Volume 4 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal of K-12 Educational Research - Page 46

44 data collected from the interviews conducted with the participating charter school principals. Research Question 1 (RQ1) What are the perceptions of public charter school system principals about the role of a principal in a charter school? The participants were asked, “What is your perspective of the role of a principal in a charter school?” The major themes revealed were safety and security, aligning vision, instructional leadership, building capacity, and role comparison with traditional public school districts. Research Question 2 (RQ2) What are the perceptions of public charter school system principals concerning principal preparation for charter principals? The participants were asked, “How were you prepared to be a principal? What do you perceive to be the strengths of that preparation? How could your preparation have been improved? What aspects of being a principal do you feel you have been properly prepared for prior to becoming a principal? What challenges have you faced as a principal that you were not prepared for?” The respondents’ answers were further organized into strengths and weaknesses of their preparation experiences. Internships and shadowing as well as learning how to manage student discipline were the revealed strengths under the theme of preparation. Lack of budget training, insufficient campus operations training, poor experiences as an assistant principal, being unprepared for dealing with the consequences of staff turnover, instructional leadership responsibilities, and the impact of being a principal on their personal lives were the weaknesses of preparation as revealed in the interviews under the theme of preparation. Research Question 3 (RQ3) What are the perceptions of public charter school system principals concerning ongoing support provided to charter principals? The participants were asked, “What kinds of support do you need to be a principal?” and “What else would you like to share about your experiences with preparation and support as a principal?” The responses to these questions revealed themes of collaboration with other principals, the importance of direct supervisor support, trust from district leadership, and the importance of support from other departments in the school system. Research Question 4 (RQ4) What are the necessary components of preparation and support for charter principals from the perspective of charter school principals? The participants were asked, “If you could design a preparation and support program for charter principals, what would you include in your design?” and “What else would you like to share about your experiences with preparation and support as a principal?” The responses to these questions included problem-based learning and scenario-based learning, internships and shadowing, campus operations training, collaboration with principals, instructional leadership, mentoring and coaching, content alignment with professional standards, budget training, and program organized into cohorts. Implications Principal Role The current study identified safety and security, aligning vision, instructional leadership, and building capacity as integral aspects of the role of the principal. The principal is responsible for the physical, emotional, and environmental safety of students (Cumings & Coryn, 2009; Grover, 2015; Hoerr, 2016). The principal role includes establishing a vision and aligning the campus staff and resources towards pursuing that vision (McIver, Kearns, Lysons, & Sussman, 2009; NASSP & NAESP, 2013; Tirozzi, 2001). Building capacity in others is an essential component of the principal role (Ash & Persall, 2000; McIver et al., 2009; Orphanos & Orr, 2014). The principal role includes, serving as an instructional leader (DuFour, 2002; Levine, 2005), improving student outcomes (Branch, Hanushek, & Rivkin, 2013; Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005), improving staff performance (Harvey, 2013; Jackson & Davis, 2000; Perilla, 2014; Seashore Louis, Leithwood, Wahlstrom, & Anderson, 2010; Ylimaki, 2007), and turning around failing schools (Elmore, 2003; Leithwood, Seashore Louis, Anderson, & Walhstrom, 2004; Mitgang, 2013). Troy Mooney, EdD