Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the architecture of internship coaching models from five innovative principal preparation programs in the Southeastern region of the USA. The researchers used coaching architecture in this context to include the assignment of coaches to interns, dosages, and enactment of evaluation and confidentiality. Design/methodology/approach The researchers used a qualitative, collective case study research design that included semi-structured interviews of program directors and coaches from each of five programs, totaling 19 interviews that lasted from 30 min to an hour and 15 min each. Findings Commonalities among architectures of principal intern coaching designs included coaching assignment by geography, frequency and format of coaching sessions and length of the internship. All five programs recommend continuing coaching into initial years of administration. Points of distinction pertained to the utilization of external versus internal coaches, confidentiality and evaluation by coaches. Research limitations/implications This study may inform coaching models for principal preparation programs within similar contexts. Because all five programs are grant-funded within one US state, generalizability and transferability cannot be assumed. Practical implications The authors provide design considerations for coaching programs, as well as policy considerations and directions for future research. Originality/value While coaching is increasingly used in leadership preparation programs, there is a paucity of research regarding the nature of coaching models, especially in terms of their architecture. The researchers examine, compare, and contrast coaching model architecture, raising important considerations for coaching designs.
In an attempt to improve training and development of principals, the General Assembly in North Carolina established a competitive grant program to transform the way principals are certified. This qualitative study aimed to inform principal preparation practices by examining the initial, critical steps of recruitment, screening, and selection of candidates to enroll in a non-traditional, university-based program. The grant that funded the principal preparation program specified that program providers partner with school districts to tap top tier educators to enroll as principal trainees. In this study, public school district partners conducted the recruitment and initial screening of aspiring candidates internally. Through interviews of district leaders and scrutiny of documents associated with recruitment, screening, and selection, the researchers of this study found that the multi-tiered process of recruiting, screening, and selection worked effectively. The challenges of a university-school district partnership are presented as lessons learned. Findings are discussed in terms of recommendations for universities and school districts as to how to work collaboratively, as well as some pitfalls to avoid to make the process equitable and fair to emerging leaders in public schools.
'/%3e%3c/defs%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0h10080v5040H0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='.6' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23b)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='.4' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23c)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='840' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='504' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cg fill='%23fff'%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' x='2520' y='3780'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='4200'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='6300' y='2205'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='840'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='8680' y='1869'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23e' x='8064' y='2730'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
