The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm

JEA
52,4

Successful leadership in a rural,

high-poverty school: the case of
County Line Middle School

422
Received 22 April 2013
Revised 27 July 2013
22 August 2013
Accepted 30 September 2013

Hans W. Klar
Eugene T. Moore School of Education, Clemson University, Clemson,
South Carolina, USA, and

Curtis A. Brewer
Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies,
University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose In this paper, the authors present a case study of successful school leadership at County
Line Middle School. The purpose of the paper is to identify how particular leadership practices
and beliefs were adapted to increase student achievement in this rural, high-poverty school in the
southeastern USA.
Design/methodology/approach After purposefully selecting this school, the authors adapted
interview protocols, questionnaires, and analysis frameworks from the International Successful
School Principalship Project to develop a multi-perspective case study of principal leadership practices
at the school.
Findings The findings illustrate the practices which led to students at this school, previously the
lowest-performing in the district, achieving significantly higher on state standardized tests, getting
along like a family, and regularly participating in service learning activities and charity events.
A particularly interesting finding was how the principal confronted the schools negative self-image and
adapted common leadership practices to implement a school-wide reform that suited its unique context.
Research limitations/implications While the findings of the study explicate the specific ways
the principal adapted leadership strategies to enhance student learning, this study also highlights the
need to understand how principals become familiar with their communitys needs, cultures, norms,
and values, and exercise leadership in accordance with them.
Practical implications The case offers an example of the need for context-responsive leadership in
schools. In particular, it illustrates how this principal enacted leadership strategies that successfully
negotiated what Woods (2006) referred to as the changing politics of the rural. To realize this success,
the principal utilized his understanding of this low income, rural community to guide his leadership
practices. Critically, part of this understanding included the ways the community was connected to
and isolated from dominant sub-urban and urban societies, and how to build enthusiasm and capacity
through appeals to local values.
Originality/value While it is widely acknowledged that school leaders need to consider their school
and community contexts when making leadership decisions, less research has focussed on understanding
how this can be achieved. This case provides rich examples of how this was accomplished in a rural,
high-poverty middle school.
Keywords Rural areas, Educational administration, Secondary schools, School reform,
Middle school
Paper type Research paper

Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 52 No. 4, 2014
pp. 422-445
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-04-2013-0056

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Clemson University Research Grant
Committee. The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Jane Clark Lindle, Rob
Knoeppel, Marissa L. Whitehouse, Amanda Werts, Emily Green, Mike Campbell, Julie Fowler,
and Matt Della Sala.

Introduction
In the current era of high-stakes accountability, low-performing schools are under constant
pressure to raise the measured academic performance of all students. While there are
examples of perennially low-performing schools overcoming challenges, such as high
levels of poverty, to realize academic success for all students (Acker-Hocevar et al., 2012;
Chenoweth, 2007, 2009; Thompson et al., 2011), success stories like these often go untold.
Our team, like Acker-Hocevar et al. (2012), set out to tell the stories of schools that
overcame challenging circumstances to increase academic achievement for all students.
In this case study, we illustrate Principal Arthur Cummings[1] role in raising the academic
performance of students at County Line Middle School (CLMS), a rural, high-poverty
school in a state in the southeastern USA. In examining the case of CLMS, we have
focussed our attention on the contributions of Cummings, for research has consistently
shown that principal leadership can make a positive, though indirect, contribution to
student achievement (Day et al., 2011; Hallinger, 2011; Louis et al., 2010). We hasten to note,
however, that this is not a case study of a principal single-handedly raising test scores in
a test prep factory. Rather, we concur with Papa and English (2011), who noted:
Leaders who turn around low-performing or failing schools cannot do it alone and never do it
alone. School leadership is about collective actions by a multitude of players and policy
actors. Leadership is about working with and through lots of people (p. 4).

Cummings practices were successful in that he adapted proven leadership strategies to

engage people in a holistic, authentic way that allowed them to collaboratively address
the schools challenging socio-cultural and political contexts.
Our core argument through the presentation of this case is that successful
school leadership is responsive to the socio-political context of schools and their
communities. Specifically, successful leaders use cultural norms, policies, and
the communitys relationship to the wider culture to attempt to contribute to the
well-being of the students[2]. This view is consistent with Day et al. (2011), who, based on
the results of their multi-year School Leadership and Pupil Outcomes Research (IMPACT)
Project in England, and a review international research, reported that:
[y] not only is successful school leadership characterized by robust sets of qualities/practices
that travel well across a variety of jurisdictions but that these are always selected and applied
in ways that are sensitive to a consideration of personnel, organizational and policy contexts
(p. 223).

Research on educational leadership practices has identified four core practices that can
enhance student achievement (Day et al., 2011; Leithwood, 2007). Yet, in concert with Papa
and English (2011), we believe that effective school leadership is a dynamic combination
of leadership and circumstances embedded in specific contexts (p. 2). As such, in this
study we endeavored to identify the way particular leadership practices and beliefs were
adapted to increase student achievement in this rural, high-poverty middle school.
Our research was conducted as part of the 17-nation International Successful School
Principalship Project (ISSPP) (see Jacobson and Day, 2007; and www.uv.uio.no/ils/english/
research/projects/isspp/for more information on the ISSPP). Since 2001, researchers
participating in this network have conducted research from multiple perspectives to
compare the personal qualities and professional competencies which are generic to
effective headship in schools (Day, 2007, p. 8) with and between national partners.
Research conducted by ISSPP network members has shown that successful principals
in elementary and secondary schools can enhance collaboration and create processes to
infuse contextual understanding about cultural diversity, local community expectations

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
423

JEA
52,4

424

and student needs while simultaneously responding to accountability pressures (Drysdale

et al., 2009; Giles et al., 2007; Jacobson et al., 2005; Johnson, 2007; Mulford et al., 2008).
While some of the schools studied in this international project were rural schools, in
the USA, the focus has primarily been on high-poverty schools in urban contexts
(see Jacobson et al., 2005; Giles et al., 2007; Johnson, 2007; Ylimaki et al., 2012). However,
with one in five students in the USA enrolled in rural schools (Strange et al., 2012),
there also needs to be careful consideration of leadership in rural contexts.
Literature review
Effective leadership practices
Decades of research have consistently shown that principal leadership can have
a significant effect on student learning (Hallinger, 2011; Hallinger and Heck, 1996;
Marzano et al., 2005; Robinson et al., 2008). A review of this research (Day et al., 2011;
Leithwood, 2007; Louis et al., 2010) identified four core leadership practices:
setting direction, developing people, redesigning the organization, and managing the
instructional program. These core strategies and their associated practices, which we
used as a framework for understanding successful leadership, can be seen in Table I.
Yet, as Leithwood et al. (2008) noted, it is not these practices themselves, but the
manner in which leaders enact these practices in relation to their unique environments,
which determines the degree to which they influence student learning. Ylimaki and
Jacobsons (2011) recent compendium of case studies of successful leadership across
multiple US contexts illustrated how effective leaders intertwined these core practices
to support student achievement. Other research (Klar and Brewer, 2013; Klar et al.,
2013; Lindle et al., 2012), has illustrated how successful school leaders enacted these
strategies via comprehensive school reform efforts.
Leadership in context
The assertion that leadership practices must be responsive to contextual factors is not
novel. Ancient works on leadership, such as, the Art of War by Sun Tzu (1994) and the

Core categories

Practices

Setting directions

Building a shared vision

Fostering the acceptance of group goals
Creating high-performance expectations
Communicating the direction
Providing individualized support and consideration
Offering intellectual stimulation
Modeling appropriate values and practices
Building collaborative cultures
Modifying organizational structures to nurture collaboration
Building productive relations with families and communities
Connecting the school to the wider community
Staffing the instructional program
Monitoring progress of students, teachers, and the school
Providing instructional support
Aligning resources
Buffering staff from distractions to their work

Developing people
Redesigning the organization

Managing the instructional program

Table I.
Core leadership categories
Source: Adapted from Louis et al. (2010, p. 75)
and practices

