Marzano, Robert J.; McNulty, Brian A. & Waters, Timothy. (2005) School Leadership that Works: From Research to Results. Reviewed by Reviewed by Jorma L. Young, University of South Florida

Marzano, Robert J.; McNulty, Brian A. & Waters, Timothy. (2005) School Leadership that Works: From Research to Results. Alexandra, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Pp. 194         ISBN 0-4166-0227-5 Reviewed by Reviewed by Jorma L. Young University of South Florida June 27, 2007 “Educators have long known that some principals are more effective leaders than others” (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2004, p.48). A universal question on school leadership is, "Why are some leaders more effective than others?" The answer is complex. Marzano, McNulty, and Waters in School Leadership that Works: From Research to Results (2005) believe that the distinguishing factor between effective and ineffective school leadership lies in student achievement. School Leadership that Works is a meta-analysis based upon the analysis of research compiled over the last quarter century. The authors attest that studies on school leadership and the correlation to student achievement do not exist in large bodies of work. The authors sought to examine 69 studies that showed a correlation between leadership and student achievement. The 69 studies were published between 1978 and 2001; the researchers exclaimed that “We found no available studies that met our criteria prior to 1978 nor after 2001” (p. 29). This meta-analysis involved 2,802 schools at various levels—elementary, middle, and high school—as well as multiple level schools, such as K-8 and K-12. And it is estimated that the group of studies included 14,000 teachers and 1.4 million students. It is my opinion that the sheer number of participants and the diverse levels of the schools give the study validity. This text focuses on how to improve student achievement and schools through effective leadership. Richard Elmore (2002) states that “internal accountability [or responsibility]…is a precondition for any process of improvement” (p. 20). Marzano, McNulty, and Waters create what amounts to manual for school practitioners to improve student achievement. Part I of this text concentrates on the research. This part is appropriately titled The Research Base. The authors devote three chapters to the research on school leadership, which “has long been perceived to be important to the effective functioning of organizations in general and, more recently, of schools in particular” (p. 12). In Chapter 1, the search for school leadership quest begins. The authors set the tone by detailing the nature and purpose of their research. The nature of the research is meta-analysis. Marzano and coauthors describe the history and the significance of this research method, which was first presented by Gene V Glass and his colleagues over 30 years ago. Since its inception, the authors attest through Morton Hunt’s (1997) research that the use of meta-analysis in medicine, psychology, and criminology as well as other fields has found success and useful application. In the authors’ own words, “meta-analysis allows researchers to form statistically based generalizations regarding the research in a given field” (p. 7). Once the authors set the foundation for their meta-analysis, they plunge into their discoveries and generalizations. Also in Chapter 1, the authors admirably address past belief systems where ”some researchers and theorists assert that at best the research on school leadership is equivocal and at worst demonstrates that leadership has no effect on student achievement.” The authors seek to debunk that archaic belief through their “meta-analysis of 35 years of research.” Marzano and colleagues claimed that research “indicates that school leadership has a substantial effect on student achievement and provides guidance for experienced and aspiring administrators alike” (p.12). Chapter 2 is dedicated to prominent and contemporary leadership theories and theorists. It reads like a who’s who of leadership and education dominions: transformational and transactional leadership, Total Quality Management, servant leadership, situational leadership, and instructional leadership. And as for theorists, the list consists of prominent researchers in the field of educational leadership, such as Richard Elmore, Michael Fullan, and James Spillane, who focus on accountability, change, and management style, respectively. The list also includes significant leaders in business management and political leadership, such as James Burns, Edward Deming, Warren Bennis, James Collins, and Stephen Covey. I believe that the authors cleverly and tactfully used these prominent leadership authorities to give their research greater validity. The last chapter of Part I—Chapter 3—focuses on the meta-analysis that the authors conducted. Here the reader is exposed, in concise form, to the research that was included in the meta-analysis. The authors explain that their “primary research methodology, uses quantitative techniques to synthesize studies in a given domain,” which “was school leadership as practiced by principals” (p. 28). Their research is further delineated by focusing on K-12 students and schools in the United States or in countries with similar educational systems. These studies must have included the correlation between principal leadership and student academic achievement as measured by some standardized test or a state accountability test. Lastly, the studies must have reported the effect size in correlation form or have reported sufficient information that the authors were able to make this calculation. Part 2 focuses on the results of their research and its application. Again, the authors appropriately name this part Practical Application. This part is composed of four chapters, all of which are intended to