Running Head: ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 1

Educational Leaders as Advocates: Mitigating the Effects of Standardized Assessment and

Supporting 21st Century Learning Commented [SH1]: Great title

Commented [SH2]:
Meredith Mitchell
Fantastic job, Meredith.
George Mason University Your problem statement is much clearer and tighter than
when you began, and you did a nice job of citing some key
EDLE 895 Summer 2015 research to make your claim. My only suggestion is to
include your research question, which is key to the
development of your research design and approach to
Dr. Sonya Horsford inquiry. The entire proposal was very well-written with little
to any errors, including APA. Bravo!

Enjoy the rest of your summer and new kitchen!

39/40

SDH
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 2

Abstract

The growth of educational accountability in America has resulted in many negative

consequences that affect the nature of student learning (Au, 2007). Educational leaders can serve

as advocacy leaders (Anderson, 2009) by promoting equitable educational opportunities through

21st century learning initiatives (Kay & Greenhill, 2011). The proposed qualitative study will

use interview data to explore how educational leaders facilitate 21st century learning

opportunities for students in a district that has recently adopted this vision. Nine participants

from various leadership roles will be interviewed in order to understand specific structures and

strategies for implementing 21st century initiatives. These insights will contribute to

understandings of how educational leaders can advocate for relevant learning experiences for

students (Anderson, 2009; Kay & Greenhill, 2011). Commented [SH3]: Good
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 3

Educational Leaders as Advocates: Mitigating the Effects of Standardized Assessment and

Supporting 21st Century Learning

The educational accountability system in America is based in the use of standardized

assessments to measure students academic growth; however, using standardized assessments as

the tool for measuring student learning systematically incurs other unintended consequences (Au,

2007; Hursh, 2007; Cohen-Vogel & McLendon, 2009). These consequences include: the failure

to recognize the strengths of students in certain marginalized populations, an over emphasis on

memorizing content knowledge, the narrowing of curricular material, the disintegration of

curricular content, student disengagement, and the deprofessionalization of teaching (Au, 2007;

Hursh, 2007; Cohen-Vogel & McLendon, 2009). The emphasis of basing educational decisions

on standardized assessments is also wrought with controversy (Desimone, 2009). Reducing a

child to a single test score does not recognize the myriad ways teachers develop their students; an

economic perspective (Hanushek, 2009) simply cannot demonstrate the individual learning of a Commented [SH4]: Hanushek conducts economic
analysis, but not completely sure this claim should be
attributed to him?
given child (Desimone, 2009). Additionally, standardized assessments are often poorly

constructed and lack sufficient validity and reliability (Popham, 2007). In considering the

growing impact of educational accountability in the past several decades (Resnick, 1980;

Resnick, 1981; Thomas & Brady, 2005), it is important for educational leaders to not only

recognize the characteristics and adverse impacts of standardized assessment, but also advocate

for reducing the detriment they cause to students (Anderson, 2009). Commented [SH5]: Strong introductory paragraph that
clearly outlines the problem! Nicely done.
The curricular effects of standardized assessment are consequences that directly impact

the lives and educational experiences of students (Au, 2007). School reformers that recognize

these impacts have highlighted the need for students, teachers, and schools to engage in 21st

century learning, which includes the practice and application of skillsets that students need to
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 4

prepare for their professional futures (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt &

Roblin, 2012). These skillsets include collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical

thinking and such skillsets are not easily measured through our current assessment paradigm

based in standardized tests (Kay & Greenhill, 2011, Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin,

2012). It is clear that there is a tension and misalignment between the types of instructional

activities students should be engaging in at the classroom level and the types of classroom

activities that standardized assessment and our system of accountability encourages (Au, 2007;

Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2012).

This issue is critically important for educational leaders, who should serve as an

educational advocate for all students (Anderson, 2009). Educational leaders, including school

based administrators, instructional coaches, teacher leaders, and district and state level

administrators, are critical to influencing the instruction and assessment that occur within

classrooms, which in turn, directly impacts student learning (Leithwood, Seashore Louis,

Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004). These leaders have the responsibility to be aware of the ways in

which accountability affects students holistically; not just in terms of academic outcomes, but

also through other unintended consequences (Anderson, 2009).

The purpose of this proposed qualitative study is to understand how educational leaders

can serve as advocacy leaders by exploring the ways in which leaders mitigate the negative

effects of standardized assessment and promote 21st century learning activities. Commented [SH6]: Great opening section! Clearly
identifiable purpose statement. Will a research question or
two guide this study?
Theoretical Frameworks

This study incorporates two theoretical frameworks: 21st century learning (cite) and

advocacy leadership (cite). The 21st Century Learning framework is a set of practices that are

based onin the premise that content knowledge is not the main goal of educating our youth; we
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 5

need to be providing students with an entire toolbox of skills that are necessary to compete in

todays competitive, global economy (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt &

Roblin, 2012). These 21st century skills include being creative, collaborative, communicative,

and innovative and were derived from actual employers and professional organizations that

exemplify the nature of todays dynamic industries (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill,

2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). As the gap between what we are providing students within the

classroom and the skills they need in order to be successful widens, it will be important to

understand the work of multiple levels of educational leaders in following through on the vision

of promoting 21st century teaching and learning (Neumerski, 2012). Advocacy lLeadership is a

framework for understanding the role of educational leaders in addressing issues through the lens

of promoting equity and justice for all students (Anderson, 2009). This framework calls for

leaders to recognize the inherent injustices of neoliberal educational reform and adopt a new

leadership vision that is student centered (Anderson, 2009). Educational leaders can serve as the

gatekeepers for mitigating the effects of national and state policies that promote inequity and can

advocate for an instructional direction within schools that benefit all students (Anderson, 2009;

Neumerski, 2012). These frameworks characterize the lens through which this study addresses

the problem of our current test centric culture. Commented [SH7]: Well done.