Aristotelian notion of Phronesis (Noel, 1999) illustrated this practical and essential
element of leadership. In more recent research, Ylimaki and Jacobson (2011) described
how successful school principals in urban, high-poverty schools lead in concert with their
contexts. Bredeson et al. (2011) found in a study of 12 superintendents that leadership
behavior changed according to variables such as a districts size, culture and norms of
communication, as well as the financial and political realities external to the organization.
In each case, successful leadership required a dynamic, fluid response to each of these
elements, or what Bredeson et al. referred to as context-responsive leadership.
The notion of context-responsive leadership affirms the work of Hallinger (2003),
who, following a review of literature on principal effects (Hallinger and Heck, 1996),
reported it is virtually meaningless to study principal leadership without reference
to the school context (p. 346). For Hallinger, a schools context is a source of
constraints, resources, and opportunities that the principal must understand and
address in order to lead (p. 346). Hallinger reported that the variables most critical
to principals include the student background, community type, organizational
structure, school culture, teacher experience and competence, fiscal resources,
school size, and bureaucratic and labor organization (p. 346). Given the complex
environments school leaders find themselves in, it is critical that they possess both
an understanding of effective leadership strategies and the practical wisdom to
adapt these practices to their immediate contexts. In Hallingers (2011) review of
40 years of research on school leadership, he reported, effective leadership for
learning is adaptive and responsive to the changing conditions of the school over
time (p. 129). This view aligns with the notion that leadership cannot be reduced to
a simple list of practices. Rather, as Day et al. (2011) reported, it emphasizes the
idea that effective principals are able to enhance student learning through who they
are-their values, virtues, dispositions, attributes and competencies as well as what
they do in terms of the strategies they select and how they adapt their leadership
practices to their unique context (p. 229).
Leadership in rural contexts
The case study reported below offers an example of how a principal practiced
context-responsive leadership in a rural area. Therefore, we briefly review literature
in the broad field of rural studies. In doing so we are attempting to offer the reader
an entrance to the study of rurality that scholars have developed over time.
This literature adds to our analysis of Principal Cummings and his context-specific
leadership approach.
In his commentary on research in rural education, Coladarci (2007) noted that, in the
USA there is a recurring assertion that the purest definition of rural entails
a population of fewer than 2,500 people (p. 2). With a population of approximately
1,800 people, the town that CLMS is near can confidently be classified as rural.
Scholars of rural education have noted that research involving schools in rural settings
often falls into two major categories: those that intentionally seek to study inherently
rural phenomena (Coladarci, 2007, p. 3) and those that study schools coincidentally
situated in a rural setting, or what Arnold et al. (2005) refer to as, rural context only
(p. 4). As it was the intent of this study to examine successful leadership practices in
a high poverty, but not necessarily rural school, we classified CLMS as rural context
only (Arnold et al., 2005, p. 4). Notwithstanding this classification, given the importance
of context to leadership practices, in this section of the literature review we discuss the
unique challenges associated with successfully leading rural schools.

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
425

JEA
52,4

426

The rural context. In the USA, a great deal of research is currently centered on
leadership in urban schools (see, e.g. Bryk et al., 2010; Portin et al., 2009). While this
focus is warranted, less attention has been paid to leadership in rural schools. DeYoung
(1987) described scholarship on rural education as relatively underdeveloped (p. 123)
in the USA. In addition to facing similar challenges as urban school leaders, such as
attracting and retaining highly qualified teachers, and providing sufficient support for
traditionally underserved students (Venezia, 2005), principals in rural schools often
face additional challenges (Chalker, 1999; Starr and White, 2008). Some of these
challenges include high turnover, small recruitment pools and a lack of community
support or involvement (Institute for Educational Leadership, 2005).
Despite these differences, and the fact that rural schools constitute one-third of all
schools in the USA (Provasnik et al., 2007, p. III), the reform efforts that have been
undertaken in rural districts have frequently been ones that were developed for non-rural
schools. As Hurley (1999) stated, For too long rural schools have been expected to adopt
the same structures, follow the same rules, and achieve the same goals as larger, urban
and suburban schools (p. 147).
Complicating the roles of rural educators is the perception of inferiority within
many rural communities. Theobald and Wood (2010) argued that rural residents
receive these messages from the non-rural, dominant culture, and posited that these
ubiquitous messages cannot fail to influence the way rural people come to think of
themselves (p. 18). Edmondson (2003) noted that rural residents receive the message
that rural life is somehow less sophisticated and in turn less desirable than life
elsewhere (p. 4). Sherman (2009) suggested that rural residents are very familiar with
terms such as backward, uneducated, and redneck (p. 4) and argued that such
descriptors serve to reinforce separation (p. 4) between them and urban dwellers.
In addition to feelings of inferiority, Edmondson noted that poverty and racism are
endemic to life in rural communities.
Schafft and Jackson (2010) stated that standardized reforms such as the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB) (2002) privilege standardized curricula and high-stakes
accountability for test scores over accountability to the contexts of local people
and places (p. 2). In their case study of three rural districts in upstate NY, Schafft
et al. (2010) reported that NCLB had the strongest effects on the most resource-poor
schools (p. 109). Jimerson (2005) claimed that the major tenets of NCLB disadvantage
students in small and rural schools. This bias, which she referred to as placism can
be seen in accountability provisions and sanctions. Jimerson (2005) suggested these
problems were the result of ignoring, or distorting, the realities of rural schooling
(p. 211). A study that examined the leadership challenges faced by principals of rural
Australian schools (Starr and White, 2008) illustrated that this problem is not unique to
the USA. Starr and White (2008) stated, The principals in this study highlight how
one-size-fits-all education policy and practices often disadvantage them, while there is also
a general lack of policy or provision that relates specifically to small rural schools (p. 10).
Research on rural school leadership is also supported by the more general research
on rural governance that highlights rural communities experiences of change over the
past 30 years. Since the 1980s, there has been a gradual shift in the politics of rural
communities away from the traditional concerns of agriculture and local community to
a question of development and connection to metropolitan regions (Mormon, 1983).
Woods (2006) asserted this has been a shift from rural politics to the politics of the
rural (p. 580). From this perspective, the social agenda of those who live in rural areas
no longer takes center stage; instead there is a contest over the very purpose of the

rural area. That is, everything from the purpose of the land (farming, landfills
for urban waste, and protection of hunting space) to the development of rural
infrastructure (roads, power grids, and social structures such as schools) has become
part of the wider discussion in state and national politics (Woods, 2006). It is through
these politics that educational leaders must govern schools in concert with others
from their communities.
Leading change in rural schools. Leading change in schools has been a subject of
research since the early twentieth century (Tyack and Cuban, 1995). Much of this research
has pointed to the need to ensure that change is comprehensive in scope. As Desimone
(2002) argued, in order to bring about change, school reforms must fundamentally
change not only the structure and organization of schools but the curriculum and delivery
of instruction (p. 434). In addition to these changes, for a reform to be sustained, it must
become institutionalized, or become a taken-for-granted feature of life in a school
(Datnow, 2005, p. 123). In her study of school-wide reforms institutionalized in 13 schools,
Datnow emphasized the importance of school leaders understanding local, district, and
state-level contexts in order to sustain these reforms.
Research on leading change in rural schools also emphasizes the need for school
leaders to be familiar with their school communities, and act in accordance with
them. Semke and Sheridan (2011) noted that, It is becoming increasingly evident
that context is a significant factor in understanding academic achievement, and the
setting in which a child, family, and school is situated is among the salient contexts
influencing performance (p. 3). According to Hurley (1999), school leaders in rural
areas learn to embrace more context-specific tactics in order to successfully
enact school change, as rural schools are extensions, or even centers, of diverse
communities (p. 141). Budge (2006) reported that a more complete understanding
of a communitys values requires a willingness to be highly visible, accessible,
and approachable, as well as to reach out to members of the community to provide
rationale for district action (p. 7). Masumoto and Brown-Welty (2009) suggested that
formal and informal interactions with the community help to create useful collaborative
bonds that assist in accomplishing the schools mission.
As mentioned above, the politics of the rural engender a sense of relocation as the
purpose of the place is redefined. Thus, community building itself takes on a special
importance as a political project. Theobald (1997) acknowledged that addressing the
challenges such as those posed by negative stereotypes of rural communities is
a process that can take many years. However, he also noted that it can be done when
teachers, administrators, and community members work together. Theobald (1997)
considered the revitalization of rural communities through curricular and pedagogical
work in schools [y] a moral endeavor (p. 121).
In this literature review, we have illustrated that though school leaders can
theoretically play a significant role in supporting student achievement through core
leadership practices and comprehensive school reform, their approaches must be
enacted in concert with their schools unique contexts. We have also suggested that,
rural school communities are currently undergoing shifts as a result of changes in the
wider economic, cultural, educational, and political realms. The school principal is
a key player in repurposing these changes and mitigating their effects so the interests
of the community are represented in their public schools. Therefore, if we are to
understand the contribution school leadership can make to positive school change in
rural communities, we must look at the nuances of how a school leader can enact
leadership strategies while remaining context-responsive.

