 Welcome and thank you for joining today's webinar, Strengthening the Bench of Principles, Evidence and Examples from Universities, Districts and States, sponsored by the Wallace Foundation. I'm Frederick Brown, the Chief Learning Officer and Deputy at Learning Forward, and I'll be your moderator for today's event, which will end at 2.15 pm Eastern Time. By the way, we have over 800 registered for the discussion today and many of them are joining us live. So first of all, a bit of housekeeping. As many of you may have already seen and heard, this session is being recorded. Both the recording and the slides will be available at WallaceFoundation.org by Wednesday. You can also download the studies on Wallace's website and the websites of the Learning Policy Institute and RAND. For best viewing, we suggest you select speaker view at the top right corner of your screen. To ask a question, use the Q&A function. If you have any technical issues, please email events at thehatredroup.com. Now to our agenda. If you're involved in K-12 education, you know that principles matter and recent research demonstrates that effective principles matter even more than we thought. High quality principle preparation and professional development matter as well because they can help principles to develop and hone the skills they need to be effective in their crucial roles. And that's why we're delighted today to share with you two new studies from Learning Policy Institute and RAND on how to make sure that principles have the kind of preparation and professional development they need to help them be effective, support teachers, and contribute to student achievement. We also have a wonderful panel of practitioners and policy experts to discuss the implications of the research for both practice and policy nationwide. And after the discussion, we'll take your questions. So again, please type them into the Q&A box and we'll get to as many as we can. Now we want to share findings from the just-released report, Developing Effective Principles, What Kind of Learning Matters. And I'm pleased to introduce Marjorie Rexler, Principal Research Manager at the Learning Policy Institute, who will be joined by Stephanie Levin, Research Manager at Learning Policy Institute. But right now, I'll turn it over to you, Marjorie. Thank you so much, Fred. It's nice to be here today. There's a substantial body of research that shows principles to be a critical influence on student achievement, graduation rates and attendance rates, teacher satisfaction and retention rates, school climate, and more. These positive outcomes are associated with principles who effectively set direction, develop staff and support their instruction, effectively manage and improve their schools, and build positive environments for students and teachers. A critical question then is how can we prepare and develop principles who are effective in all of these areas? That was the focus of our study. We wanted to understand the features and outcomes of high quality principal learning opportunities. To do so, we conducted a comprehensive review of the literature since 2000. To understand principles access to high quality learning, we analyzed survey data from a representative national sample of principles and from statewide surveys from California and North Carolina. We also reviewed many articles, books, and policy reports to understand the role of federal, state, and local policies in shaping principal learning. So what did we find? First, there is a growing body of research that shows that high quality principal preparation and professional development are associated with positive principal, teacher, and student outcomes. And this is especially the case for well constructed and carefully implemented programs. Not only did principles develop confidence in their leadership abilities, they adopted more efficacious practices. High quality principal learning was associated with teacher outcomes, such as higher teacher retention rates, and with student outcomes including achievement levels and graduation rates. The next question is what are the elements of professional learning that are associated with these outcomes? On this slide, you can see the theory of action guiding our study. We found that what principles learn matters. That includes instructional leadership, which means knowing how to develop students higher order thinking and how to select effective curricula and materials. How to improve schools by doing things such as using data to inform continuous improvement. How to establish positive school conditions for students and teachers by creating collaborative work environments and working with school and community stakeholders. They need to learn about staff development and how to help teachers improve and meeting the needs of all learners. Research has found that applied learning activities such as action research and reflective projects such as cross cultural interviews can help aspiring principals develop knowledge about how to meet the needs of diverse student populations. We also found that in addition to what principles learn, how they learn matters. Especially important are applied learning opportunities such as inquiry projects or field-based projects based in real schools. Internships are important where pre-service principals take on the responsibilities of a leader such as decision making or leading staff development. They learn from expert coaches or mentors who can provide support and guidance. And being in cohorts or networks is also important having a stable group of professionals to learn and grow together. So we know what makes for high quality learning, but do principals actually have those learning opportunities? We found that in their preparation most principals do have at least minimal access to the important content areas that I described. And access to this content has increased over time. Principals certified in the past 10 years were more likely to report access to important content than more veteran principals and this chart offers some examples. However, even with these improvements and access to content, not many principals had access to the authentic job-based learning opportunities that the research has identified as being important. For example, only about half had experienced internships with administrative responsibilities and coaching or regularly participated in a principal network. We also found that access to strong principal preparation is not equitable, that access to high quality preparation varies by school poverty level. This chart shows examples of differences and access to important content and we also found differences in access to the high leverage strategies I discussed, the problem-based learning, the coaching and principal networks, which raises the question, how can we equalize access to high quality principal learning? So my colleague Stephanie Levin will now discuss the role of policies. We've learned from our research that state and local policies can support high quality principal learning opportunities and access to high quality programs. As one example, let's look at California. Between 2011 and 2017, California changed its licensure and accreditation policies. It integrated the new national professional standards for education leadership developed by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration with input from 30 groups across the country. They also have state standards emphasize educational diverse learners developing staff and involving stakeholders for school improvement. Administrative performance expectations were then translated into program approval standards and new expectations for both pre-service training and induction. Later they were translated into an administrative performance assessment. These changes guiding program approval and induction were associated with changes in principal's perceptions of their preparation. As shown on this slide, more recently prepared principals in California had greater access to learning about key topics than veteran principals. Also, more recently prepared principals felt significantly better prepared than veteran principals in virtually