St. Martin de Porras School Turnaround: Leadership Study

Introduction

This report analyzes a case study of a school known as St. Martin de Porras. The case study was divided into two portions — Part A and Part B — representing a clear "before" and "after" picture of a school that was struggling in every measurable way. This report includes a brief literature review, a methodology section, a study and analysis section, and a conclusion with recommendations. The study section identifies the problems, goals, and concerns of the stakeholders, as well as the critical issues that existed before the turnaround. The analysis section compares those findings to the literature review and examines alternative solutions.

Literature Review

While some may be reluctant to engage with a school like St. Martin de Porras, schools of this type — when managed well — can produce dramatically better outcomes than struggling inner-city schools in areas like greater Chicago or other major urban centers across the country.

Two main sources were reviewed for this report. The first addresses servant leadership and how it relates to organizational effectiveness, day-to-day experiences, and the barriers leaders face. A central lesson drawn from the St. Martin de Porras case is the critical importance of how leaders engage those they lead. As noted by Savage-Austin and Honeycutt (2011), schools like St. Martin de Porras "benefit from understanding how leadership engages followers in day-to-day activities because the outcome of this act contributes to the organization's ability to be effective" (Savage-Austin & Honeycutt, 2011). The climate at St. Martin was very poor before the new principal and assistant principal implemented their programs. Teachers were treating supervisors and observing colleagues as adversaries and were blaming students for their own professional failings. However, things changed quickly once new leadership took hold (Savage-Austin & Honeycutt, 2011).

The second major source consulted focuses on student engagement and motivation — a central issue at St. Martin de Porras. One of the most damaging practices occurring before the arrival of Odiotti and Seiberlich was that students were consistently disengaged, and teachers were not only tolerating this but were actively enabling academic dishonesty by feeding students answers and shielding them from accountability. The work of Chiao-Ling, Yang, and Chen speaks directly to this problem. When students are not discouraged from dishonesty — and when teachers are participants in it — the likelihood that the behavior continues unchecked is extremely high, which is precisely what was happening at St. Martin de Porras in Part A of the case study. This source specifically highlights that a student's self-perception relative to the perceptions of peers and teachers is strongly linked to their propensity for academic dishonesty (Chiao-Ling, Yang & Chen, 2015).

Methodology

A straightforward approach was taken given the scope of the case study and the nature of this report. Both portions of the case study were read in full before any sources were sought. The two articles selected represent a blend of qualitative and quantitative research styles, which mirrors the nature of the case study itself. For example, the assistant principal's decision to rearrange furniture to make herself more visible and accessible to those approaching her office is a qualitative, perception-based intervention — not a statistical calculation. By contrast, the principal set measurable, numbers-based targets, such as reducing tardiness by one-third. This blend of approaches in the case study justified selecting sources that similarly spanned both methodological orientations.

The two primary stakeholders in the Porras case are Odiotti and Seiberlich. Their mutual assessment of the situation at the school is captured concisely in their opening question: "Where do we start?" The students represent the next major stakeholder group. While few student voices are directly quoted in the case study, one notable moment occurs during a field trip when students refer to Porras as the "poor kids' school" — a phrase that reflects a complete absence of academic pride or achievement. The teachers constitute the third stakeholder group. As a whole, they were performing poorly and, as the case study describes, were blaming students in order to "absolve themselves" of responsibility. Additional stakeholders such as parents and the broader community could be identified, but the three groups named above are sufficient to make the key analytical points.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Chiao-Ling, H., Shu Ching, Y., & An-Sing, C. (2015). The relationships among students' achievement goals, willingness to report academic dishonesty, and engaging in academic dishonesty. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 43(1), 27–37. doi:10.2224/sbp.2015.43.1.27

Savage-Austin, A., & Honeycutt, A. (2015). Servant leadership: A phenomenological study of practices, experiences, organizational effectiveness and barriers. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 9(1), 49–54.