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
427

JEA
52,4

428

Methods
Site selection
We chose to study CLMS following a multi-step selection process. This process was
both in accord with the ISSPP research design (Day, 2007), and our interest in studying
successful leadership in high-poverty schools in a state located in the southeastern
USA. To begin the process, we used data available on the states department of
education web site to identify all 103 public, non-charter middle schools from 47 school
districts in one region of the state. Using these schools Absolute Indices[3] as an
outcome variable, we conducted a multiple linear regression to identify schools that
performed better than expected given their levels of poverty and other school-related
factors. We entered the predictor variables for this analysis in three steps. These variables
included the Poverty Index, school enrollment, percentage of prior adequate yearly
progress (AYP) objectives met, percentage of students with disabilities other than speech,
and nine indicators of parent, teacher, and student satisfaction with the learning
environment, social and physical environment and school/home relations. The model that
included all of these variables was statistically significant, explaining about 90 percent of
the variance in schools absolute indices (R2 0.896, F 64.04, po0.05). We next sorted
schools with the highest positive residual scores to those with the highest negative
residual scores, which essentially provided a ranking of schools from those that
performed better-than-expected to those that performed worse-than-expected. Next,
we limited our selection to schools that had a Poverty Index of 80 percent or more.
From this pool of schools, we further narrowed our selection by only examining schools
where the current principal had served for at least three years, and there had been an
increase in the Absolute Index during the principals tenure. We also examined other
publicly available data such as school report cards and lists of state and national award
winners. After three potential schools were identified, we interviewed relevant district
officials to discuss their perspectives of each principals contribution to the increased
academic achievement at their school. Following this lengthy selection process, we chose
to study CLMS and its principal, Dr Arthur Cummings as his case provided the most
illustrative opportunity to examine how leadership was enacted in context.
CLMS. CLMS was located at the center of its large attendance area, through which
students travelled up to 20 miles from all directions to attend school. Commercial
farms, modest houses, and mobile homes surrounded CLMS. The Poverty Index of
CLMSs attendance area was 82 percent.
Approximately 400 sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade students attended CLMS. Of
these students, 65 percent were white, 30 percent were African-American, and 5 percent
were Hispanic. Totally, 11 percent of students had disabilities other than speech. To create
the school, sixth-grade classes from each of the surrounding elementary schools, and
seventh- and eighth-grade classes from the neighboring high school were amalgamated.
In 2009-2010, the most recent year for which data were available, CLMSs ratings were
the highest among demographically similar schools. In recognition of CLMSs increased
academic achievement, it had also won numerous state awards for academic achievement
and closing the achievement gap. According to the most recent state report card (2010),
the average achievement gap between white and African American students was
approximately 10 percentage points. This contrasted with the achievement gap at the
district and state levels, where there was a difference of between 15 and 20 percentage
points. In addition to a higher rating on the states academic achievement index, CLMS
had met 19 of 21 AYP objectives for the last two years. This was an increase from
achieving only 13 of 21 objectives in 2008.

As can be seen in Table II, during the seven years the principal had been at CLMS,
both the Academic Index and the Growth Index had increased. The Growth Index is
a measure of student growth over the previous year, and is reported using the same
ratings as the Absolute Index. As reflected in this table, though academic achievement
improved during the principals tenure, it took several years, and remained modest.
Nevertheless, this increase in achievement was affirmed by one teacher, who noted,
[it] took several years to make the changes in staff and teacher attitudes and to set up
new programs (survey respondent 9). While growth in academic achievement at
CLMS alone was impressive, it had also received the Red Carpet award several times in
recognition of its family-friendly atmosphere.
Principal Cummings. Arthur Cummings, a white male in his 50s, was in his seventh
year as principal at CLMS at the time this study was conducted. Prior to arriving at the
school, he had been principal at another middle school for three years and an assistant
principal and a teacher before that. Though Cummings was not from the area in which
CLMS was located, he grew up in a community described as being similar to the one
surrounding the school.

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
429

Data collection
Our research team visited CLMS for two full days to conduct interviews, collect data,
and observe normal school activities. We conducted semi-structured interviews of
between 20 and 60 minutes in length with the principal, other administrators, teachers,
staff, and parents. The teachers who were interviewed were arranged by the principal
on the basis that they were familiar with his work at the school, and, wherever
possible, had been at the school prior to his arrival. A specific breakdown of the
interview participants and their roles can be seen in Table III.
Years principal at CLMS
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.

School year

Absolute index

Growth index

2009-2010
2008-2009
2007-2008
2006-2007
2005-2006
2004-2005
2003-2004

Average
Average
Below average
Below average
Below average
Below average
Below average

Good
Average
Below average
At-risk
Average
Below average
Below average

Notes: School report cards provided by the State Department of Education. Both indices are reported
using the following rating scale: at-risk, below average, average, above average, good, and excellent

Interview number

Participant role

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Principal
Assistant principal
Two 8th grade teachers
Two 7th grade teachers
Two 6th grade teachers
SIC chair/instructional coach
Two parents
Principal

Table II.
CLMS ratings 2003-2010

Length in minutes
60
45
30
25
25
30
20
20

Table III.
CLMS interview
participants

JEA
52,4

430

We interviewed the participants using semi-structured interview protocols adapted

from ISSPP protocols to gather information related to the participants perceptions of
the schools challenges, the strategies that had helped address those challenges, and the
degree to which the schools success could be attributed to the principal. The protocols
were developed and validated by ISSPP researchers and have been used in the
development of numerous case studies of effective school leadership in the countries
where ISSPP researchers are located.
We recorded all interviews and transcribed them in their entirety. We also collected
documents related to school activities, such as school report data, and professional
development and school improvement initiatives. We took field notes of activities
observed during the two days, and members of the research team met at the completion
of the visit to compare field notes.
Following our visit, we sent an online survey to the entire teaching staff to allow for
a broader representation of responses than the eight teachers who were interviewed.
All 27 CLMS teachers completed the entire survey. The survey was also developed and
validated by a panel of ISSPP researchers. It has been piloted by two other US-based
research teams, and used in the development of several case studies of effective school
leadership in the USA. The survey included both open-ended questions and Likert-scale
items designed to assess teachers perceptions of the following:
.

the current level of academic achievement;

the amount of change in academic achievement in the previous five years;

the instructional practices in the school, and the extent to which the principal
contributed to the practices;

issues related to school capacity and the principals role in building that
capacity;

the degree to which the principal felt accountable to various stakeholders;

the challenges that existed in the school, and how the principal worked to resolve
them; and

the degree to which students were supported by the broader learning environment.