all the content areas with very large changes in instructional leadership, the ability to lead school improvement, the ability to meet the needs of diverse learners. Newly graduated principals were also more likely to have been exposed to problem-based learning approaches and field-based projects that were part of the new program expectations. In another example, comprehensive changes in Illinois produced substantial changes in principal preparation programs. The state established a PK-12 principal endorsement designed specifically to prepare principals to address leadership challenges. Requirements included formal partnerships between principal preparation programs and districts, rigorous selection processes, a year-long internship, and competency-based assessments. Researchers documented a number of positive changes. These included stronger partnerships, targeted recruitment and enrollment, curriculum focused on important content, greater attention to diversity, high-quality internships, and a focus on continuous improvement. So we know policies can make a difference, but to what extent are states enacting such policies? Some of the key policy levers controlled by state agencies are program of approval or accreditation and principal licensing. The University Council on Education Administration, or UCEA, developed criteria for assessing state policies based on the research. In UCEA's 2015 review, they found only two states met all five of the high-leverage criteria. Eleven states did not meet any of the high-leverage criteria. And states are more likely to legislate requirements for principal licensure than for a higher-leverage program approval. Our research suggests several implications for policy. Stronger use of licensure and program approval standards can help ensure that programs include the features of high-quality programs. Policymakers can require quality internships and encourage applied learning opportunities, accompanied by expert coaching and mentoring. There's a need for stronger state infrastructure for principal professional learning. States can fund leadership academies and paid internships using state investments and federal funds from ESSA Titles 1 and 2 and the American Rescue Plan Act. And to ensure greater equity, we need to make sure that aspiring and current principals learn how to support diverse student bodies. We also need to make sure that principals who work in high-poverty schools have access to high-quality preparation and professional development. States can direct professional development resources to those schools or districts and underwrite high-quality preparation for prospective principals who will work in those schools. We need to build local pipelines that start with identifying teachers with strong leadership potential and carry them through their preparation, providing strong mentoring and induction, and continuing with high-quality learning opportunities. Finally, as a field, we need to grow our understanding of high-quality principal learning by broadening the spectrum of outcomes measured, accounting for factors such as principals prior experiences, district content and program implementation, and using mixed methods to understand program processes and effects. Access to professional learning matters for principal success and retention and that of the teachers and students in their schools. The key question is whether we can create and sustain policies to enable ongoing high-quality professional learning. And with that, I'll turn it back over to you, Fred. All right. Thank you so much. Marjorie and Stephanie, of course, as you can imagine, just wearing my learning forward hat for a minute, how important it was to hear that the equity issue around professional learning and access to effective professional learning. So I really appreciate all the points that have been made up to this point. And so now we're going to return or turn to that question of how universities by partnering with districts and states can actually design and build more coherent programs with authentic clinical experiences that prepare principals for the real-world challenges that they will face. So I'm excited to introduce Becky Herman, Senior Policy Researcher at RAND, to share findings from that study, redesigning principal preparation programs. So Becky, I'll turn it over to you. Thank you, Fred. We appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about the findings from the study of the University Principal Preparation Initiative, or UPPI. To set the context, many university-based principal preparation programs have struggled with how to make the fundamental changes needed to prepare principals for today's schools. To test a path forward, the Wallace Foundation provided grants to seven universities and their partners to redesign their programs in line with research-supported practices. Under UPPI, university programs in purple on the left collaborated with district partners in green on the right and state partners in orange with the goal of improving the programs and principal effectiveness. The program redesign focused on elements of effective principal preparation programs identified in prior research, as we've just heard, such as coherent curriculum, integration of theory and practice, active learning, supervised clinical experiences that are linked to coursework, active recruitment and selection, and a cohort structure. This work was supported by partnerships with mentor programs. These are preparation programs which previously went through a similar redesign and embedded in the state policy context around program improvement. Together, these elements showed the importance of treating program redesign as systemic change. Here quickly are the seven UPPI programs. Two previous UPPI study reports shared findings about the initial year of implementation and the state role respectively. The final report which we are discussing today is actually a suite of five reports, a full report with technical details, a brief report that summarizes the main findings and implications, and three targeted reports to be released later this month highlighting findings most relevant to principal preparation program leaders, district leaders and state education leaders. This suite of reports draws on over 630 data collection activities. The overarching finding from this study is that significant change around research-based practices in principal preparation programs is possible. In specific, the study found that UPPI teams improved program coherence, actively engaged partners to drive the redesign, and played out the redesign features across other programs, districts and state policies. We'll start with the changes within the programs. The redesign programs were characterized by a framework of core principles, more deliberate sequencing of courses to better scaffold learning, alignment to standards, more intentional and personalized clinical experiences, and instruction that apply classroom content to real job requirements. Altogether, these changes resulted in greater program coherence. Programs and districts together made recruitment more purposeful. Districts reported being more involved in helping the programs recruit promising candidates likely to become successful leaders, in part through the use of performance-based tasks. Candidates traveled through the redesigned program in cohorts. Principal candidates in the programs reported that their cohort supported them through the program, and the instructors reported that they could build on the learning from prior courses because candidates have had similar foundations. Next, we'll look at how UPPI programs leveraged partnerships in the change process. The four main types of partners played active roles. University-based UPPI staff managed the work, and typically led both the steering groups, which set the direction of the initiative, and the working groups, which created the program by, for example, designing the new courses. Most districts led the leader tracking system development and engaged as peers in both the steering and the working groups. Most state partners provided policy guidance and convened statewide events