Search

This paper reports on findings from a Leadership Foundation for Higher Education funded project exploring the role of associate deans in UK universities. While the number of associate deans leading cross-curricular and inter-disciplinary initiatives appears to be on the increase, there has been very little research focusing on the exact nature of the role and its importance, or otherwise, in the leadership and management of universities. Drawing on mixed-methods data from 15 semi-structured interviews and a follow-up online survey (n = 172), this paper reports on how the role is defined and positioned in relation to university organisational structures and identifies what the similarities and differences are between associate deans working at traditional and modern universities. As the first national survey of the role, it is argued that this paper makes a significant and original contribution to knowledge. By drawing on the concept of distributed leadership, the paper also offers new theoretical insights into how different types of universities in the UK are responding to external pressures as a consequence of the fast-changing and increasingly complex sector environment.

As the principal’s role has become more complex and complicated, there has been increasing advocacy for ‘teacher’ and ‘distributed’ leadership by policy advocates and some researchers. Against this international backdrop, this chapter focuses on how principals re-negotiate leadership responsibilities in a context where new management structures have been created at the national level, while internal school dynamics vary considerably. It deals with how principals re-negotiate leadership responsibilities amidst a changing school dynamic where policy rhetoric advocates a ‘distributed’ leadership role while legal requirements and more practical considerations constrain the enabling of colleagues to take on responsibility for leadership in a collaborative manner. The chapter provides further testimony that school culture and traditions, the inter-personal skills and leadership capital of the principal are critical in terms of the extent to which tinkering with existing provision rather than systematically building sustainable leadership capacity within schools continues to be a work in progress.

This chapter explores the culture of leadership at Macquarie University and how that might influence the culture of engagement with peer review by comparing the practices and perceptions across four faculties. In particular we examine views of “top-down” and “bottom-up” approaches to peer review to investigate suggestions that a top-down approach can lead to a particular perception of peer review as a form of quality assurance or managerial surveillance imposed by leaders, rather than a form of quality enhancement encouraged through distributed leadership. What emerges is the importance of leadership actively encouraging a culture of learning and collective community of practice. We present a case study of how institutional policy on peer review contrasts with the perceptions of the same policy by staff.

Educational accountability models throughout Canada commonly use low-stakes, large-scale assessment programs to support and inform school improvement efforts. These models provide school board and school administrators with the autonomy to direct their improvement efforts to meet their students’ educational needs, with no direct threat of sanctions or negative consequences. Overviews are provided for the large-scale assessment programs across Canada along with the current accountability programs that use these assessment programs. A thorough review of the Ontario context is provided, highlighting the ministry, school board, and school initiatives and practices intended to develop leadership capacity and increase student achievement. Ontario illustrates the model of distributed leadership commonly found in Canada, in which school leadership has evolved from a managerial role to one of creating shared leadership and professional learning communities to improve students’ educational outcomes. The existing challenges are identified along with the need for directed research to better understand the role of educational leadership to lead school improvement efforts in various Canadian contexts.

Individual science teachers who have inspired colleagues to transform their classroom praxis have been labelled transformational leaders. As the notion of distributed leadership became more accepted in the educational literature, the focus on the individual teacher-leader shifted to the study of leadership praxis both by individuals (whoever they might be) and by collectives within schools and science classrooms. This review traces the trajectory of leadership research, in the context of learning and teaching science, from an individual focus to a dialectical relationship between individual and collective praxis. The implications of applying an individual-collective perspective to praxis for teachers, students and their designated leaders are discussed.

This chapter is about how education leaders can act to reduce educational disparities for indigenous and other minoritized peoples through strategic goal setting, supporting effective pedagogies of relations, promoting distributed leadership, enacting inclusivity, using evidence and owning the need for reform. Examples are drawn from a large-scale, theory-based education reform project called Te Kotahitanga which is currently running in 50 secondary schools in New Zealand. Developing a model for effective leadership needs to commence with the understanding that the key to change is teacher action supported by responsive structural reform (Elmore 2004). In our earlier work (Bishop et al. 2003, 2007) we investigated what effective teacher action looks like. This chapter presents a model of what “responsive structural reform” looks like in practice and what leaders need to do to implement and sustain gains made in student performance at the classroom, school and system-wide levels.

Over the years, much has been written internationally about leadership purposes, values, practices and effectiveness. More recently, issues of succession planning, capacity building, distributed leadership, sustainability and systems leadership have been the focus of policy and policy-related research. Yet, relatively little research has focused upon how resilience contributes to the success of school leaders, principals in particular, in sustaining their values, motivation, commitment and sense of effectiveness over time in changing personal, social, organisational and policy contexts.