Using SPSS Version 21, we conducted a reliability analysis of all survey responses.
The result was a Cronbachs a of 0.986, indicating a high level of internal consistency.
This result corresponds with the 0.95 that Bennett et al. (2013) found when administering
the survey to a similar sample of 27 teachers in Arizona.
Data analysis
In order to develop our case study of Cummings and CLMS, we qualitatively analyzed
the data collected before, during, and after our site visits (Corbin and Strauss, 2008).
Interview transcripts, field notes, and documents were analyzed both inductively and
deductively (Patton, 1990) using NVivo 9. Coding was initially done individually using
the core leadership practices as a conceptual framework, while remaining open to other
themes emerging. Following our first cycle of data analysis, a common codebook was
created and a second cycle of coding was performed as a group (Saldana, 2009).
Through an iterative process, we developed and refined our coding scheme as we
attempted to ascertain the story behind the change at CLMS (Ryan and Bernard, 2000).
Information collected from the interviews served as the primary source of data for this

study, while information collected from the online survey and other sources was used
to corroborate the findings. The themes that arose from our analysis made it evident
that we should present our findings via an instrumental case study in order to provide
insight into a specific subject of interest (Stake, 1995).
Given that the result of our work is an instrumental case study, and our focus was
on how the principal adapted his leadership practices to the specific challenges of his
given time and place, we do not consider this research to be generalizable in
a statistical sense. However, in the research tradition of the case study, we feel it offers
important lessons for leaders of schools similar to CLMS. Further, we anticipate that
the findings of this study will serve as a starting point for the development of further
research on context-responsive leadership in rural schools.
Findings
In the following case study, we provide a brief discussion of the challenges that
Cummings faced when he began his tenure at the school. We then describe how he
enacted the four core leadership strategies in concert with CLMS unique context, as
well as how he personally connected to the school community.
Challenges
Upon arriving at CLMS, Cummings was faced with a number of challenges, including
low-academic achievement, limited fiscal resources, geographic isolation, and accountability
demands. A seventh-grade teacher noted that when Cummings arrived at CLMS it was
the laughing stock of the district, always scoring much lower than the other middle
schools on state tests. Soon after Cummings first arrived at CLMS he attended
a district-level meeting where he learned first hand how poorly his school fared
compared to other middle schools in the district. He reported:
When I came here, I went to a district meeting. I went into a little conference room. It had four
middle school principals in there, and they had a PowerPoint flipped up there, and they were
showing the ELA scores for the last year. [School name], number one. [School name], number
two. [School name], number three. County Line, number four. And they also had the percent of
your students who passed, and it was an unreal difference between third and fourth. It was
like twenty-something percentage points. And then we looked at math and science and social
studies. Im not talking about just being last. Im talking about a huge difference.

This meeting was a poignant moment in the history of CLMS. As illustrated in the
following sections, Cummings used his schools poor academic performance relative to
other middle schools in the district to motivate teachers and students to realize higher
levels of academic achievement for all students, in a sense taking the ubiquitous
messages of inferiority and turning them around (Theobald and Wood, 2010, p. 18).
Of course his reframing did not immediately change the minds of the students.
Cummings reported a conversation he had with a student in the lead up to state testing:
I said, Were going to beat those city schools. And this boy said, We cant beat them. I said,
What do you mean we cant beat them? He said, Dont you know, were dumb kids? Were the
dumb school. I said, Youre not dumb. So I had to overcome their belief that they couldnt do it.

Cummings went on to explain that some teachers also felt students could not achieve
academically and how he tried to overcome this attitude:
Some of the teachers didnt believe that they could actually achieve. And so we had to
overcome that. And thats when we started doing lots of incentives, lots of rewards, and lots of
praising students to get to that point.

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
431

JEA
52,4

432

Cummings also had to contend with a dour economic situation that resulted in financial
cutbacks. District and statewide fiscal constraints resulted in cuts in funding
for conference attendance, professional development, and substitute teachers. In each
of the previous two years, teachers had been furloughed for five days. As one of the
sixth-grade teachers noted, that kind of wipes out any professional development.
County Lines remote location was another challenge to the school. One aspect of
this remoteness was the lack of a community center around which students and
families in the attendance area could coalesce. As a seventh-grade teacher said, In our
community we are really spread out. There is no little town that people cling to.
This lack of community was something that Cummings tried to address in his time at
the school as evidenced by the second seventh-grade teacher who reported, You know,
these kids come together [from all directions to] this little spot out in [our state],
so there is no community feeling here, you know. So hes kind of tried to make that with
the school.
Another aspect of the schools remote location that challenged Cummings was
being able to attract high-quality teachers. When CLMS was being staffed in its first
year, local principals were asked to recommend teachers to send to the school.
According to one participant, this resulted in principals sending their worst
teachers. In his first interview, Cummings noted how this process gave the school
a poor start. He stated, There were lots of teachers who didnt like kids. Some of
them were incompetent teachers.
Despite these local challenges, Cummings, like all principals, was pressed to meet
state and federal accountability policies. Cummings acknowledged the challenges of
meeting the demands stemming from these policies and described doing so as being
similar to chasing a moving train. He also said, Its killing us, you know. I feel like
just when were about to catch the caboose, they speed it up.
Setting direction
To set a positive direction for CLMS, Cummings built a shared vision, communicated
a new direction, and held both teachers and students to high-performance expectations.
Cummings vision grew from a combination of his own desires for the students and
the communitys desire to have a school they could be proud of. After returning from the
district meeting where he learned of the large discrepancy between academic achievement
at CLMS and other middle schools in the county, Cummings addressed his faculty.
He described the meeting this way:
So I came back to my faculty, and I got them in there, and I said, Let me tell you something.
I sat through an embarrassing meeting. I said, Im not sitting through that next year. I said,
Weve got this test coming up at the end of this year, and were going to do something. Were
not going to be last on everything.

Following this meeting, Cummings began to set the new direction by engendering
a family atmosphere at the school, recognizing both students and teachers for various
achievements, and raising expectations.
Two themes addressed in many interviews with Cummings and the teachers were
that the school lacked a symbolic community center, and many students did not come
from supportive backgrounds. As such, there was an effort on the part of Cummings
and the staff to provide familiar support and a community feel for students at the
school. An eighth-grade teacher noted that the schools theme for the 2012-2013 school
year was in fact family. This teacher explained, I think these kids feel like no matter

whats going on at home, this is my family. And we just try to build them up. Cummings
later acknowledged that creating a family environment was part of his vision for
the school.
Another key strategy Cummings employed to set a new direction at CLMS was
recognizing students and teachers. A sixth-grade teacher said, From birthday books
to Pride in the Principal to County Lines Finest they are awarded at all angles, and
thats something I think the kids really enjoy. County Lines Finest was an award for
students who received As, Bs, and Cs on their quarterly report cards. Students
receiving this award got a prize at the school store. The assistant principal explained
that, while most schools only reward students who receive As and Bs, at CLMS they
want to let students know that As Bs and Cs are okay, that Were getting where we
need to be. The Pride of the Principal award is given to students nominated by their
class teachers. Students receive a certificate and have their picture taken with
Cummings. In this way, students are rewarded for academic success as well as other
achievements. A sixth-grade teacher reported, He recognizes kids over and over and
over again. And comes up with ways to do that. An eighth-grade teacher explained
how she saw the recognition of students as both signifying the school vision and
creating the family feeling. She emphasized that this is how he communicates what is
important, and creates the family feel thats missing for some students. Her fellow
eighth-grade teacher said:
If any kid wins a writing award [y] theyre recognized. Teachers are recognized. You know,
anybody thats done anything. Its that community feel, you know.

The instructional coach noted that Cummings used the awards as an opportunity to
reward students for a variety of activities and tried to ensure a socio-economic and
racial balance among students who received awards. She reported:
He worries about if all of the well-to-do kids are receiving all the awards. He never fudges the
numbers, but if anything is subjective, hes like, Is there an African American kid that you
could see in that same spot? I know this kid pops to your mind, but all these children are
white. And then the teachers are like, Oh my gosh! They are! Really? He really keeps that
in check, and I think its a good thing.