around UPPI learnings. All state partners served on the steering committee, but only some teams included state partners on the working groups. And mentor programs served a variety of roles from thought partner to TA provider, depending on the needs of the program and the phase of the redesign. UPPI team members reported that having a committed team dedicated to the mission was a major driver of the work. One of the strategies that seemed to help was working together on quality measures, a program self-assessment. The process of developing a common vision for the program was also important. UPPI teams emphasized the importance of having some tool, whether it was a logic model, a theory of action, a conceptual framework, to develop and communicate the essential ideas of the redesigned program. Mental programs also helped the partners focus the work. While all UPPI teams ultimately redesigned the full program, each site took a unique approach to sequencing the work, as you can see in the range of patterns on this timeline. As the design phase wound down, UPPI teams began to focus more on implementing the redesigned program. Several features emerged as useful for implementation, ensuring the instructors understood the design and the intent of the program, holding coordinated meetings and professional development for instructors to maintain quality and consistency across course sections, and establishing coordinators or cohort directors to facilitate organizational collaboration. Teams baked in procedures for continuous improvement by collecting and analyzing data, recognizing that this was not a one-and-done process. For example, one program built semester-end meetings into faculty responsibilities to review the data and tweak the program. To institutionalize and sustain the partnership and the critical program features, some universities made coordinator roles fully funded positions, established external advisory groups, and created guides at other documentation. District and program staff reported that working together became a part of their job. An important element of continuous improvement was the leader tracking system, which is a database with longitudinal information about current and aspiring principals. The LTSs were designed to provide data on graduates to inform program improvement. They also served additional purposes, for example, helping districts develop potential leaders and hire and place leaders. Next, we turned to how the UPPI redesign reached beyond the original partner programs and districts. Programs expanded the UPPI partnership to include new districts. Universities also developed new programs for other stages of the principal pathway, such as programs for teacher leaders. Partner districts applied the principles from the UPPI redesign to their district policies, such as leader standards and evaluation. Most UPPI districts also created new courses for teachers, teacher leaders, recent program graduates, or principal supervisors. State partners used their policy levers to promote principal quality, especially leadership standards, followed by principal licensure, program approval, and professional development. States organized events so that the programs and districts could share their experiences and approaches with their peers. Programs and districts also did this mentoring on their own. Now I'll turn to lessons learned, looking across program change, the change process, and extending the work. UPPI teams faced common challenges with collaborative redesign, and they developed viable strategies to address them. The most commonly cited challenge was finding time to do the work. Some universities bought out faculty time, especially during that intensive curriculum development period at the beginning. Both university and district participants adjusted their schedules to find times where they could meet, and some districts made the work part of their day jobs by embedding it in district strategic plans. Teams addressed staff turnover through staged onboarding, redundant staffing, and document libraries. Another challenge was the fundamental shift in the work of professors from owning their own courses to co-developing common courses. Programs helped their professors adjust by engaging them in the development and by providing professional development and frequent instructor meetings. In many cases, the programs shifted some or all of the courses to add jobs with recent school leadership experience, sometimes transitioning tenure-track faculty to PhD-level courses. In closing, UPPI provides a model and a structure for redesign. Each UPPI team invented unique approaches and solutions that fit their context. However, common strategies also emerged. Collaborative partnerships are key, as is having clear and ambitious shared vision. States, which were selected for UPPI in part because of their prior worth of school leadership, strengthened their principal policies. And teams need to find that balance between consistency and flexibility. Thank you for joining this conversation and we look forward to the discussion. All right. Well, thank you, Becky. Appreciate those recommendations from universities and states and districts can effectively work together. And we look forward to continuing this conversation. And I'll just say this, just as a reminder, everyone will get access to the slides and the recording. So that will be something that will be coming forth as well. So we hope you'll take time to learn more about these and other studies. But before we dive into our discussion, let me just recap some highlights from both presentations. First, it's clear that high-quality principal learning matters. And it's at universities, districts, and state policies, they all play a role in providing it. And that's a very important shift in the thinking. And also, thanks to two decades of research, we now have a much better idea about what content and learning approaches are especially effective. So it's great that high-quality learning opportunities for principals learning are now more widely available, but access remains inconsistent and varies by state and school poverty level. And that makes principal learning, as I said earlier, an issue of equity. Unfortunately, we've seen that states and districts can take steps to boost access. States, for example, can update their leader's standards and strengthen program approval. Districts, for example, can collaborate on identifying candidates and create comprehensive aligned principal pipelines. And universities working collaboratively with states and districts can redesign their program to be more coherent and research-based, making the work of the seven universities and the University Principal Preparation Initiative a model for others. So before I bring out our panel, just wanted to, again, the PowerPoint recordings will be available, so everyone will have access to those. But I'm excited that we have a panel of folks who can help us dive into this a bit more. I'm going to be joined by starting with Peter Zamora, Director of Prado Relations, the Council of Chief State School Officers, Dan Dominic, Executive Director of AASA, the School Superintendent Association, Daniel Reyes Guerra, the Associate Professor at Florida Atlantic University and a Project Director for the University Principal Preparation Initiative's work at FAU that we just heard about from Rand, and Roshanda Tyson, Assistant Principal, University High School for Science and Engineering of Hartford Public Schools and a graduate of the University Principal Preparation Initiative program at the University of Connecticut. So Peter, I'm coming to you first, just thinking about the role of state policy and what is CCSSO doing to advance leadership and how might these findings influence what states do, and I want to give you about two minutes to respond to this question. So thank you, Fred, and very glad to be here. So for those who may not be familiar, CCSSO, the Council of Chief State School Officers, we're the national nonprofit organization representing state leaders of K-12 education systems, and we have a long history, much of it in coordination with the Wallace Foundation, of