The Effects of NCLB on the Principal\u27s Authority to Manage the Success of English Language Learners

The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) legislation on principals\u27 authority to manage the success of English language learners (ELL). Seven research questions guided inquiry about the perceived effects of NCLB on the principal\u27s authority to manage the success of the ELL. Participating principals were randomly selected. The only criterion was that their schools had to serve English language learners and that this population of students was aggregated into the accountability performance of the campus. Definitions for transactional and transformational leadership styles were given to respondents to select from in order to determine their perceived styles. Three teachers working with each participant principal were also questioned to determine if the respondent\u27s perceived leadership style matched the teachers\u27 perceptions of their principal. Teachers were also questioned about their view of the principal\u27s knowledge of educating English language learners and about the level of support they received. In order to gain an understanding of how NCLB has impacted principals\u27 authority to manage the success of English language learners, research questions addressed a variety of issues, including the level and nature of principals\u27 instructional involvement, their familiarity with NCLB and ELL program practices and models, leadership adjustments made in response to accountability laws and several others realms of inquiry. Overall, this researcher found that the nine principals in this study, who exhibited both transformational and transactional leadership qualities, were able to effectively manage the academic success of the ELL population within the structure of accountability systems. This conclusion is based on the fact that they, with exceptions as noted in Chapter 4, were highly involved in the instructional process, understanding of ELL models and educational practices, supportive of ELL teachers, empowering of faculty members through collaboration, and generally embracing of the vision and intent of NCLB. Some did, however, note that certain aspects of the law limited their authority to act and prompted increased directive behavior with faculty members. Additionally, they unanimously believed the testing in English requirement of the law was flawed. Recommendations for future research in this realm and suggestions for practitioners are presented