Thus, the development of community and a clear direction was purposefully created in
two ways. First, students enjoyed positive interactions with adults at school. Second,
this praise became a public event in which parents, grandparents, and other
community members were encouraged to participate. In addition to rewarding
students, Cummings devised ways to reward teachers. This was done in part through
the monthly Golden Apple award and the Teacher of the Year award.
As well as using student and faculty awards to communicate what was important,
Cummings used daily e-mails and other time together with students and staff to
communicate his expectations. On Monday mornings he shared The Week at a Glance,
providing an overview for the week and highlighting important events. The sixth-grade
teachers reported that all teachers received a daily e-mail in which, the very last sentence
is bell to bell. As the school did not actually have a bell schedule, teachers noted
this was Cummings way of reminding them to make the most of each class period.
As a sixth-grade teacher explained, Bell to bell is his little way of saying from the time
you shut your door to the end of class, you should be engaged. You know, your kids
should be engaged.
Teachers were aware of Cummings high expectations, but also acknowledged that
he supported them in achieving these expectations. A teacher said, He really pushes

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
433

JEA
52,4

434

the test scores [y] but he tries to do it in a positive light. Another teacher reported,
I have been here ever since he has been here and the reading has always been a big
push. When asked how Cummings promoted success in reading, the teacher replied,
He just really encourages, you know, he wants us to be cross-curriculum. He thinks
thats beneficial [y] and he just really says, try to plan with your group, the whole
unity and team thing.
The notions of family and community pride clearly played an important role in
Cummings vision for CLMS. Although, like all principals, Cummings was accountable
for student achievement on state standardized tests, he used the accountability system
to highlight local values, such as family and hard work to create a shared vision for the
school and the value of education. One survey respondent reported:
Dr Cummings has fought hard to [y] make both students and parents realize that true
success in life can be achieved through education. That students can be more than the poor
circumstances that may surround them. Dr. Cummings has challenged all of his staff to not
accept the culture of apathy. We continually push our students to do better, not to accept
alright. [y] This is a constant struggle for us as teachers and for our students to grasp and
understand. But it is a fight we are unwilling to give up on.

Developing people
To develop people Cummings modeled values and practices that resonated with the
school community and provided intellectual stimulation through professional
development. However, he made this context specific by attaching status to the
work of becoming a great teacher. That is, he reframed the teaching job as one with
a high degree of moral capital (Sherman, 2009, p. 68). He also offered individual
support and consideration for teachers, reminding them of their importance in
the community.
One way Cummings displayed appropriate values and practices was by motivating
students to do their best. One eighth-grade teacher noted that Cummings often
encouraged students in both verbal and non-verbal ways:
He encourages them in so many nonverbal ways. He goes out and has recess duty [y] and he
just promotes you can do it if you put your mind to it. And he likes to give them things and
encourage them verbally.

Cummings encouraged his teachers to collaborate and share instructional practices.

He fostered this practice by having teachers observe each other and share the things
they learned during the observations at staff meetings. He also encouraged teachers to
share with teachers at other schools by presenting at conferences and the districts
instructional fair. An eighth-grade teacher reported:
He encourages us to present [at the district instructional fair] to share what were doing with
other schools. A lot of principals are like Dont tell them. We want to keep that our secret,
you know. But hes very open to sharing.

In addition, Cummings values and work ethic were things members of the school
community felt were important factors in their schools success. The instructional
coach said, Hes here early. He stays late. You can ride by parents ride by going to
town and from town and see his car here. And thats very important to people in this
community, is work ethic. These quotes suggest that Cummings was tapping into the
local social capital structure much like the one described by Sherman (2009) in her case
study of poverty and morality in the USA.

Cummings offered intellectual stimulation to teachers by providing professional

development related to teaching literacy himself, rather than paying to have
speakers come to the school (again showing his willingness to work). Other ways
Cummings supported teachers professional learning was through peer observations
and book studies.
As mentioned above, Cummings also provided individual support and consideration
as a way to develop people. An eighth-grade teacher explained that Cummings worked
closely with teachers throughout the school year. She explained:
He meets with us to say What are you doing in your classroom? What do you think you
should do, based on these scores, based on their achievement so far with you?

A seventh-grade teacher echoed this sentiment noting that he tried to help people out
that were struggling. Cummings balanced his high expectations for instruction with
a concern for individuals. An eighth-grade teacher reported:
And then anything thats going on in our lives, he recognizes. You know, someones having
surgery, someones family member just passed away, someones had a great day. [y]
And that creates a closer bond with all of us and makes us more likely to work together. Now,
were a small school, and its easier for us to do that, but it builds that again, that community
sense, that family feel.

Redesigning the organization

Another core strategy employed by Cummings was redesigning the organization.
Specifically, he restructured the organization to support collaboration and the building
of collaborative cultures. He also connected the school to the wider community and
built relationships with families. Cummings built collaborative cultures through
a range of strategies, including building teams, providing time for people to work
together, encouraging sharing, and publically acknowledging people for their efforts.
These particular approaches were both made easier by and conducive to the structure
of middle schools in the USA, where students within grade levels are often organized into
teams and have the same group of teachers for all core subjects. This formation is
intended to provide a supportive environment for students while providing teachers the
opportunity to collectively address the needs of the students in their teams.
A particular aspect of the collaborative culture that emerged at CLMS was the
family or community feel intentionally fostered by Cummings. One eighth-grade
teacher talked about the community feeling among teachers. She stated:
We get together, and we feed off what these children need, and we pride ourselves on being
reactive to what they need more so than just what the State Department says we need to do at
that time.

Cummings created teacher teams and provided time to meet during the regular
school day that may have contributed to this feeling. An eighth-grade teacher noted,
We meet every Tuesday during our planning time, and more during the week if we
need to. The opportunity to observe their peers teaching was another way that
teachers formed collaborative relationships. The other eighth-grade teacher reported
that the conversations teachers had after observing each others lessons fostered
continuing dialogues.
As pointed to above, Cummings was able to increase parental involvement in school
activities and to make parents feel comfortable talking with him about their childrens
progress at school. One open-ended survey question asked teachers to describe CLMSs

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
435

JEA
52,4

436

challenges and Cummings response to them. Several teachers indicated that a lack of
parental involvement in their childs education was one of the most significant
obstacles. Survey respondent number eight reported that Cummings addressed these
challenges by making sure that, opportunities are available for parents to see first
hand what their child is doing in school. Other strategies described in this teachers
response included: first, holding school functions at times convenient for most parents;
second, notifying parents of school activities well in advance; and third, encouraging
teachers to notify parents about student progress on a regular basis. Survey respondent
20 noted that Cummings used band and chorus events to get parents involved in school
activities. This teacher also noted that Cummings provided dinner before PTA meetings,
and held an open house before family reading nights to attract more parents to school
functions. When the instructional coach was asked how the school responded to the
challenge of parental apathy, she replied, by reaching out. She elaborated that a specific
strategy was to encourage families to come to the summer reading celebration and the
family reading nights. She remembered:
You know, theyll sign up and theyll bring Grandma, and theyll bring all the little brothers
and sisters. But thats such a good thing because Grandma goes out into the community and
says, Boy, we had the nicest time at County Line Middle School the other day. And thats
really good PR for us, and making parents feel comfortable about coming in the building.

Another teacher (number 23) reported that, Our principal actively encourages
community members to get involved in the school and its activities at every chance.
Many parents attend the Monday morning awards ceremonies and the annual family
night. Totally, 97 percent of parents also attended parent-teacher conferences. All of these
changes had been implemented as part of the schools comprehensive focus on literacy.
In addition to parents and families, Cummings also reached out to community
organizations to get funding and support for the school. These organizations, which often
had connections to parents of CLMS students, included local charities and companies,
one of which provided CLMS with funding to support their summer reading program for
the previous five years.
Managing the instructional program
In order to manage the instructional program Cummings first aligned resources to the
literacy goals. He also monitored school activities, provided instructional support, and
encouraged innovation. The community in general suffered from a lack of wealth so his
management of school funds needed to resonate with the local value of stewardship.
Under Cummings leadership, classrooms at CLMS were equipped with clickers and
smart boards, and there were laptop computers available for classes to use. However,
a criterion for determining whether these items were needed was how well they aligned
to the state standards. One seventh-grade teacher reported, We dont have a lot of money,
but he gets us materials if we really need them. The instructional coach echoed this
sentiment noting He doesnt hoard our money, but hes very careful. She complimented
his stewardship, explaining that he did a fantastic job of spending our money to get the
biggest bang for our buck academically.
One aspect frequently reported by school staff was that Cummings continually
monitored school activities. Describing him as always in the hallways, an eighth-grade
teacher reported, Hes very accessible to us and to the students, and that makes a big
difference. In addition to being visible in the corridor, Cummings also regularly visited
classrooms. Cummings, the assistant principal, and the instructional coach also regularly