supporting states and ensuring that all schools are led by effective and well-prepared school leaders. So CCSSO worked in partnership to develop the professional standards for educational leaders, which are standards for practicing district and school leaders, and we also helped to develop the national educational leadership preparation standards, which are standards for the preparation of aspiring school and district leaders and the accreditation of leadership preparation programs. We also advocated for the optional reservation of funds, I think we heard it referenced just briefly not too long ago, on state leadership and the Every Student Succeeds Act, and so we're helping states to take advantage of this opportunity, and we run a collaborative of state K-12 leaders who meet regularly and coordinate on school leadership strategies. So the research today really supports CCSSO's work in this space and will help to inform it in the future because we've long recognized that effective school leaders are an essential element of good schools, that state policy is a critical lever, and that high quality preparation is necessary, and that's particularly true today as schools are working to address the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our students. Absolutely, and Peter, I want to stick with you just for a little bit longer and thinking about federal policy, which in part we know governs what states do. So what are the implications of the LPI and RAND studies for federal policy? Thanks, Fred. So yeah, there's a lot of activity that's currently underway in states. We heard some of this referenced in our presentations, including some good uses of the federal COVID relief funds that Congress provided, and states are leveraging these to support school leaders. So just a few examples of leveraging these federal ESSER funds, that Florida is supporting elementary school principals and assistant principals to help them focus on improving literacy. Illinois is using COVID relief funds for competitive grants to provide mentoring services to all new principals in the state. Kansas is using federal COVID relief dollars to implement a leadership training framework for the state's educational leaders. And Nevada is supporting a principals leadership network, a school improvement network for principals and teachers, and a rising leaders network for education leaders from historically underserved groups. So the research described today will inform these ongoing efforts to promote effective principal pipelines, including federally funded initiatives. And of course, it will also serve to influence future federal policy development. So as Congress considers legislation to strengthen educator pipelines, such as the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act or the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we will encourage it to learn from the research and from the practical experience in the field as it continues because it considers making some changes in this space. Because I think while we're encouraged by the improvements we're seeing in leadership pipelines in recent years, we really need to build on these improvements moving forward. I like that a cycle of continuous improvement. So I want to turn to Dan then from AASA, Dan Dominic for perspective on the role of the district. And so Dan, do we see a difference in school performance from principals participate? And I know this is a, I'm lobbing you an easy picture. What do we see when it comes to their participation in PD activities? Absolutely, Fred. I think one of the, I mean it's so much, it's so much of it is common sense that you need to have the additional professional development experience. You know, it's not like in the old days that you got your degree and you were done. Teacher graduated from school and they were a teacher and nothing else needed to be done. Same thing with principals, same thing with superintendents and what we have learned and certainly the research that we have here is proof of that factor. And by the way, I want to take the opportunity to compliment the Wallace Foundation. A lot of this work has been done thanks to the Wallace Foundation. And I personally benefit tremendously when I was a superintendent in Fairfax County, Virginia, I was one of 12 superintendents that was the initial group that participated in this professional development leadership development effort on the part of Wallace. So thank you Wallace for giving me that opportunity. But yes, we see from in districts, there's no doubt that the districts that engage and support, and by the way, this is key. The district has to support this professional development activity and has to encourage their leaders to participate in these programs and work with the universities to make sure that there's a collaborative effort, because the results are there. The research that we were shown today clearly show that principals that have gone through this kind of training, that it has an impact on the performance of their students in the school, that it has an impact in the way that the staff feels about the work that they're doing and that they become role models for implementing the kind of practices that we know make a difference. So there is no doubt at all that this kind of activity is essential. It's important. The biggest problem we have for it is equity. Unfortunately, as it is the case with everything else in education, the districts that have not are not able to provide their leadership with these kinds of experiences as much as the wealthier districts can. So clearly, that's a factor that's there, that equity factor's there, and we need to correct it. We can't allow our districts that don't have the financial resources alone without the ability to provide their leaders with the training that will make a difference in their schools. But Dan, you brought back such good memories of generation one from the Wallace leadership work. Many of us have five memories there, but you're also talking about what happens in districts. And once folks are on the job, let's go back a bit and look at the pre-service experience because we heard from Rand or LPI about the importance of authentic on-the-job experience for aspiring principals. So I'm curious, how do you see the importance of the clinical experience and principal development on the podium? It's very important. Again, as we have seen the change in the way that we process professional development, just sitting in a classroom or sitting in a room where somebody is lecturing you doesn't do it. What does it is to have the ability to be in a situation where you practice these skills, to work closely with a principal if you're not a principal yet, if you are a principal to visit schools and work with principals that are experienced in a particular areas that you want to learn. So mentors, coaches, the clinical experience that one-to-one in working with individuals and experts that you can learn from and you can see you're not just sitting there listening to the theory and you're practicing when you're seeing it. So that is very, very important. And we finally, frankly, a lot of the surveys that were done including the UPPI service, one of the feedbacks that we got at ASA from a lot of our principals, that when they didn't have that clinical experience when that collaboration wasn't there between the college, the university, and the school district, it wasn't happening the way it can and should happen. So you ended, right? You handed it off nicely to Daniel, because I think that's the conversation we're going to have right now. And by the way, their school, may I say, I personally know what their school is doing. And they are indeed a model. So Daniel, thank you. Oh, see, that was a great setup for you, Daniel. So Daniel Reis-Diera, who was participating in the redesign of that prep program at FAU. And so as you hear all this, what do you see as the benefits and results, as a matter of fact, as we just heard from Dan, taking this collaborative approach that we heard about from Rand? Well, let me start by thanking Dan for that lotting. Much appreciated. And building really on that