help the scholar practitioner in schools. In Chapter 4, Marzano, McNulty, and Water present their meta-analysis. Their research study found that there are 21 responsibilities or behaviors of the principal that “have a statistically significant relationship with student achievement” (p. 64). The authors explain each responsibility and report the size of its correlation with achievement. An example is Change Agent—willingness to challenge the status quo—with an average correlation of .25. While explicitly describing each responsibility, the authors do a fantastic job of giving several concrete scenarios describing how each responsibility would look in a school setting. These scenarios give practitioners clear understanding of each responsibility. Using the Change Agent responsibility, the authors write: “the school leader demonstrates [Change Agent responsibility]…when he makes a commitment to implement a new reading program for at least two years to give it adequate time to work” (p. 45). The authors claim that this “is perhaps the first time in the history of leadership research in the United States that we can point to a set of competencies (responsibilities) that are research based” (p. 62). Marzano and his coauthors assert that this research makes a major contribution to the knowledge base of school leadership. Chapter 5 focuses on the 21 responsibilities in relation to two types of change. Here Marzano, McNulty, and Waters incorporate their earlier works: Developing the Science of Educational Leadership (2004); and Leadership that Sparks Learning (2004). The two types of change are incremental and deep. First order change (incremental) is small change that fine tunes the already existing system, while second order change (deep) dramatically alters the system in a new direction. The authors indicate that all 21 responsibilities are “involved in the day-to-day first order changes” as part of the daily management of the school (p. 75). The second order of change only empathizes sevens of the responsibilities. Chapter, 6, focuses on doing the right work. The authors assert that “one critical aspect of leadership that was not evident from our meta-analysis…was the type of work a school selects as its focus” (p. 76). In this chapter, Marzano and colleagues assert that there are 11 factors of doing the “right work,” such as safe and orderly environment, parent and community involvement, and instructional strategies. These factors can be grouped into school-level, teacher-level, and student-level. They indicate that “the school leader’s ability to select the right work is a critical aspect of effective leadership” (p. 97). Marzano, McNulty, and Water insist that administrators and teachers in low-performing schools are working hard but not necessarily intelligently in the selection of interventions that increase student achievement. Chapter 7 is entitled “A Plan for Effective School Leadership.” The authors summarize their purpose for this chapter thus: to “organize our findings and conclusions into a plan of action that will help any school leader articulate and realize a powerful vision for enhanced student achievement” (p. 98). That realization is a five-step plan: Step 1, develop a strong leadership team; Step 2, distribute some responsibilities throughout the leadership team; Step 3, select the right work; Step 4, identify the order of magnitude implied by the selected work; and Step 5, match the management style to the order of magnitude of the change initiative. These five steps are quintessentially the end all or the culmination all the research presented in a practical school based plan of action that can be implemented by “experienced and novice school leaders” (p. 123). In the one-page epilogue, the authors express the hope that their plan is seen as a useful tool for strong and thoughtful leadership teams. This book should be read by every principal, assistant principal, and aspiring principal. As a matter of fact, this text really should be read by every graduate student—masters and doctoral—in educational leadership. This text absolutely belongs in a course that focuses on the principles of educational leadership. School Leadership that Works outlines 21 responsibilities of which all school leaders should be aware. With conscious awareness, the school leader will then become a reflective practitioner and, hence, a more effective school leader. The readers must heed the words of the authors that “the variety of skills a leader must master is daunting” (p. 62). The authors prescribe that these responsibilities should not fall on one individual but rather a distributed leadership team. Marzano, McNulty, and Waters sum up their work with a wish: “It is our hope that the information presented in this book will help principals and others translate their vision and aspirations into actions that will change not only our schools, but potentially, the world” (p. 123). References Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the Gap Between Standards and Achievement: The Imperative for Professional Development in Education. Washington, D.C.: Albert Shanker Institute. Hunt, Morton M. (1997). How Science Takes Stock: The Story of Meta-Analysis. NY: Russell Sage Foundation Waters, T., Marzano, R., and McNulty, B. (2004). Leadership that Sparks Learning. Educational Leadership, 61, 48-51. Waters, J. T., Marzano, J. S., & McNulty, B. (2004). Developing the science of educational leadership. Spectrum, 22(1), 4–13. About the Reviewer Jorma Young is pursuing his doctoral degree in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. His research focus and area of interest is K-12 school leadership archetypes, which includes the classroom and the principal leaders. He is the Supervisor of Academic Programs, Secondary Education, for Hillsborough County Public Schools, one of the ten largest school districts in the United States.