reviewed lesson plans and formally visited classes. An eighth-grade teacher described the
type of feedback teachers received after classroom visits. She stated, they make positive
comments on things theyd like to see more of. Or if were trying something new, theyll
say, Let me know how that goes. Id be interested to hear that. This teacher also
reported that Cummings frequently asked, Where do you want the children to be at the
end of this activity?
A number of CLMS staff lamented the fact that their success was judged by
students results on state tests. As a result of this pressure, the instructional coach
described Cummings as very test score conscious, and that he meets with the
teachers and they have to review their test scores. Cummings acknowledged that of all
the responsibilities he shared with other staff, analyzing test data was the last one he
would relinquish.
In addition to providing staff with professional development and support himself,
Cummings also provided instructional support through a system of peer observations.
An eighth-grade teacher reported that peer observations were a good way to learn
from peers in other subject areas, or with particular strengths, such as using technology
in the classroom. The other eighth-grade teacher reported that Cummings tried to
help them improve their instruction in any way he could. She noted, Hes always very
How can I help you? What do you need form me? I might not be able to provide supplies
for your class, but what can I do to help you? How can you help one another?
As previously noted, inheriting some poor quality teachers was one of the many
challenges Cummings encountered upon arriving at CLMS. Though Cummings did not
like to describe removing poor quality teachers as an effective strategy, he said that
ultimately, Im looking out for the students. As such, staffing the program with effective
teachers was another of his key strategies related to managing the instructional program.
Cummings noted that the collapse of the economy had actually been a benefit for him as
he was able to get some people from up north that couldnt find jobs up there [y].
And its worked. Ive got some really good people. Faced with the threat of losing some of
those teachers due to budget cuts, Cummings worked hard to advocate for his staff at
a school board meeting, as he described in his second interview:
I went before the board and I said, Listen, all of our teachers are outstanding teachers here
and Im proud of them, but theres three who have gone their scores are through the roof and
I cant afford to lose them. So whatever yall decide tonight on this budget, please leave the
teachers alone.

To emphasize how important these teachers were to his school, Cummings created
a certificate called Exemplary Teachers of CLMS and presented it to them before the
board. Though Cummings was unsure of the degree to which he influenced the boards
decision, all staff received a reduction in pay in lieu of any teachers losing their jobs.
Despite Cummings insistence that teachers taught to the state standards,
a seventh-grade teacher pointed out that, He lets you kind of do it your way, as long as its
successful [y]. And so hes real good about letting you sing the way you sing, you know.
An eighth-grade teacher explained that not only are teachers encouraged to try new
things, but to share their innovations with their colleagues. In this way he encouraged
instruction that resonated with students and their experiences in a rural location.
Connecting to the local community
In addition to enacting the four core leadership practices in concert with the CLMS
context, Cummings ability to connect to the community appeared to strongly influence

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
437

JEA
52,4

438

his ability to lead meaningful change at the school. Several interview participants noted
that Cummings was from a community similar to the one surrounding CLMS, and that he
regularly shared his experiences growing up there. The instructional coach said:
I think he was probably raised in a community thats a lot like ours. He has a great
understanding of the kind of students that we work with, the kind of families that we work with.
I think thats been a huge factor in our success.

Cummings himself felt his story was an important influence on his leadership practices
and shared it during our first interview:
I grew up poor, and I feel like I can relate to poor students economically. When I grew up,
I would go to church activities and so forth, and I would notice some of my friends when they
would go home from church, they went home to a lot better house than we had. And I was like
well, how come that is? Because my dad worked hard, my mom worked hard, but we didnt
have anything close to what my friends had. And then I started trying to figure it out as a kid.
And it finally hit me, it was education. Their parents had a college education or even high
school. My dad had a seventh-grade education. And so I realized early on, I said you know
what? If I want to have the things that other people have, Ive got to get an education. Thats
the key.

During our visits, members of the school community regularly described Cummings
ability to relate to the students and connect to the wider community as important
factors in the schools success. The instructional coach noted, Hes very diplomatic,
but he also has that country boy mentality from where he came, and I think it works
really well here at this school.
A theme that was repeated in a number of interviews was that Cummings was
personable, yet serious and committed to the students. A seventh-grade teacher noted,
hes such a good guy and he really cares about the kids. The instructional coach said,
I think it shines through because he really does care about the parents and the kids.
People also described Cummings as conservative. A seventh-grade teacher described
how he was reserved in formal settings, yet enjoyed interacting with students in less
formal settings. She reported, Hes really kind of conservative when hes in front of the
kids, but hell get out there and play intramurals with them and stuff like that and they
just love that.
Discussion and conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify how particular leadership practices and beliefs
were adapted to increase student achievement in a rural, high-poverty middle school.
The core leadership practices (Louis et al., 2010) provided a useful framework for
examining Cummings leadership practices at CLMS. Cummings addressed the many
school and community challenges he encountered at CLMS through direction setting,
developing people, redesigning of the organization, and managing the instructional
program. However, as Leithwood et al. (2008) noted, it was not the practices themselves,
but the manner in which Cummings applied these practices in concert with his unique
environment, which determined the degree to which he was able to influence student
learning. Indeed, the practical wisdom Cummings demonstrated by employing the core
strategies in concert with his unique context suggested that simply knowing what the
core strategies were was a necessary, but insufficient precondition to school improvement.
Rather, our findings indicate that it was Cummings understanding of how to lead in
concert with his local context that determined the success of his leadership efforts.
Our findings showed that effective school leadership in this case proved to indeed be

a dynamic combination of leadership and circumstances embedded in specific contexts

(Papa and English, 2011, p. 2). In particular, as Datnow (2005) discovered in her study of
successful school reforms, Cummings understood how local, district, and state-level
contexts affected his school and responded in ways that were both place-conscious
(Gruenewald, 2003, p. 620) and context-responsive (Bredeson et al., 2011).
Cummings efforts to set a positive direction at CLMS required directly confronting
the inferiority complex most poignantly encapsulated by the student who innocently
asked, Dont you know [y] were the dumb school? Though this perception is not
uncommon in rural communities (Edmondson, 2003; Sherman, 2009; Theobald and
Wood, 2010), mitigating this belief required setting high expectations, and holding
students and staff accountable for reaching new goals. It also led to Cummings
symbolically recognizing progression toward this new direction, by rewarding students
for demonstrations of good character and academic achievement, even if they were only
getting where [they needed] to be.
In his attempts to support the development of others at CLMS, Cummings
demonstrated the moral imperative (Theobald, 1997, p. 122), hard work, and commitment
required to raise students, teachers, and community members expectations. His personal
and professional support of individual teachers and prominent visibility reinforced his
commitment, and resonated with the values of this particular community. In addition,
our case suggests that by asking all members of the community to engage in the work of
educating children, Cummings made the moral capital available to more members of the
community. As one survey respondent noted, there are parents who are not sure how to
go about helping their students. Cummings was able to address both the issues of apathy
toward education, and a lack of understanding about how to assist their children in
school, by encouraging families to become involved in activities at the school, such as
open-houses, concerts, and award nights. Once at these events, parents, like the students,
became engaged in the schools activities, and learned how they could support their
children at home in ways they had not envisioned before. The school thus became a place
where family help and moral capital could be acquired (Sherman, 2009, p. 27)
As Schafft and Jackson (2010) found in their research in rural school districts, the
demands of NCLB clearly affected life at CLMS. However, Cummings did not merely
encourage teachers to focus on better test preparation. Rather, he worked with faculty and
parents in ways that met students individual needs. In addition, he attempted to enrich the
curriculum and provide stronger connections to the community through extra-curricular
activities like outdoor clubs, service learning, and charity events, and by encouraging
teachers to teach the state-standardized curriculum in ways they thought best met
the needs of their students. This allowed for a more place-conscious (Gruenewald, 2003,
p. 620), and, arguably, more engaging curriculum for students at CLMS.
Teachers and staff at CLMS described feeling like a family and having a sense of
pride at being able to respond to the individual needs of the students. These feelings
were attributed in part to Cummings creating opportunities for teachers to collaborate
and share instructional strategies for supporting students. Cummings and the teachers
created opportunities for the CLMS parents to get involved in school activities in ways
they felt comfortable doing so. By having teachers working more collectively inside the
school, and increasing interactions with parents and others outside the school,
Cummings was able to engender collaborative bonds that resulted in more focussed
attention on academic achievement (Masumoto and Brown-Welty, 2009). Though there
was little evidence of parents being empowered to the point of having a large influence
on decision making related to school activities, there was evidence of an increase in the