last comment about the clinical experience, one of the things, one of the big benefits in terms of the way that we work to build our program was really bringing the district on board for that co-construction. And when you talk about the internships, and the pieces that are really hands on work, we designed using the administrative calendar and made sure that the principals and the district administrators were telling us both what happens when, in terms of an administrator's professional life, and making sure that our activities were tied directly to that, so that as they were going through the internship, not only were they doing real work, but they were supporting the schools that they were working with. And this has been, you know, programs traditionally have been constructed and implemented by professors, university professors who use the research to create these programs. But this initiative really focused on bringing the stakeholders into the process, you know, and bringing policymakers and those who execute policy. But like I said, most importantly, the districts who receive our students when they go out and graduate and go into the AP positions or principal positions. I think another benefit is that it was really important to include our state policymakers so that we heard their perspective, because they see all districts and schools across the state, but also expose them to the ground level needs for pipeline development, so that they can blend that into policies that they are implementing on the state level. For example, in Florida, this led to creating a whole new set of educational leadership standards and educational leadership program approval standards for both the universities and the districts. And then we actually passed new legislation that governs how the state supports educational leadership professional development. And I have to say, you know, repeating what you've already heard Wallace, the Wallace Foundation was really important as a support. For example, the latest report that came out in 2021 by Grissom and his other authors has been a real eye opener in so far as what, how we look at leadership. Now that we know, based on research, the principles can have an impact of up to three months of learning when they are effective in the school. This means that now state can think about, okay, resources should not necessarily all be directed just to the teacher in the classroom. We can have a huge impact if we're directing resources towards leadership development in the schools. So the other benefit that I would go after is the real partnership that was created with districts. We co-created and implemented programs. And this really brought value to the learning joint decision making was also taking place. We recruited and admitted students together curriculum was developed together. And we actually used, as you heard from Becky Herman, we use district administrators seated district administrators to become adjuncts in our programs. Our programs became very district specific meeting the leadership needs of the district's context, as opposed to kind of generic learning that, you know, meets the requirements of a leadership, but not necessarily at leadership in a specific place. And finally, the LTS system that was talked about, these were developed in different districts, they provided a real avenue for data exchange between the university and the district in terms of how these students were progressing and what then needed to change in our program, as well as their professional development in terms of what we were seeing in their performance. Daniel, let me just, I want to, because it sounds wonderful in the kinds of conversations you're having with districts sound like the exact type of conversations you want to have, but how easy was that culturally at the university to make that shift in terms of how you engage around this work, how you plan for this work, how you just, can you talk a little bit about the cultural shift at the university itself? Sure. You know, in universities for us to make any changes, you start by going through multiple committees and terms of curriculum, it takes year, year and a half to make any quick change. And on top of that, you have this real ownership, I would say, that professors have over their own courses. You know, I teach law, I've been teaching law for the last 20 years. So therefore, what I'm teaching, it's my course, et cetera, et cetera. So you have to break that mold, you have to break that culture and say, we're teaching together. We're creating together. And courses are no longer static. We can't have the same law course taught every year in the same way because of the differences that are happening because of the new needs of the districts. So that had to be a cultural shift as well. And I think you heard from Dr. Herman, also the idea of what faculty do. So we were one of those institutions that did actually hire program coordinator faculty who would make this partnership with the districts real and focus on those programs as opposed to it being just a part of faculty member's job. Districts are now our true partners. These programs that have been created are not FAU is offering a program. We actually have a name for each of our programs, you know, with Broward, it's Propell, with Palm Beach, it's exec, with our northern districts, it is Elite, and they are their own organization that is populated by both faculty and by the district. So it really is a total shift in the way, in the culture within the university and the way we do things. Well, I appreciate that perspective. And I know Roshan, as you're listening to this, as a graduate of a program and as a current sitting assistant principal, I'm sure a lot is going through your mind right now. And so I'm wondering, can you give us some examples, just a couple examples of things that you've learned in your principal preparation program that you actually put to use in your first month of being an assistant principal? Hello. So Yukon prepared me well for the first month of school. We spent some time going over improvement, school improvement plans and actually learning how to create them. And that worked well with me in starting the school year and going over student learning objectives with teachers. So that was definitely practical. We spent countless hours going through the CCT rubric as well, and looking at the differences between an effective teacher and a highly effective teacher. And that allowed for me to have meaningful conversations with teachers around the observation process and what it is that I would be looking for when I enter their classroom. And last but not least, I'd like to credit our family engagement course and not only helping me to plan an open house for our school, but also to think about engagement in terms that are different from what we know to be traditional, like students or families are engaged if they come into our building, right? That course opened up my mind to reaching out to families and community outside of them just coming into our building. So I'd like to say that you can prepare me well to be an administrator. Nice. And I know you're an amazing one. I can already tell. And we've been talking about professional development a lot as well. And I'm just curious, how does your district's PD program support you and anything you find particularly effective in that support? So our district does a great job of the, I guess I'll call them technical things that we need to know in terms of standards and best practices around instructional leadership and how to get our students to perform better overall. But what I'm really proud of that my district is doing right now is focusing on restorative practices and also, excuse me, and also focusing on uncovering people's biases, right? We all have some implicit biases and it is the work of uncovering those that will help us to be better professionals, better toward our students, better toward our school community. And eventually that will lead some more student outcomes in terms of achievement. Cannot agree more. All right. Well, thank you. Thank you. So all of those who might be watching at this point