Chapter I Appendix Figures
II.1 Literature Review .1 How school personnel allocate their time .1 How school personnel allocate their time
II.1.2 What factors are related to how school personnel allocate their time
In addition to describing how school personnel spend their time, studies of time allocation in education have identified several personal and organizational characteristics that are related to differences in time allocation among school personnel (E. B. Goldring et al., 2008; Grissom et al., 2013; Stallings, 1980; Vannest & Hagan-Burke, 2010). For teachers, the number of years since they were certified and their knowledge of current research are related to how much time they spend on research based instructional practices (Spear-Swerling & Zibulsky, 2014). Vannest and Hagan-Burke (2010) find that how special education teachers allocate their time is related to the structure of their instructional duties (e.g., pull-out, resource, co-teaching). Several studies find that teachers’ practices vary across different levels of school achievement (Stallings, 1980;
Virgilio et al., 1991). School leadership and how they structure the school climate seem to play especially important roles in shaping the behaviors of teachers (Bryk et al., 2010; Julie Cohen &
Brown, 2016; Hitt & Tucker, 2016; Smylie, 1988).
Prior research suggests that school leaders, specifically their leadership behaviors, are critical to quality instruction in schools (Coelli & Green, 2012; Hitt & Tucker, 2016; Leithwood et al., 2004; Liebowitz & Porter, 2019; Smylie, 1988). Although some leadership behaviors are related to improvements in student outcomes, research also finds that principals’ time is often constrained by contextual factors. Several studies find that the school size is related to how school leaders allocate their time (E. B. Goldring et al., 2008, 2019; Grissom et al., 2013;
Grissom, Loeb, et al., 2015). Leaders of smaller schools tend to spend more time on instructional
85
leadership tasks and less on internal relations (Grissom et al., 2013; Grissom, Loeb, et al., 2015).
Grade level is another important contextual factor related to principals’ time allocation in several studies (E. B. Goldring et al., 2008, 2019; Grissom et al., 2013; Grissom, Loeb, et al., 2015;
Huang et al., 2018). These studies find that high school principals tend to spend more time on organizational management tasks, and elementary school principals spend more time on instructional tasks (E. B. Goldring et al., 2008; Grissom et al., 2013; Grissom, Loeb, et al., 2015).
The demographic characteristics of the student population also have a significant relationship with principals’ time allocation across multiple studies. Grissom et al. (2013) finds that principals who spend more time on instructional leadership lead schools that have more Black and free and reduced price lunch eligible (FRPL) students, and Grissom et al. (2015) find that principals who lead schools with more FRPL students spend less time on tasks related to organizational management. Goldring et al. (2008) and Huang et al. (2018) find conflicting evidence about the diversity of tasks that principals spend their time on in schools with more disadvantaged student populations. Goldring et al. (2008) find that principals in schools with less disadvantaged student populations tend to spend their time on a wide range of activities while Huang et al. (2018) find the opposite pattern. Studies also find that principals’ time allocation is related to student achievement. A few studies find that principals of schools with high
achievement growth tend to spend less time on instructional activities and more time on tasks related to managing the organizational aspects of the schools (Grissom et al., 2013; Horng et al., 2010; May et al., 2012). However, Grissom et al. (2013) find that principals who spend more time specifically coaching and evaluating teachers tend to lead schools with higher achievement growth in math, and Goldring et al. (2008) find that schools with principals who spend their time
86
on instructional leadership tend to have higher levels of academic press. These studies seem to suggest that there is an important relationship between contextual factors and the duties that occupy a principal’s time.
Another important contextual factor in determining how school leaders allocate their time is the local policy environment (Portin et al., 2003). One type of policy that research finds has had a significant role in shaping how school leaders spend their time in recent years is teacher evaluation policy (Cannata et al., 2017; E. Goldring et al., 2015; E. B. Goldring et al., 2019;
Lochmiller & Mancinelli, 2019; Neumerski et al., 2018). These studies find that the
implementation of multiple measure high stakes teacher evaluation policies in recent years has resulted in school leaders spending much more of their time on evaluating the instruction of teachers (Lochmiller & Mancinelli, 2019; Neumerski et al., 2018). As evaluation becomes an important part of the role of principals, prior studies find some evidence of principals shifting some of their organizational management duties to assistant principals (E. B. Goldring et al., 2019; Lochmiller & Mancinelli, 2019; Neumerski et al., 2018). Just as principals have adapted to changes to teacher evaluation, APs’ duties and tasks may be changing in response to these policy shifts (Lochmiller & Mancinelli, 2019; Sun, 2012).
Although several studies suggest that the time allocation of education personnel is important for student learning and other important school outcomes like school climate, most of the research has been focused on teachers and principals (Berliner, 1990; Grissom et al., 2013;
Horng et al., 2010; May et al., 2012; Stallings, 1980). This emphasis on teachers and principals is understandable because their behaviors have more direct connections to student learning than the behaviors of APs. But recent research on distributed leadership and other forms of shared
leadership in schools suggests that the most effective principals share the work of leadership with
87
several school stakeholders (Heck & Hallinger, 2010; Spillane et al., 2007). Moreover, research on the theory of leadership substitutes suggests that leadership may be more appropriately conceptualized as a set of leadership duties that can be fulfilled by the principal or other organizational resources (Firestone, 1996; Freeston, 1987; Pitner, 1986). Despite research that suggests school leadership is not solely a function of the principal, the research on APs’ duties is underdeveloped.