| Reform documents clearly convey that teachers are central to national efforts to reform instructional and curricular practices in science classrooms. Although teachers are recognized as critical to reform efforts, actualizing the vision requires the combined efforts of an array of individuals. Within the school’s context, science education reform developers and researchers recognize that principals are important, and indeed influence science programs, particularly curricula and program decisions. Further, reform today calls for principals to be instructional leaders, assuming a more active role in the decisions that are made regarding the instructional program. However, research that examines the influence of the school principal within the science program is embryonic and not fully understood. Utilizing the Instructional Leadership Model and the Teacher- Centered Systemic Reform Model as guiding theoretical frameworks, this study investigated the influence of an elementary principal’s instructional leadership in a science program and the ways in which elementary teachers, charged with implementation of reform, respond to the curriculum and program decisions supported and championed by the principal.;This naturalistic investigation was conducted over a seven month period in an elementary school in a large metropolitan school district in the state of Florida. Data collection methods included interviews, document analysis, reflective journal entries, principals/teacher relational observations, classroom observations, and an open-ended questionnaire. The principal’s role, decision-making, and impact within the science program were examined. Also examined was the influence of the principal’s instructional leadership on teachers’ instructional practices. Too, the district’s influence on the principal’s instructional leadership as well as the district’s role in forwarding contradictory messages of reform (change) was explored. The findings revealed that the principal, while diligent in her efforts to develop an effective science program in which student learning was prioritized, championed and implemented first order changes (e.g., instituting a science laboratory, departmentalization, providing resources, instructional changes that were directed at fifth grade), and not change supported by national science education reform (second order). The district’s vision for science, which prioritized test preparations, and the principal’s lack of knowledge of national science education reform efforts, limited pedagogical knowledge in science, and the relatively small pool of ideas from which to suggest curriculum changes, greatly influenced her instructional leadership and the change efforts that were embraced. Even though the changes proposed and implemented were first order, science teachers regarded the principal as a capable and skillful instructional leader who had a history of making sound decision. As a result, many of the science teachers repressed or abandoned many of their own beliefs about how science should be taught, following the guidance and direction of their principal.;One implication of this research is the need for elementary principals to have at best, a minimal, if not robust understanding of science education reform and the goals espoused. In order for elementary schools to develop and implement science programs that parallel and reverberate the messages of reform, principals are integral. As these findings suggest, principals, perceived as effective instructional leaders, are more apt to be supported by teachers and are more apt to support the decisions made by the principal. Although the principal was not found to directly influence teacher practice, her instructional leadership defined school values and the pathway to change. Other research implications, the “fit” of this research with current research on elementary principals in science education, and recommendations for future research are included. |