This chapter focuses on the links between school leadership, teacher leadership and student leadership. Drawing on the literature on distributed leadership, pupil voice and participation, it examines key conceptual problems such as the tension between the desire to enhance human agency for students and teachers and the reality of compulsory schooling and hierarchical systems of accountability. The chapter draws on material arising from two research and evaluation projects, the ‘Influence and Participation of Young People in their Learning’ (IPiL) project and the ‘Evaluation of the Learning to Lead Initiative’ (ELLI), to discuss the strategies that schools can use to enable students of all ages to exercise leadership and become full partners in the enterprise of learning. The leadership challenges faced in developing participative cultures are examined.

This chapter comprises two parts. The first part is addressed to higher education scholars and graduate students. It explores conceptual insights that emerge from this work. Drawing on key principles from complex adaptive systems theory such as disrupting units’ autopoietic processes (tendency to seek homoeostasis) and notions of connectivity, interdependence and co-evolution between academic units and their environments, it explores how these concepts can be employed to enhance academic units’ adaptive capacities and overcome units’ resistance to change. The second part of Chapter 9 is addressed to practitioners; written in clear (non-theoretical language), it discusses five strategies that academic units can implement to enhance academic units’ capacities to adapt to the challenges posed by complex, turbulent environments and to develop units’ fiscal self- reliance. Each strategy is defined, its significance explained and suggestions on how it can be attained are provided; the five strategies are (1) transforming academic units’ culture and values, (2) implementing distributed leadership and decision making, (3) undertaking strategic positioning and strategic thinking for differentiation in core markets, (4) enhancing flexibility and risk taking to develop units’ capacities for innovation and (5) developing units’ entrepreneurial capacities and using entrepreneurial activities to attain fiscal self-reliance.

Preface: School Leadership: International Perspectives.- . 1. Improving Schools in Hong Kong: A Description of the Improvement Model and Some Reflections on Its Impact on Schools, Teachers and School Principals Mel West and Mel Ainscow.- 2. Structure, Culture Leadership - Prerequisites for Successful Schools? Measuring the Social and Civic Objectives Bjorn Ahlstrom and Jonas Hoog.- 3. Educational Leadership for Democracy and Social Justice Olof Johansson and Elisabeth Zachrisson.- 4. School Leadership Effectiveness The Growing Insight in the Importance of School Leadership for the Quality and Development of Schools and their Pupils Stephan Gerhard Huber and Daniel Muijs.- 5. The Principal as Educational Leader: What Makes the Difference Michael Chirichello.- 6. From Successful School Leadership towards Distributed Leadership Lejf Moos.- 7. The Professionalization of Instructional Leadership in the United States: Competing Values and Current Tensions Patricia Burch.- 8. Values-based Leadership: At the Heart of Sustaining School Reform and Improvement Michelle A. Johnston and Michael Harris.- 9. System-sensitive Professional Leaders in Education Hanja Hansen.- 10. Multiple Thinking and Creativity in School Leadership: A New Paradigm for Sustainable Development Yin Cheong Cheng.- 11. Realising the Potential of System Leadership David Hopkins.- 12. Preparing School Leaders - International Approaches in Leadership Development Stephan Gerhard Huber.- 13. Developing New School Leaders: Application of International and Local Knowledge to Practice Linda Kaser and Judy Halbert.- 14. Investigating the Use of Capability and Standards - Referenced Frameworks to Support the Professional Learning of Aspiring, New and Experienced School Leaders in the Public Education System in New South Wales, Australia Norman McCulla.- 15. Cloning Their Own: Aspirant Principals and the School- Based Selection Game Peter Gronn and Kathey Lacey.- 16. The Recruitmentand Selection of School Leaders - First Findings of an International Comparison Stephan Gerhard Huber and Maren Hiltmann.- Index.

To date, the literature on distributed leadership has mainly developed along twopaths – conceptual writing about what distributed leadership is, and empirical stud-ies describing whether and how leadership is distributed. At this stage of its devel-opment, this literature has not seriously addressed the potential consequences northe benefits of distributed leadership. In summarizing a recent edited volume onthe subject, Leithwood et al. (2008) acknowledge that the volume, and the largerbody of research on distributed leadership has not yet assessed “the contributionof greater leadership distribution to the long list of desirable outcomes typicallyinvoked by advocates” (p. 280). What benefits can be expected for schools in whichleadership is distributed and how might distributed leadership help bring about suchbenefits? In this chapter, we take a small step towards addressing such questions byinvestigating the association between the distribution of leadership to teachers andinstructional change in schools.There is growing evidence that comprehensive school reform (CSR) programscan support improved achievement by facilitating the adoption of new instructionalstrategies in schools (Borman et al., 2007). There is also emerging evidence thatCSR programs can support student achievement and instructional change by reor-ganizing the ways in which schools manage and support instruction (Rowan et al.,2009). Research has further shown that distributed leadership is used by a numberof these programs as a primary tool for reorganization (Camburn et al., 2003). Thischapter reports an investigation of the America’s Choice CSR program. The designof this program is intended to distribute leadership responsibilities to teacher leadersin schools, and this distribution of leadership in turn, is intended to act as a keylever for instructional change. In this chapter, we examine how this intended designplayed out in about 30 urban elementary schools that implemented the America’sChoice design. We begin by describing persistent barriers to instructional change

