Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assistant Principals Research topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Researchers: Stamford district’s assistant principals for specialized instruction show early promise, need clearer roles
Summary
Researchers who studied Stamford School District’s new assistant principals for specialized instruction (APSEs) report positive early signals—higher teacher satisfaction where APSEs provide resources—but highlight variability in role clarity, scheduling and communication with families.
Dr. Carrie Cruz Bueno, a researcher at Wesleyan University, told the Stamford School Board that an exploratory study of the district’s newly created assistant principals for specialized instruction (APSEs) shows promising early signs but also areas that need attention. The research paired surveys of special education teachers with focus groups and descriptive analysis; roughly 144 teachers completed most survey items.
The study found that teachers who agreed they received tangible resources from APSEs were about 29 percentage points more likely to say they were satisfied with their working conditions, Dr. Bueno said. Researchers emphasized that the work is an early implementation study—not causal proof—because the program had no random assignment and data were collected amid other concurrent district initiatives.
Megan Ossowicki, Director of Special Education and Related Services, and Jennifer Ibera, an administrative intern and TOSA for ML student support, joined Dr. Bueno in presenting the methods and qualitative findings. The team said teachers and administrators described three themes shaping APSE effectiveness: concrete expertise (APSEs’ knowledge and skills), relational factors (availability and relationship building), and organizational factors (clear role definitions and scheduling). Presenters said some APSEs cover two buildings, which can limit their visibility and parents’ perceptions of their availability.
Board members pressed presenters on cost and scope. One member, Becky, asked whether the district paid for the study; Ms. Baldotti said the research was grant‑funded and did not cost the district. Board members also asked whether APSEs attend individualized education program (IEP) meetings; presenters said APSEs generally support compliance and complex cases behind the scenes and that building administrators remain the primary hosts for IEP meetings, though a parent can request APSE attendance.
Presenters described a robust teacher response rate (the team stated a near‑70% response rate on some measures) and said they combined quantitative descriptors with thematic analysis of focus groups. They urged clearer, district‑wide role definitions and consistent communication with teachers and families so APSEs’ functions—paperwork support, compliance assistance, co‑teaching and professional development—are understood.
The board did not take formal policy action during the presentation. Researchers requested continued partnership with the district to collect additional data and recommended follow‑up analyses to quantify time allocation, measure effects on IEP quality and document impacts on student outcomes.
The presentation concluded with board discussion of budget timing and implementation challenges; the district moved on to the next agenda item after thanking the presenters.
