Date of Conferral



Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)




Richard Penny


The research problem for this basic qualitative study was that principals were not consistently providing content-specific feedback to support teachers’ instructional practices. This problem was important because principals, as instructional leaders, are responsible for giving feedback to teachers to support teachers’ instructional practices. The purpose of this study was to investigate principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of content-specific feedback. Danielson’s framework for teaching was the conceptual framework that linked the concepts and variables in this study. The research questions addressed how principals perceived that they provided content-specific feedback to support teachers’ instructional practice, and how teachers perceived principals as providing content-specific feedback to support teachers’ instructional practices. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit nine participants: two principals and seven teachers. The data was collected through interviews. The data were analyzed using an inductive approach. Two themes were used to convey the study’s findings: (a) although principals’ content knowledge does not align with all content areas and evaluation rubrics are inadequate, principals still give teachers content-specific instructional feedback and additional supplements to improve teachers’ instructional practices; and (b) teachers received feedback and instructional support from principals but believed that principals’ professional experiences, expertise, and the evaluation also influenced the specificness of the feedback. This study contributes to positive social change on the organizational, school, and individual levels because improved instructional leadership practices result in improved instructional practices by teachers and thus contribute to improving educational outcomes and life opportunities for students.