might be thinking, so what can we do within our own sphere of influence? All right. So that's, I imagine that's what the folks in the audience are thinking about. So for Peter, Dan, Daniel, and Rashonda, what one minute of advice would you give to states, districts, universities that are looking to better develop and support principals? One minute. Peter, we'll start with you. Thanks, Fred. Well, I do think one of the key takeaways is around the role of state policymakers. And so building networks, engaging CCSO as I flag, works with networks of state education leaders who spend every day really trying to advance this body of work in their states. And so both are being informed by the research described today by your own practical experience on the ground. And then building relationships at the state level, I think is going to be really important. And then I manage the federal policy portfolio, and that same, I think, lens applies around the federal policymakers. And so as you look to engage your members of Congress as your campaigns start to engage, there's a real opportunity here, and there's not sort of an immediate legislative vehicle, a bill that's moving right now that's going to cover this. But this would be the time to sort of build the consensus that we're going to need to get legislation across the finish line here at the federal level. So I guess if it's sort of one word, it's relationships. Relationships. Relationships matter. But Dan, I'm going to come to you with your one minute of advice to the state's district universities, but just with an extra nuance. And what about rural settings? So just your secondary thought on that piece as well? Well, at the district level, for sure, Fred, it's important for the district to plan organize and in collaboration with the local universities, I put together a program, professional development program for their administrators, beginning with the classroom teachers, by the way, you need to create the pipeline. With the classroom teachers who aspire to be assistant principals with the assistant principals that aspire to be principals within the district. That's key. I was able to do that in Fairfax County. And by the way, again, thanks to a grant from the Wallace Foundation. So thanks again, Wallace Foundation. But it's also important at the state level, you know, that the standards and the policy, the rules and the regulations are set that indicate and we've been very active at AASA in being part of that process. Because so much has changed. I mean, think about the world today and think about our schools today. Two years, almost three years into COVID. It's a different world. So many things are changed so drastically. So whatever we were doing to train principals three years ago is out the window. It's a whole new ball game today. And that's what we have to focus in and come together. What are the needs? What are the skills? And how do we provide this kind of opportunity for our administrators? So again, in turn, they have the leadership to make sure that all of our students have the quality education that they're entitled to. And then any added advice for rural communities or those places that are supporting? Rural is a very important and it's a problem area because of the fact that they're so isolated. So one of the things that we've seen working with rural is to create the kind of collectives in terms of a number of districts that form a cooperative that can work with their university because here is not just the university in the backyard. Here is a wide area where only one university is providing the services and you have to create those collaboratives and that's working very well. Nice. Thank you. Daniel, how about for you? You're one minute of advice. So I'm enjoying this because I can always build on what Dan says and I'll tell you that one of our experiences with our northern districts is they are more rural and smaller. So really quick just to say those cooperatives, those consortium really make sense for universities because then we can bring together enough students from different districts to actually create good solid cohorts because as a university we need those numbers as well. So that's a really important piece. But my advice here would be one, in terms of partnership, make sure that your partnership with the district is a real profound partnership, that you are working together on all levels, on all parts of the continuum of leadership within your district and that includes really important elements like having a really strong professional development piece around coaching and really having a curriculum that can react to the differences that happen. Once again, what Dan just mentioned about the changes that have happened in the last three years, we're seeing that social emotional learning, social emotional support has become really important for both the students but also for teachers and administrators. And then finally really real quick, if you have a state organization, get together with the other universities and talk about what you're doing, hear what they're doing, figure out how to bring these innovations across all universities. Everybody needs to know what we're up to so that we can increase student learning across the state. So those would be mine. Powerful pieces of advice. So Roshanda, imagine you've got 800 people who are at universities, states, districts, hearing the advice that you would offer them. What would you say to them about all the things that we discussed to help them better develop and support principals? So both Dan stole my answer. Dan. They both did. Not seriousness though. I've been thinking a lot about mental health, right? COVID has wreaked havoc on our students and our families, our communities in a number of ways and we are seeing, I guess I'll call it the backlash of that in terms of student behaviors in our schools. So principal prep programs should definitely do something, whether it's a course or a seminar around mental health and like how to identify when certain behaviors are outside of what we know to be normal for students. And I'd like to underscore social and emotional learning for administrators as well. This time has been difficult for us and we have had to do some self-care but I think that the prep program should do that as well so that we could truly set the tone for our buildings and again get to our bottom line, which is to make sure that our students prosper. Great advice. Thank you so much. So I want to bring back Marjorie Wexler of LPI and Susan Gates, Senior Economist at RAND and a co-author of the report on principal preparation and program design for some reflections on what the panelists just shared and then we'll go to questions from the audience. So remember, audience members put your questions in the Q&A box and ask what we'll look for your questions but I want to start with you Marjorie, just some reflections on what you heard. Great, thanks and thank you panelists. That was fascinating and I'd like to highlight actually in these few moments what you said when you started Fred and what has been underlying much of what the panelists have been saying. All of these issues that we've been discussing about principal learning, about the principal pipeline, are issues of equity and it's critical that we as a field, as practitioners, as policymakers, as university faculty, as researchers pay attention to these issues. So policies such as providing paid residences can open up the principalship to promising leaders from all backgrounds, not just those who can afford a program. We can open up the field while providing strong preparation. States and districts can direct resources to high poverty schools to ensure that principals who work in those schools have access, the same access as principals in low poverty schools, to high quality learning opportunities. Preparation and professional development programs can include a focus on equity to help principals develop the knowledge and skills to meet the needs of diverse student populations. So these and other actions really support principals, supports teachers, their schools, their students and their communities. Powerful