Purpose – This article aims to discusses the nature and benefits of lateral approaches to educational change, especially in the form of distributed leadership, that treat schools, localities, states, or nations, as “living systems” interconnected by mutual influence.Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a conceptual discussion of the interrelated ideas of living systems, communities of practice and networks. Research examples from England, North America, and Finland are used to underscore the article's argument.Findings – The article underlines how, within this conception, distributed leadership operates as a network of strong cells organized through cohesive diversity and emergent development rather than mechanical alignment and predictable delivery. However, more deeply and more critically, the chapter also investigates whether, in practice, these lateral strategies are being used to extend democratic public and professional involvement in developing the goals and purposes of education or whe...

Leadership is seen as moving away from the traditional, hierarchical, rational planning, bureaucratic approach, toward a more collaborative approach with formal and informal leaders. Leadership and organizational learning are interrelated, with organizational learning being dependent on the capacity of the organization to facilitate collaboration among individual learners who take on distributed leadership responsibilities and learn from each other. The greatest challenge faced by school district is how to help schools become professional learning communities when the authoritarian hierarchy remained entrenched in the minds of formal leaders, community members, and government departments. Through a review of relevant empirical literature and reanalysis of five of their previous studies, the authors present a view of leadership that guided their actions and research in Discovery School District.

In a matter of a few short years, the idea of distributed leadership has evolved from a theoretical consideration of naturally-occurring social influence processes in school organization . . . to a mantra for reshaping leadership practice. More and more schools and school systems are attempting to develop distributed leadership. Increasingly, state education agencies and national education organizations are encouraging them to do it. (Louis et al., 2009) The challenge of developing schools with the capacity for continuous improvement has led to a rapidly emerging focus on fostering leadership at all levels of the education system. Nowhere is this more evident than in the press towards distributing leadership among a broader set of key stakeholders, especially teachers, in schools (Barth, 1990; Gronn, 2002; Lambert, 2002, 2003; Spillane, 2006). Paradoxically, the latest thinking suggests that the drive to develop distributed leadership in schools neither diminishes nor comes at the expense of the principal’s responsibilities for leadership. Indeed, scholars and policymakers alike assert that principal leadership remains a key driver for change and source of support for building leadership capacity among others (e.g., Childs-Bowen et al., 2000; Gewirtz, 2003; Lambert, 2002, 2003; Murphy, 2009; Stricherz, 2001). As Mayrowitz and colleagues AQ1 observe: “[P]rincipals occupy the critical space in the teacher leadership equation and center stage in the work redesign required to bring distributed leadership to life in schools.” This focus on the development of distributed, shared or collaborative leadership is especially evident in new policies and programs initiated at the school system and higher governmental levels (Barth, 1990, 2001; Clift et al., 1992; Fullan, 2006; Gronn, 2002; Harris, 2003; Lambert, 2002, 2003; Spillane, 2006; Spillane et al., 2004). In this chapter we explore the system-wide initiation of distributed leadership and its effects on school improvement. We examine these issues in the context of a state-level mandate in the USA to increase school accountability, enhance leadership capacity, and improve student learning. The specific policy context included the formation of school-community councils intended to engage a broad set of stakeholders in working with the principal to lead school-level improvements.

Recent work suggests that viewing school leadership from a distributed perspective has the potential to provide useful insight into how management and leadership unfold in the daily lives of schools. Writing in the area of distributed leadership has identified numerous entities in the school across which leadership can be distributed, including people and aspects of the situation such as routines and tools (Harris, 2005; MacBeath et al., 2004; Spillane, 2006). While there have been advances in articulating conceptual frameworks for taking a distributed perspective on school leadership and management (Gronn, 2000; Spillane et al., 2004), the empirical research base in this area is less developed. With a few exceptions (Camburn et al., 2003; Leithwood et al., 2007; Spillane et al., 2007), most empirical work has involved small samples of schools. But as we argue in this chapter, before researchers begin to accumulate evidence on distributed leadership in schools, an important intermediate step needs to be taken: the operationalization of concepts, or in other words, the translation of theory into measurement. It is this intermediate step that is the primary focus of this paper. In this chapter, we examine the entailments of the distributed perspective for collecting and analyzing data. We then go a step further and examine the results obtained for different operationalizations of a distributed perspective, considering along the way the strengths and weaknesses of each operationalization. Within the larger domain of distributed leadership, we are concerned with the epistemological and methodological challenges involved in studying the distribution of leadership across people within the school – the leader-plus aspect of a distributed perspective (Spillane, 2006). Researchers who wish to study the leader-plus aspect of distributed leadership face two basic questions