Methods and Data Sources

This study is a qualitative research design (Merriam, 2009) and will be conducted within

a large Mid-Atlantic school district in the United States. This school district was selected

because it has recently adopted a vision and mission to provide students with more frequent and

authentic 21st century learning experiences. Participants will be administrators, instructional

coaches, and teacher leaders in the school district that are purposefully selected (Glesne, 2011) as Commented [SH8]: Are these individuals in central office
or located in schools throughout the district?
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 6

having directly developed or implemented the district initiative for 21st century learning. Commented [SH9]: Good, but what are the criteria for
determining this?
Potential participants will be directly contacted at the district level and snowball sampling

(Glesne, 2011) will be used to lead to other potential participants in educational leadership roles. Commented [SH10]: Okay, you address my previous
questions here.
These sampling techniques will be utilized until nine participants representing a variety of Commented [SH11]: Why nine?

educational roles consent to study.

Data Sources Formatted: Left, Indent: First line: 0.5"

Each participant will participate in a semi-structured interview at their respective work Commented [SH12]: How long will the interviews be?

And more importantly, what is the overall research question

site. Interview protocols will be curtailed to fit each participants professional role. District and for the study? That should open your Methods section and
probably be included in introduction as well, following the
school level administrators will answer questions regarding their perceptions on the effects purpose statement.

standardized assessments have on students and teachers, their understandings of teachers

process of implementing 21st century learning activities, and their actions and intentions for

supporting this type of instruction. Teacher leaders will be asked about their perception of the Commented [SH13]: By whom? The researcher? Be clear
about that here.
impact of standardized assessment on their teaching and student learning, their own perceived

obstacles in implementing 21st century learning, their understandings of how 21st century

instruction is supported within their school, their insights as to what could be done to better

support 21st century frameworks within a school, and their experiences with student outcomes

that derive from 21st century instruction. Interviews will last approximately one hour. Commented [SH14]: Oh, its here. Maybe include in your
first mention of interviews.
Results

It is expected that this study will yield information regarding the ways in which leaders

may manipulate structures within their schools, provide professional development and

continuing training, and develop mentoring programs and collaborative opportunities in order to

facilitate the implementation of 21st century skills in the classroom (Kay & Greenhill, 2011).

Educational leaders and teacher leaders will be able to provide specific examples as to how these
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 7

and other types of support work within their school, and may also provide insight for additional

ways in which a 21st century instructional vision may be facilitated.

Significance

Current accountability-based reform measures incur a multitude of negative

consequences for students (Au, 2007; Hursh, 2007; Cohen-Vogel & McLendon, 2009).

Educational leaders must take a stance of advocacy in order to promote practices that benefit all

students and equalize opportunities for students within schools and in their future careers

(Anderson, 2009). By advocating for a 21st century learning framework, educational leaders may

support a vision that is constructed around developing relevant skillsets that breed innovation

and opportunity for young people in a competitive, globalized world (Kay & Greenhill, 2011;

Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). .

ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 8

References

Anderson, G. (2009). Advocacy leadership: Toward a post-reform agenda in education. New Formatted: Font: Italic

York: Routledge.

Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: a qualitative metasynthesis.

Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258-267.

Cohen-Vogel, L. & McLendon, M. (2009). New approaches to understanding federal

involvement in education. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider & D.N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of

Education Policy Research (735-748). NY: Routledge.

Desmione, L. (2009). Complementary methods for policy research. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider &

D.N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research (163-175). NY: Routledge.

Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Upper Saddle

River, New Jersey: Pearson.

Hanushek, E. A. (2009). The economic value of education and cognitive skills. In G. Sykes, B.

Schneider & D.N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research (39-56). NY:

Routledge.

Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education

policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493-518.

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2011). Twenty-first century students need 21st century skills. In G. Wan

& D. Gut (Eds.), Bringing schools into the 21st century (pp. 41-65). Netherlands:

Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0268-4_3

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2012) The leaders guide to 21st century education: 7 steps for schools

and districts (pp. xiii-23). New Jersey: Pearson Resources for 21st Century Learning.
ADVOCACY LEADERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING 9

Leithwood, K.. Seashore Louis, K.. Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership

influences student learning. New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Neumerski, C. (2012). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about

principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?

Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310-347. doi: 10.1177/0013161X12456700

Popham. W.J. (2007). Instructional insensitivity of tests: Accountabilitys dire drawback. The

Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 146-155.

Resnick, D. (1981). Educational policy and the applied historian: Testing, competency and

standards. Journal of Social History, 14, 539-559.

Resnick, D. (1980). Minimum competency testing historically considered. Review of Research

in Education, 8, 3-29.

Thomas, J. & Brady, K. (2005). The Elementary Education Act at 40: Equity, accountability, and

the evolving federal role in public education. Review of Research in Education, 29, 51-

67.

Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st

century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321. doi:10.1080/00220272.2012.668938