points, thank you. How about for you Susan, some reflections on what you've heard from our panel? Thanks Fred, yeah for me what struck me is that each panelist talked about principal preparation from a slightly different perspective, but with the recognition that principal preparation is not something that happens discreetly within the university. Rather it's a process that extends across the entire pathway to the principalship in a district before an aspiring leader even enters a program while they're enrolled in the program and concurrently working in a district most typically and then after program completion. And through this lens it's easy to see why a system perspective on prep program improvement is so critical. You know I think Dan said it's just common sense, right? So for me the panelists' comments really drive home some of the lessons that we learned from our study of UPPI. First the importance of engagement and collaboration among states, programs and districts and secondly the importance of coherence. And when we talk about coherence, of course we're thinking about coherence within the program across courses between clinical practice or clinical experiences and classroom experiences, but also coherence across that pathway between what happens in that program and what happens on the job. Our research found that leader standards either national standards such as NPBEA or state standards can help create a common understanding about what's expected of school leaders and it's that active use not just the existence of the standards but the use of them that's critical. We also found that developing a common vision for leadership unique to each partnership as Dan described happened in Florida Atlantic University builds coherence. This common understanding can drive coherence across the pathway to the principal share. Nice. And Susan while you're speaking a question came up from the chat just asking about it came up during the random presentation on buying out faculty time and the question was what's that about what does that mean and how does that look? Yeah so I think what that's referring to is that faculty who would normally teach several courses in a given semester or a year would be given a break maybe they teach fewer courses so that they could devote additional time to collaborate on the revisions to the curriculum. Got it. So they're not overwhelmed or doing this as an add-on. That makes perfect sense and and Rand Daniel question for both of you just people are wondering how long does this take the redesign take at the university and I'm sure it varies but just would love some examples from both of you if you could talk about sort of the length of time and and even sort of what it felt like maybe Daniel during that time for folks as you're going through that design redesign process but maybe Susan first any general sense of time across the various programs? Yeah I think in Becky's presentation she showed a timeline chart quickly that kind of gave a sense of like this was you know pretty much a four to five year effort with certain activities being revisited over time and I think that's that's also a key point to emphasize this isn't a one and done you know you don't revise the program and then put a bow on it and then you know kind of put it in the closet all of the programs were viewing this from a continuous improvement perspective and putting processes in place that could enable and sustain that continuous improvement but Daniel I think you might be able to speak more specifically to how long individual pieces of this took. Yeah so at the U what we did is we actually established work groups that that went through and once we had determined we went through a whole process using the standards to determine what were the courses that we wanted in in this program and once we determined what those standards were and we kind of bucketed them then those buckets then turned into courses and we created work groups that worked on those courses. Hindsight 2020 right looking back one of the things that we had to make up for was some of those we did in isolation and didn't scaffold so we then went after it again and in our continuous improvement have really made sure that all of our courses scaffold build on each other as they go as you go through the program so timeline to do that initial step was a good year it was it was a year-long process and then really we dedicate time at the end of every semester going forward to be constantly engaged in continuously changing our courses as we make discoveries along the way. Hmm so in both case as we're describing that's just a cycle of improvement and there are times that we go back and revisit. So Marjorie a question for you then because some people are wondering like what's keeping people from just implementing these changes right now like what's what advice would you offer for those who are asking that question? Well I think one of the themes that we've heard throughout this webinar is the amount of work it takes to of everybody working together right getting making sure at the state level that we have standards in place that have content that for example focus on equity that for for program approval that require that act of learning those internships enabling universities not they're you know we were just talking about buying out the time Susan was talking about that but rewarding faculty they're not going to be publishing they're going to be doing other work that needs to be honored at the at the university um and getting in place the infrastructure that that is needed at the state level and at the local level to enable the coaching to occur where we can have coaches who are trained and who have time and and time for brand new principals to actually have you know have opportunities to meet with their coaches so it's not just popping in but but significant time to provide that advice so I think there are a lot of pieces that need to get put in place but I think we know what those pieces are and we've seen it um successfully implemented so I think we can put together the pieces and improve support for principals principal learning and that's all nice well and it's such a sense of urgency right like we all want to get this work moving forward because we know how important it is so uh great advice and you you were mentioning the coaching piece but I want to tease out mentoring separately from that and this is I'm going to open this up starting with you Marjorie than others so like where are these mentors coming from how do we develop a cadre of mentors to support principals in the job are they current administrators are they retired folks curious what kind of models you're saying Marjorie I'm going to start with you and then others Dan I'm probably going to come to you next on this one uh and then we'll see where it goes but Marjorie if you kick this one off yeah mentors are often retired you know they've been successful principals administrators they understand they have been there they understand it and we've seen successful models where mentors have training they have their own support so that they can share ideas they can share their tools support each other in the same way we're talking about principals supporting each other and there are things that we know about what makes for strong mentoring that's in the research I didn't get to discuss in the presentation today for example you know we know that it takes as I said earlier some significant time you can't just fly in and out of a classroom it takes a culture where the new administrators trust their mentors and they can mess up and know that there's someone there to catch them and you know good matches between new administrators and mentors so I think there's a lot more that we we know about and I think there are a lot of people in the field when we talk about a principal pipeline when we talk about the farther end of the pipeline we have people who are skilled who can serve as those mentors thank you thank you Dan nominees I'm coming to you well as you heard this from Marjorie anything you would add from your perspective no I absolutely the retired particularly your