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
439

JEA
52,4

440

social and moral capital of parents in that they more actively participated in school
activities and more ably supported learning at home.
Cummings and his community confronted the changing politics of the rural while
opening multiple routes to success and the meeting the accountability demands
associated with NCLB. In responding to this challenge, Cummings initiated a schoolwide reform effort suited to the communitys needs, interests, and values. Cummings
contribution was that he utilized his understanding of low income, rural communities
to guide his leadership practices in the schools he served. Numerous interview
participants described how Cummings used his skills and experiences to relate to and
motivate students and staff at CLMS. As a result of his efforts, he was able to engage
school and community members to address the state and federal accountability
measures in a way that was meaningful to the community.
Cummings ability to relate to the CLMS community does not suggest that
a principal needs to be from the same or a similar community in order to be successful.
However, it does emphasize the importance of understanding a communitys needs,
culture, norms, and values, and exercising leadership in accordance with them.
Our findings also suggest that successful rural school principals can use an understanding
of their school communities and the ways they are connected to and isolated from
dominant sub-urban and urban societies to build enthusiasm and capacity through
appeals to local values. In doing so, they may be able to reframe the external pressures,
such as state and federal accountability measures, and address the evolving politics of the
rural to maintain a sense of local autonomy.
Our findings also have implications for principal preparation programs. The results
of this study indicate that principals should not only be introduced to research-based
leadership strategies, but that they also need to develop the ability to enact them
in concert within unique school and community contexts. In terms of leading change in
rural schools, aspiring principals need to learn to recognize the unique challenges
encountered in leading such schools. In particular, they need to understand the
notion of placism ( Jimerson, 2005) as it applies to rural communities. For many
rural school leaders this may mean being equipped with strategies to address the
often-pervasive belief that rural communities and their residents are inferior to their
sub-urban and urban cousins (Edmondson, 2003; Sherman, 2009; Theobald and Wood,
2010). Such strategies may need to be focussed on developing and communicating
a vision that is counter to what stakeholders and in the school and community imagine
being possible.
In addition, aspiring rural school principals need to understand and be prepared
to address the negative impact of school reform efforts, such as NCLB, on their
schools ( Jimerson, 2005; Schafft and Jackson, 2010; Starr and White, 2008). As noted
by these scholars, school reform efforts are generally designed for urban contexts,
and one-size-fits-all designs can in fact disadvantage rural school communities.
As such, principals need to be able to identify and mitigate the negative effects
reforms can have on their rural communities.
These findings also support Budges (2006) suggestions that aspiring
principals need to learn how to assess a communitys values in order to effectively
lead change. This, according to Budge, requires being visible and accessible to the
community and reaching out to the community to create collaborative bonds.
As noted by Masumoto and Brown-Welty (2009), and illustrated by the principal
in this case study, this can be achieved through a combination of formal and
informal interactions.

Finally, the findings from this study substantiate the findings of Crow (2007), who,
in analyzing other ISSPP cases, suggested that the manner in which a principals
experience and other personal characteristics (p. 73) influences leadership practices
is an area which still requires further research. Further research is required in this area
to help determine specifically how principals decide to adapt their practices and how
they determine which practices would be most suitable. This research is important for
preparing aspiring leaders for rural schools as well as for supporting the current
leaders of one-third of the nations schools.
Notes
1. All names of persons and schools are pseudonyms.
2. There are important critiques of policy and the growing normalization of neo-liberal
discourses in education (see Ball, 2009; Sherman, 2009). However, in the presentation of this
case we highlight how a principal used or consumed the available resources to improve
a local school (de Certeau, 1984).
3. The Absolute Index is calculated by using a combination of weighted scores from standardized
English language arts, math, science, and social studies exams. The index is reported in both
numerical terms and ratings. The ratings are at-risk, below average, average, above average,
good, and excellent.
References
Acker-Hocevar, M.A., Cruz-Janzen, M.I. and Wilson, C.I. (2012), Leadership from the Ground Up:
Effective Schooling in Traditionally Low Performing Schools, Information Age Publishing,
Charlotte, NC.
Arnold, M., Newman, J., Gaddy, B. and Dean, C. (2005), A look at the condition of rural education
research: setting a direction for future research, Journal of Research in Rural Education, Vol. 20
No. 6, pp. 1-25, available at: http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/20-6.pdf (accessed December 1, 2012).
Ball, S. (2009), The governance turn!, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 537-538.
Bennett, J.V., Ylimaki, R.M., Dugan, T.M. and Brunderman, L.A. (2013), Developing the potential for
sustainable improvement in underperforming schools: capacity building in the socio-cultural
dimension, Journal of Educational Change, pp. 1-33, doi:10.1007/s10833-013-9217-6.
Bredeson, P.V., Klar, H.W. and Johansson, O. (2011), Context-responsive leadership: examining
superintendent leadership in context, Educational Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 19 No. 18,
pp. 1-28, available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/739 (accessed December 1, 2012).
Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S. and Easton, J.Q. (2010), Organizing
Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Budge, K. (2006), Rural leaders, rural places: problem, privilege, and possibility, Journal of
Research in Rural Education, Vol. 21 No. 13, pp. 1-10, available at: http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/
21-13.pdf (accessed December 1, 2012).
Chalker, D.M. (Ed.) (1999), Leadership for Rural Schools: Lessons for All Educators, Technomic
Publishing, Lancaster, PA.
Chenoweth, K. (2007), Its Being Done: Academic Success in Unexpected Schools, Harvard
Education Press, Cambridge, MA.
Chenoweth, K. (2009), How its Being Done: Urgent Lessons from Unexpected Schools, Harvard
Education Press, Cambridge, MA.
Coladarci, T. (2007), Improving the yield of rural education research: an editors swan song,
Journal of Research in Rural Education, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 1-9, available at: http://
jrre.psu.edu/articles/22-3.pdf (accessed December 1, 2012).

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
441

JEA
52,4

442

Corbin, J.M. and Strauss, A.L. (2008), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures
for Developing Grounded Theory, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Crow, G.M. (2007), The complex landscape of successful principal practices: an international
perspective, International Studies in Educational Administration, Vol. 35 No. 3,
pp. 67-74.
Datnow, A. (2005), The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing
district and state contexts, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 1,
pp. 121-153.
Day, C. (2007), Conducting Research on Successful School Principals: Associate Members Guide,
University of Nottingham, Nottingham.
Day, C., Sammons, P., Leithwood, K., Hopkins, D., Gu, Q., Brown, E. and Ahtaridou, E. (2011),
Successful School Leadership: Linking with Learning and Achievement, Open University
Press, Maidenhead.
de Certeau, M. (1984), The Practice of Everyday Life (Arts de faire), University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA.
Desimone, L. (2002), How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully
implemented?, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 72 No. 3, pp. 433-479.
DeYoung, A.J. (1987), The status of American rural education research: an integrated review
and commentary, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 123-148.
Drysdale, L., Goode, H. and Gurr, D. (2009), The Australian model of successful school
leadership: moving from success to sustainability, Journal of Educational Administration,
Vol. 47 No. 6, pp. 697-708.
Edmondson, J. (2003), Prairie Town: Redefining Rural Life in the Age of Globalization, Rowman &
Littlefield, New York, NY.
Giles, C., Jacobson, S.L., Johnson, L. and Ylimaki, R. (2007), Against the odds: successful
principals in challenging US schools, in Day, C. and Leithwood, K. (Eds), Successful
Principal Leadership in Times of Change, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 155-169.
Gruenewald, D.A. (2003), Foundations of place: a multidisciplinary framework for
place-conscious education, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 40 No. 3,
pp. 619-654.
Hallinger, P. (2003), Leading educational change: reflections on the practice of instructional
and transformational leadership, Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 33 No. 3,
pp. 329-351.
Hallinger, P. (2011), Leadership for learning: lessons from 40 years of empirical research,
Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 125-142.
Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. (1996), Reassessing the principals role in school effectiveness:
a review of empirical research, 1980-95, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 32
No. 1, pp. 5-44.
Hurley, J.C. (1999), Leading rural schools: building relationships and structures, in Chalker, D.M.
(Ed.), Leadership for Rural Schools, Technomic, Lancaster, PA, pp. 137-156.
Institute for Educational Leadership (2005), Preparing Leaders for Rural School: Practice and
Policy Considerations, Institute for Educational Leadership, Washington, DC.
Jacobson, S. and Day, C. (2007), The international successful school principals project (ISSPP):
an overview of the project, the case studies and their contexts, International Studies in
Educational Administration, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 3-10.
Jacobson, S., Johnson, L., Ylimaki, R. and Giles, C. (2005), Successful leadership in challenging
US schools: enabling principles, enabling schools, Journal of Educational Administration,
Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 607-618.

