that the program stimulated innovation because instructors encouraged cohort members to think outside the box. The focus on collaboration and cooperation helped an elementary teacher realize that they worked for the district, and not just one school. An elementary mentor principal volunteered to support a second inquiry team because the experiential-learning component provided cohort members opportunities to observe how school leaders are addressing equity issues. Additionally, because the culture in eastern Kentucky is unique, she believes that each school in the district faces different challenges in promoting learning and success for all children.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 15

The programs attention to rural education filled a void in the preparation of rural school leaders according to one cohort member. This school librarian volunteered to conduct a literature review for her inquiry teams action research report, but she could not find information relevant to the challenges faced by school leaders in rural districts. She found the opportunities to collaborate with each other in rural settings quite meaningful. The district administrator responsible for the evaluation of school administrators offered a different perspective about the programs contribution. Few new residents relocate to eastern Kentucky for a variety of reasons; thus, districts there are not able to recruit administrators from elsewhere. Instead, they must develop school leaders with a broader scope of understanding about their impact on student learning, which the program did. Element 6: Dual CommitmentsAuthenticity and Relevance The leadership team used the dual-commitment strategy to transform the principalship. By envisioning an ideal principal, stakeholder groups working with the Standards were able to develop performance indicators aligned with the new expectations. By requiring principals to talk publicly about their school improvement efforts and accountability results, the broader community learned that instructional leadership is a critical component of the principalship. By cultivating a culture valuing continuous professional development, mentors were available to guide inquiry teams and cohort members understood their weekly release from work was important. The districts model of leadership development assured authenticity and relevance. Peppered throughout program-evaluation data are references to the powerful learning that occurred by having teachers and principals participate together. During a group interview, a veteran middle school principal stated that the program is probably as close to . . . being a

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 16

principal as you can get. A peer described the interaction between administrators and teachers as an eye opener for aspiring principals, a way for them learn first hand what is really required to lead schools and an experience he wished he had. A personal revelation for him as a cohort member was that the principalship doesnt have to be isolated, lonely work. During the group interview with the leadership team and cohort instructors, a district administrator asserted that the field-based experiences were especially powerful because program participants now understand the role of the principal. They also have the big picture of school leadership, something that aspiring principals do not gain during preservice preparation. A high school assistant principal shared a similar perspective drawn from her dual experiences as a cohort member and mentor. The leadership development program gave active and aspiring administrators a practical view of the role of principals because they used research data they collected and analyzed to address real problems in schools. Additionally, a veteran teacher wrote on a survey that traditional models of professional development often present theory but do not link [it] to practice. In the past she received an abundance of resources during training events but did not have opportunities to practice what had been taught. She particularly appreciated the field-based learning component of the program because she was able to integrate theory and practice through actual experiences within schools and with other administrators. Element 7: Cyclical EnergizingInnovation, But No Rest When the superintendent began his tenure in 1998, many schools in the district were among the lowest performing in Kentucky based on school-accountability measures. The leadership team worked tirelessly for 7 years to transform the district, and their efforts have been noticed. The superintendent was selected by his peers as the Kentucky Superintendent of

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 17

the Year for 2004. A high school in a remote area of the district, once scheduled for closing due to poor performance, was recognized by the state department of education in 2005 as a pacesetter for its steady improvement. Data spanning the recent 4 years (e.g., scores on accountability tests, graduation and attendance rates, disciplinary actions) indicate improved academic and personal performance among students throughout the district. The teams focus on learner-centered leadership development has made a difference. Evidence of the second important component of cyclical energizingstability creationdoes not appear in program-evaluation data. In fact, during the June 2005 group interviews, cohort members and mentor principals talked positively about what they had learned, but also candidly talked about their fatigue. Several stated that they needed time to apply what they learned. Further, despite being reminded that the superintendent was eligible for retirement after completing his 47th year of service, the interviewees almost unanimously viewed him as the individual solely responsible for assuring sustainability of the districts leadership development efforts. The superintendent and his leadership team have been the driving force for change in the district, working tirelessly to develop principals and teachers willing and able to provide optimum learning opportunities for the students they serve. Even during implementation of the sponsored leadership development program, the district launched other initiatives aimed at improving teaching, learning, and leading. Principals and teachers seem to be experiencing initiative overload due to the continuous cycle of innovation implementation. Element 8: Long Lever of LeadershipLeaders at All Levels The learning activities delivered through the leadership academy in the late 1990s began developing instructional leaders among then-current principals and school-council

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 18

members. These early efforts exemplified to the broader community new administrative expectations in the district. Leadership capacity expanded further when veteran, novice, and aspiring principals worked together during the grant-sponsored leadership development program. Mentoring stimulated growth for practicing and prospective principals alike and helped to reculture the principalship and expand the candidate pool. Principals who participated in the first cohort learned the value of asking others to assume leadership responsibilities during their weekly absences, discovering in the process that building leadership capacity in their schools was an unanticipated but very welcomed outcome. The principals nominated their teacher leaders to participate in the second cohort; in turn, the teachers suggested ways for their cohort peers to distribute leadership within their schools. Bases on analysis of program-evaluation data, program participants appear to value distributive leadership both as a means to develop future leaders and as a way to share instructional responsibilities. Prospects for Sustained Leadership Development Efforts The superintendent began changing leadership practices in 1998 by inviting district administrators to work with him to transform the school system and institute changes toward the goal of success for all students. The leadership team envisioned an ideal principal that reframed the principalship from school management to learner-centered leadership. The district and its university partner designed an innovative approach to advanced leadership development and received a grant to implement and evaluate their ideas. Recognition from external sources and recent accountability about student performance suggest that the districts efforts over the past 7 years have yielded positive results.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 19

This assessment identified two potential stumbling blocks to sustained influences of the districts long-term initiative: (1) the absence of a rest cycle to support innovation adaptation and evaluation, and (2) the lack of a broad-based effort among leaders at all levels to sustain innovation. Both elements can be easily addressed, provided the leadership team perceives their importance. Based on the remaining essential elements in Fullans (2005a) leadership and sustainability model, the districts systemic effort to reculture the principalship shows promise of lasting impact. Endnote
1

Original draft was presented at the February 2005 meeting of the American Association for

School Administrators in San Antonio, TX. References Abrahamson, E. (2004). Change without pain: How managers can overcome initiative overload, organizational chaos, and employee burnout. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Council of Chief State School Officers. (1996). Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium: Standards for school leaders. Washington, DC: Author. Evans, R. (1996). The human side of school change: Reform, resistance, and real-life problems of innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Bristol, PA: Falmer. Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. Philadelphia: Falmer. Fullan, M. (2003a). Change forces with a vengeance. London: Farmer. Fullan, M. (2003b). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 20

Fullan, M. (2005a). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Fullan, M. (2005b, February). Resiliency and sustainability. The School Administrator, 16-18. Fullan, M., & Ontario Principals Council. (2006). Leadership and sustainability: A multimedia kit for professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hessel, K., & Holloway, J. (2002). A framework for school leaders: Linking the ISLLC Standards to practice. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Kentucky Education Reform Act, Kentucky Revised Statute, KRS 160.345 (1990). Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (1999). Analyzing and interpreting ethnographic data. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Schlechty, P. C. (2001). Shaking up the school house: How to support and sustain educational innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Short, P. M., & Greer, J. T. (1997). Leadership in empowered schools: Themes from innovative efforts. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fullans Sustainability Elements as Framework 21

United States Census Bureau. (2000). Pike Count, Kentucky. Retrieved October 17, 2003, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/21/21195.html