Ideas come and go. Some retain their usefulness, while some fall by the wayside. Still others survive with their original integrity intact, while others undergo major surgery or revision. To this point in its career history, the signs for distributed leadership are optimistic. If one casts a roving eye back across a decade or so, between the point of its arrival and its more recent uptake, then this particular view of leadership appears to have weathered an initial stage of conceptual exploration and is now well into a phase of empirical investigation. Moreover, some sense of its impact (and the difference, if any, that it makes) is becoming clearer. In short, distributed leadership displays a number of the hallmarks of survival. Having said that, and without wanting to adopt a glass half-empty mentality, the purpose of this chapter is to give voice to some caveats and concerns. These include: first, a need to revisit the provenance of distributed leadership and to set the genealogical record straight; second, to rethink the meaning of the term; and, third, to inquire about future directions and what comes next. Taken at face value, these first two concerns have a rather deceptive “housekeeping” quality about them. That is, answers to the questions appear to serve the interests of conceptual tidiness. In fact, the clarity they introduce has significant implications for how researchers and commentators understand leadership more generally. In relation to the third concern, somewhat paradoxically, I am suggesting that, just as distributed leadership appears to have come into its own, it would be profitable to begin thinking beyond it. Throughout the chapter (but especially in the final section) I suggest what this would entail, why this needs to occur and how it might be done. To expand on each of these points, it can be said, for example, in relation to the first that, notwithstanding the current level of interest in distributed leadership, the claim that the leadership of an organization observes a distributed pattern is

General Editors: K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger. Section Editors: G.C. Furman, P. Gronn, P. Hallinger, K. Leithwood, J. Macbeath, B. Mulford, K. Riley. Preface K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger. Section 1: Leadership Effects and School Improvement: P. Hallinger. Introduction. 1. What Do You Call People With Visions? Vision, Mission, and Goals in School Leadership and Improvement P. Hallinger, R. Heck. 2. Leading for Change: Building Capacity for Learning L. Stoll, et al. 3. Conditions Fostering Educational Change P. Sleegers, et al. 4. The Changing Context of School Leadership: Implications for Paradigm Shift Y.C. Cheng. 5. An Alternative Perspective of Educational Leadership for Change: Reflections on Native/Indigenous Ways of Knowing M.K.P. Ah-Nee-Benham, L.A. Napier. 6. Moving School Leadership Beyond Its Narrow Boundaries: Developing a Cross-Cultural Approach A. Walker, C. Dimmock. Section 2: Leadership In the Creation of Community: G.C. Furman. Introduction. 7. Cross-Cultural Leadership and Communities of Difference: Thinking about Leading in Diverse Schools C.M. Shields. 8. The Role of Professional Learning Communities in International Education J.C. Toole, K.S. Louis. 9. The Role of School Governance in the Creation of School Community R.G. Croninger, B. Malen. 10. Community as Curriculum R.J. Starratt. Section 3: Leadership In Diverse Contexts: K. Riley, J. Macbeath. 11. Cultural Isomorphs in Theories and Practice of School Leadership L. Moos. 12. Connecting School Leadership with Teaching, Learning and Parenting in Diverse Cultural Contexts: Western and Asian Perspectives C. Dimmock, A. Walker. 13. Mission Integrity: Contemporary Challenges for Catholic School Leaders G. Grace. 14. Lessons from Successful Leadership in Small Schools G. Southworth. 15. School Leadership and Self-Assessment: Guiding the Agenda for Change B. Smith. 16. Boundary-breaking Leadership: A Must for Tomorrow's Learning Communities J.M. Robertson, C.F. Webber. Section 4: Organizational Learning and Leadership: P. Gronn. Introduction. 17. Leadership and School Results H. Silins, B. Mulford. 18. Strategic Leadership and Cognition B. Fidler. 19. Distributed Leadership P. Gronn. 20. From Teamwork to Teamwork in Education V. Hall. 21. Enhancing Knowledge in Organizations: Developing Capacity and Capability Through Learning and Leadership T. Seddon, L. Cairns. 22. Organizational Learning, Organizational Problem Solving, and Models of Mind V.M.J. Robinson. Section 5: The Context for Educational Leadership in the Twenty-First Century: K. Leithwood. Introduction. 23. Scenarios for Leadership and the Public Good in Education B.J. Caldwell. 24. Leadership Practices for Accountable Schools K. Leithwood, et al. 25. Postmodern Expressions of Educational Leadership L. Sackney, C. Mitchell. 26. School Choice and Educational Leadership: Rethinking the Future of Public Schooling J. Gaskell. 27. Teacher Leadership, Reflective Practice, and School Improvement C. Day, A. Harris.