In the fall of 2015, the University of Missouri St. Louis (UMSL) College of Education welcomed a small cohort of teachers to spend two years preparing to be principals of high-need schools. In many ways, their preparation will be similar to how UMSL has historically prepared school leaders; they will take courses within the University's approved Master in Educational Administration program, fulfilling all of the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's requirements to apply for certification as a school administrator. But the experience of these aspiring leaders will diverge from traditional principal preparation in several important ways. They were selected based on demonstrated teaching expertise and a demonstrated commitment to improving outcomes for students. Their coursework will be more intensely based on learning the practices of effective school administrators. In their second year, they will leave their current jobs and undertake a full-time, paid "residency" in a school, where they will practice their leadership under the guidance of a sitting principal and with support from UMSL faculty. The assessment of their learning will be tied into those residency experiences. And their experience will be the new normal at UMSL, with cohorts added each year and the current program phased out as students graduate. UMSL's shift in approach to principal preparation comes at a time when universities across the country are grappling with the same issues. While there are important pockets of innovation and a growing sense of urgency among policy makers and institutions themselves, too many programs have not responded to the need to drastically upgrade the quality of principal preparation. Those that do want to improve and innovate likely face the same internal challenges and market pressures confronting UMSL. This case study is intended to help other colleges of education and their partners to consider both the opportunities of embracing key improvements in principal preparation--rigorous selection and aligned assessment; updated content based on current understandings of effective leadership practices; greater opportunities to practice leadership in a school context during preparation; and closer partnerships with hiring school districts--and challenges associated with changing program structures and content. This case study consists of four parts: (1) Background on UMSL; (2) UMSL's process of improvement; (3) UMSL's new approach to principal preparation; and (4) Discussion. To develop this case study, the authors used two primary sources: (1) Documents developed by the team that designed UMSL's new approach to principal preparation. Documents include new program standards for principal preparation, a scope and sequence, drafts of course outlines, and planning documents developed by the work group and by the group's facilitators. (2) Interviews with sixteen people knowledgeable about the process for developing the new approach. Interview respondents included University administrators, College of Education faculty, civic leaders engaged in education improvement work, superintendents and other senior school district leaders, and community partners. The interviews were semi-structured, based on a protocol developed by the authors to elicit information about the context for the work at UMSL, the College's purpose in changing its approach to principal preparation, the process of change, and the key components of the new program.