Jimerson, L. (2005), Placism in NCLB how rural children are left behind, Equity and Excellence
in Education, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 211-219.
Johnson, L. (2007), Rethinking successful school leadership in challenging US schools: culturally
responsive practices in school-community relationships, International Studies in
Educational Administration, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 49-57.
Klar, H.W. and Brewer, C.A. (2013), Successful leadership in high-needs schools: an examination of
core leadership practices enacted in challenging contexts, Educational Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 768-808, available at: http://eaq.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/
03/29/0013161X13482577 (accessed April 1, 2013).
Klar, H.W., Brewer, C.A. and Whitehouse, M.L. (2013), AVIDizing a high poverty middle school:
the case of Magnolia Grove Middle School, Engage: The International Journal of Research
and Practice on Student Engagement, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 9-23.
Leithwood, K. (2007), The 2005 Willower family lecture: leadership according to the evidence,
Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 177-202.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2008), Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-42.
Lindle, J.C., Werts, A.B. and Green, E.R. (2012), Knowledge from successful SC schools: the ethical
foundation for whole-school initiatives, paper presented at the South Carolina Educators for
the Practical Use of Research Annual Conference, Columbia, SC, February 9-10.
Louis, K.S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K.L. and Anderson, S.E. (2010), Learning from
Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning, Center for Applied
Research and Educational Improvement, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN.
Marzano, R., Waters, T. and McNulty, B. (2005), School Leadership that Works: From Research to
Results, Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning, Aurora, CO.
Masumoto, M. and Brown-Welty, S. (2009), Case study of leadership practices and schoolcommunity interrelationships in high-performing, high-poverty, rural California high
schools, Journal of Research in Rural Education, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 1-18, available at: http://
jrre.psu.edu/articles/24-1.pdf (accessed December 1, 2012).
Mormon, M. (1983), The emergence of rural struggles and their ideological effects,
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 559-575.
Mulford, B., Kendall, D., Ewington, J., Edmunds, B., Kendall, L. and Silins, H. (2008), Successful
principalship of high-performance schools in high-poverty communities, Journal of
Educational Administration, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 461-480.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (2002), No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Public Law, pp. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425.
Noel, J. (1999), On the varieties of phronesis, Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 31 No. 3,
pp. 273-289.
Papa, R. and English, F. (2011), Turnaround Principals for Underperforming Schools, Rowman &
Littlefield, New York, NY.
Patton, M.P. (1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Portin, B., Knapp, M., Dareff, S., Feldman, S., Russell, F., Samuelson, C. and Yeh, T.L. (2009),
Leadership for Learning Improvement in Urban Schools, University of Washington,
Seattle, WA.
Provasnik, S., Ramani, A.K., Coleman, M.M., Gilbertson, L., Herring, W. and Xie, Q.S. (2007), Status
of Education in Rural America, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC.
Robinson, V., Lloyd, C. and Rowe, K. (2008), The impact of leadership on student outcomes: an
analysis of the differential effects of leadership types, Educational Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 635-674.

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
443

JEA
52,4

444

Ryan, G.W. and Bernard, H.R. (2000), Data management and analysis methods, in Denzin, N.K.
and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,
pp. 769-802.
Saldana, J. (2009), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Schafft, K.A. and Jackson, A.Y. (2010), Rural education and community in the twenty-first
century, in Schafft, K.A. and Jackson, A.Y. (Eds), Rural Education for the Twenty-First
Century: Identity, Place, and Community in a Globalizing World, The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park, PA, pp. 1-16.
Schafft, K.A., Killeen, K.M. and Morrissey, J. (2010), The challenges of student transiency
for rural schools and communities in the era of No Child Left Behind, in Schafft, K.A. and
Jackson, A.Y. (Eds), Rural Education for the Twenty-First Century: Identity, Place, and
Community in a Globalizing World, The Pennsylvania State University Press, University
Park, PA, pp. 95-114.
Semke, C.A. and Sheridan, S.M. (2011), Family-school connections in rural educational settings:
a systematic review of the empirical literature, R2Ed Working Paper No. 2011-1, National
Center for Research on Rural Education, Lincoln, Nebraska, available at: http://r2ed.unl.edu/
workingpapers/2011/2011_1_Semke_Sheridan.pdf (accessed December 1, 2012).
Sherman, J. (2009), Those Who Work, Those Who Dont: Poverty, Morality, and Family in Rural
America, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.
Stake, R.E. (1995), The Art of Case Study Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Starr, K. and White, S. (2008), The small rural school principalship: key challenges and crossschool responses, Journal of Research in Rural Education, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 1-12, available
at: http://jrre./psu.edu/articles/23-5.pdf (accessed February 8, 2011).
Strange, M., Johnson, J., Showalter, D. and Klein, R. (2012), Why Rural Matters 2011-12: The Condition
of Rural Education in the 50 States, Rural School and Community Trust, Washington, DC.
Theobald, P. (1997), Teaching the Commons: Place, Pride, and the Renewal of Community,
Westview, Boulder, CO.
Theobald, P. and Wood, K. (2010), Learning to be rural: identity lessons from history, schooling,
and the US corporate media, in Schafft, K.A. and Jackson, A.Y. (Eds), Rural Education for
the Twenty-First Century: Identity, Place, and Community in a Globalizing World, The
Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA, pp. 17-33.
Thompson, C.L., Brown, K.M., Townsend, L.W., Henry, G.T. and Fortner, C.K. (2011), Turning
Around North Carolinas Lowest Achieving Schools (2006-2010), Consortium for
Educational Research and Evaluation, Chapel Hill, NC.
Tyack, D. and Cuban, L. (1995), Tinkering Toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Tzu, S. (1994), The Art of War, Basic Books, New York, NY.
Venezia, A. (2005), Inequitable opportunities: how current education systems and policies
undermine the chances for student persistence and success in college, Educational Policy,
Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 283-307.
Woods, M. (2006), Redefining the rural question: the new politics of the rural and social
policy, Social Policy & Administration, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 579-595.
Ylimaki, R. and Jacobson, S. (Eds) (2011), US and Cross-National Policies, Practices and
Preparation: Implications for Successful Instructional Leadership, Organizational Learning,
and Culturally Responsive Practices, Spring, Dordrecht.
Ylimaki, R., Bennett, J., Fan, J. and Villasenor, E. (2012), Notions of success in Southern Arizona
schools: principal leadership in changing demographic and border contexts, Leadership
& Policy in Schools, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 168-193.

Further reading
Thurston, L.P. and Berkeley, T.R. (1998), Morality and the ethic of care: peaceable rural schools,
caring rural communities, Rural Special Education Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 71-79.
About the authors
Dr Hans W. Klar, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of the Educational Leadership at the Clemson
University. His research is focussed on understanding the principals role in leading change and
fostering leadership capacity in schools. Dr Hans W. Klar is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: hklar@clemson.edu
Dr Curtis A. Brewer, PhD, studies the Political Action of Educators and Policy Development
at the University of Texas at San Antonio.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Successful
leadership in
a rural, highpoverty school
445

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.