outstanding retired principals make great mentors because they have the time and they can spend time in person with the individual let's say it's a newly appointed principal to have that mentor working with that principal and in person going to the school on a regular basis and also on the phone and at other times that kind of a relationship is outstanding and I know the districts that are practicing are very happy with that and and the individuals that are retiring I love it and many of them continue to do it many years after they're retired because it's something that they they love to do they enjoy doing they still feel that they're contributing and the same thing with coaches you know so retired administrators are great mentors outstanding coaches and they can make a significant difference and it facilitates the process by the way because you're somebody that can go to the school you're somebody that's available whenever the principal is available it's not that the principal has to be taken out of the school or has to attend the program this can happen and in person in the building where the difference is made so that that's an outstanding practice yeah agreed agreed and I want to give any other panelists a chance to jump in on this question before I go to the next anyone else want to add to this conversation about mentors yeah please yeah so I had a clinical supervisor during the time that I was in UConn UCAPS program who then became my mentor during the school year and yes we have you know formal meetings let's just stay there the first Tuesday of the month but what I really appreciate is the on the spot you know my mentor being ready for on the spot questions because sometimes things come up we do a thousand things in a day right we make a thousand decisions a day so I appreciate those informal times be it just a text message or a quick phone call so yes I would say hire more retired administrators to be mentors for us great point thank you and it sounds like that getting that right match is so important so that you can be vulnerable and have those kind of conversations that you need to have to really advance your practice you know uh Peter I'm people are probably wondering like how do I find out if my state as a program that supports principal development suggestions that you have on where they should look yeah I mean I think we have seen a number of states I just listed a few that are using their federal covid relief dollars and many state educational agencies have been posting information around those expenditures on their their websites on their sea website also ccso.org my association is also publishing a bunch of different resources but also you know there's a lot of stuff that doesn't you know get the public kind of attention but that certainly individuals at the sea or if their universities or in the districts would know very well and so I hate to sort of go back to this notion of kind of building relationships with state educational agency staff you know we're very interested in engaging you know broadly and so I would encourage folks to find out what you can online but then also you know reach out and connect with folks at sea so I'm sure we'd be glad to to um coordinate great point and you know this whole notion of getting the word out you know they're all of us have a different role that we play and getting the word out about this these reports uh these findings and the implications for the field I know just where am I learning for it for a second as a communication partner with Wallace uh part of our role is to get this out and our publications and our social media and our blogs and elsewhere and I'm just curious uh Susan Marjorie suggestions that you all would have for the field and others of us on how do we get the word out about these important findings so that they can actually be there's we can put the information to good use and Susan I'm going to start with you then I go to Marjorie and then I'll any and then Dan I think I'll come to you on this one as well Susan how do we get the word out on this so I think one of the challenges about getting the word out on a complex set of learnings such as have emerged from the UPPI stems from the fact that everybody who's interested in the topic is coming at it from a slightly different perspective so I would you know I think convening a panel like this where you have representatives who can speak to it from each perspective and drive home what they found to be most relevant is a great starting point and then using them as emissaries for their their group and you know really targeting the message you know because the questions that districts might have in their mind are going to be very different from the questions that preparation program your preparation programs I would think well how how do I reach out to a district how do I structure a meeting to make sure that they feel engaged districts might be wondering you know is this worth my time you know what is a program going to be asking of me so I think targeting those those lessons to the audience is is a good way ahead yeah that's such a great point you know every time one of the members of the panel said professional development or coaching and mentoring it was speaking to my heart coming from moving forward and I can imagine as every time Dan anyone talked about the needs of superintendents and principals and how important it is to get this right it spoke to yours so Dan before I come to you I want to hear from Marjorie though like what other advice would you offer us a couple other pieces of advice one I know sometimes people don't have time to read the long reports I know we have an executive summary I know Rand puts out executive summaries and briefs and so there are shorter versions that people can access and I know we'll be creating more and I'm sure Rand will as well there are many resources adjacent to these there are these reports there are other reports available on all of our websites Rand has a wealth of information learning policy institute all the Organs Wallace Foundation AASA ccso there are tons of so go to the websites and see what addresses this specifically and adjacent as I said reports and reach out reach out we are all passionate about this subject about what we've learned and if you need a resource or you don't understand something reach out and we were we're you know I'm sorry I'm gonna uh Susan I'm sure is available so I'm making her back um so there are there are ways to get that tailored information that that Susan was talking about wonderful and Dan I'm going to give you the final word on this you got 30 seconds what's well Fred but we work very closely with the two principal organizations the elementary principals the secondary principals and together we send out the message of how critical and how important this all is and and we work closely with all of our colleges and universities in terms of creating these partnerships between the associations and the colleges and the universities all in terms of trying to bring about the resources necessary the cooperation that's necessary and the working together and let me say that to me this is the key in all of this the working together all of us that are here universities research the various organizations if when we come together we're incredibly powerful and getting that message out and making it happen yeah and I could not agree more and I thank you all for coming together in partnership today so Marjorie, Stephanie, Becky, Susan, Peter, Dan, Daniel, Roshanda thank you what an insightful conversation and for pointing us on a productive path forward and of course a great thanks to all of you for listening and sharing your questions your interest is a powerful sign that we can build on the progress that we've heard about today and as a reminder again a recording of this webinar along with the slides will be available at WallaceFoundation.org by Wednesday so I urge all of you who are interested to check out both studies so on behalf of the Wallace Foundation thank you again I wish you continued progress in achieving equity and excellence for the young people we serve have a great afternoon