• There are no suggestions because the search field is empty.

News & Stories

The Rooms Principals Didn’t Walk

by Impact Florida

April 15, 2026

“If you were a K–2 teacher, I probably wasn’t in your room last year, and if I was it was during reading. I am now walking math classrooms and teacher performance has increased.”

This observation came from a principal in Impact Florida’s Focus K–3 Cadre, reflecting on what changed over the past year—not a shift in curriculum or a new initiative, something simpler.

He became intentional about K–2 math support.

In Florida and across the country, early elementary math gets less attention than literacy. Leadership tends to focus on literacy in the early grades and tested subjects in grades 3 through 5. In practice, that means K–2 math classrooms receive less consistent observation, less structured feedback, and fewer opportunities for professional dialogue. In schools participating in the Focus K–3 Cadre, that pattern is shifting under the leadership of Dr. Katelyn Devine, Director of Math Success, and Kristen Shannon, Assistant Director of Math Success.

In fact, principals are not only spending more time observing early math instruction, but they’re also showing up differently in relationship to teachers.

And that matters.

Decades of research have shown that the relationship between principals and teachers shapes the conditions under which instructional improvement is possible. When teachers trust school leadership, they are more likely to collaborate, reflect on their practice, and engage in sustained professional learning. Leadership shapes whether teachers see themselves as contributors to improvement or recipients of decisions.

Expecting Resistance

The Focus K–3 Cadre invited principals to engage more directly with K–2 teachers around math instruction: gathering teacher input about their experience teaching math through listening sessions and surveys as well as engaging in classroom walks focused specifically on early math instruction.

The principals worried teachers would be resistant to opening their classrooms to math observation, so they framed their efforts not as compliance exercises, but as opportunities for teachers to inform decisions about professional learning and support.

This positioned teachers as experts in their own practice and invited them to the table to help design the support they would receive. “Teachers know their classrooms better than anyone,” Devine says. “We wanted them to be part of shaping what support actually looks like.”

Just as important, leaders “closed the feedback loop.” They returned to teachers with what they’d heard. They highlighted key themes. They shared what would change as a result and, in some cases, what would not and why. This practice signals that feedback is not a formality but a driver of action.

“When you start to have a voice in something,” Devine says of this two-way dialogue between principals and teachers, “there’s this feeling that, ‘I’m being asked for my opinion, and they care about me professionally.’ And as a result, ‘I can care more about what I’m doing.’”

Early Results

After their initial data collection, principals reflected on how teachers showed up professionally—and the results were impressive.

Simply by engaging K–2 teachers in broader math discussions this year, 74% of principals indicated that they have observed moderate or great changes in how teachers show up professionally in their school.

The most common shifts were:

  • More active participation in professional learning communities (reported by 10 of 15 principals)
  • Greater comfort with school leadership observing instruction (8 of 15)
  • Increased willingness to ask for instructional support (7 of 15)

Only one principal in fifteen reported no observable change.

This suggests that creating structured space for K–2 teachers to talk about math instruction is shifting adult culture, not just instructional knowledge. Principals are noticing changes in professional behavior, which is often an early sign that implementation conditions are improving.

What the research tells us

The relationship between principals and teachers shapes how teachers show up in their work. When that relationship is strong, teachers are more likely to engage in improvement, collaboration, and high-quality instruction.

Research points to trust as the foundation. In schools where teachers trust school leadership, they are more likely to reflect on their practice, collaborate with peers, and take responsibility for student outcomes (Bryk & Schneider, 2002). That trust also changes how feedback is received. When classroom observation is experienced as support rather than monitoring, teachers are more willing to acknowledge challenges in their instruction and act on feedback. This aligns with research on psychological safety, which shows that people are more likely to seek help, test new approaches, and improve when they feel supported and respected (Edmondson, 1999).

Leadership also shapes the broader professional culture in a school. Principals influence expectations through what they prioritize, how they follow through, and how consistently they engage with teachers. Research has shown that leadership is one of the most important school-based factors influencing student outcomes, largely because of its effect on teaching practice and working conditions (Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008). At the same time, teachers are more likely to remain in schools where they experience leadership as consistent and supportive, and more likely to leave when those conditions are absent (Ingersoll, 2001; Boyd et al., 2011).

The principal-teacher relationship is not separate from instructional improvement—it creates the conditions that make it possible. “In the Focus K–3 Cadre, we’re observing these behaviors in real time,” Devine says.

Implication for District Leaders

District leaders can strengthen the principal-teacher relationship through what they prioritize and reinforce. The expectations they set, and how consistently they follow through, influence whether principals engage teachers as partners in improvement.

District leaders can support the principal-teacher relationship through:

  1. Instructional coaching rather than compliance monitoring. Position classroom observation as an opportunity to support teaching. Provide principals with tools and training to give specific, actionable feedback.
  2. Meaningful teacher voice in school improvement decisions. Expect principals to gather and use teacher input and train them on this practice. Create structures where teachers can share their experience and see how it informs decisions.
  3. Support for collaboration and professional learning communities. Set expectations for protected time for teachers to work together and provide clear structures for professional learning communities. Monitor that these structures stay focused on improving practice, not managing logistics.
  4. Fair evaluation and transparent decision-making. Establish processes that are clear, consistent, and explained to teachers. When decisions are visible and grounded in evidence, trust is more likely to build.
  5. Consistent communication and follow-through. Set clear expectations and reinforce them over time. Ensure that what is communicated at the district level is carried through in practice at the school level.

“We’re starting to see a shift in how principals are showing up and how teachers are responding,” Devine says. “It’s still early, but teachers seem more open to engaging in the work.”

—

In many schools, these shifts in behavior could go unnoticed. A principal walks a few more K–2 classrooms. A teacher asks for help where they might have stayed quiet before. But these are the moments where change begins.

In the Focus K–3 Cadre, principals are choosing to show up differently, and teachers are responding. The work is still new. But the direction is clear—and it’s one that schools can build on.

Sources