Transforming Educational Leadership

A special issue of Education Sciences (ISSN 2227-7102).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (29 February 2024) | Viewed by 3112

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD 4122, Australia
Interests: educational leadership; educational reform; educational change

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The past fifty years have seen massive changes to the educational provision for schools in many countries. The 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s saw radical transformations to school governance and management, headlined by the move towards self-management. Decentralization meant that many of the decisions previously made at a national head office were now being made by individuals at schools. Suddenly, school leaders now needed to oversee the policy, financial, and practical aspects of schooling, with support from school councils or boards comprising parents, teachers and sometimes students. The previous hierarchical approach to system management was initially replaced by hierarchical approaches to school leadership. Instructional leadership was a managerial approach used in many systems and focused on leading teaching to increase student outcomes in basic school skills. Leithwood (1992) argued that, although IL had served a purpose in the 1980s and early 1990s, it “no longer appears to capture the heart of what school administration will have to become” and proposed transformational leadership instead. By the turn of the millennium, efforts to improve teaching were supplemented by a focus on the role of school leaders in improving learning itself across the school and beyond just student outcomes. Leadership for learning became a popular term, albeit one that was interpreted differently by various scholars.

It has since become clear that there were three main shifts in the way leadership was undertaken in schools over the past few decades. The first is that school leadership became a shared activity rather than the sole responsibility of the school leader. The second is that leadership was now seen as activity rather than something associated with a position (principal, director), and it is understood that what people can do is more important than the position they hold. The third change is that we now recognize that leadership is context-specific—a person that is a good leader in one set of circumstances may not be so good when circumstances are different.

This Special Issue brings together a collection of papers from senior international scholars documenting how school leadership has changed in their own country since the turn of the millennium and how this can impact on our understanding of school leadership. Themes to considered include:

  • How has decentralization impacted school leadership? What new responsibilities do school leaders have? How has this changed decisions that are made at the school level?
  • How have relationships between school leaders, teachers, students, and school families changed?
  • How are school leaders prepared, appointed, and supported?
  • Have these changes impacted the pool of teachers willing to become school leaders?

The Issue will conclude with a paper that synthesizes what we have learned about school leadership and considers how it might change into the future.

Prof. Dr. Tony Townsend
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Education Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • school leadership
  • decentralization
  • leadership for learning
  • learning sciences
  • learning research
  • evidence-based teaching
  • myths about learning
  • technology-enhanced learning
  • educational technology
  • barriers and facilitators to implementation
  • emerging learning research

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

12 pages, 225 KiB  
Article
A Genealogy toward Methodic Doubts in Educational Leadership Research
by Ira Bogotch
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(5), 493; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050493 - 4 May 2024
Viewed by 387
Abstract
In this critical narrative essay, titled A Genealogy Toward Methodic Doubts, I ask readers not only how and why educational leadership research(ers) detoured from the rigorous pursuits of truths, but also how and why I had missed the signposts which might have alerted [...] Read more.
In this critical narrative essay, titled A Genealogy Toward Methodic Doubts, I ask readers not only how and why educational leadership research(ers) detoured from the rigorous pursuits of truths, but also how and why I had missed the signposts which might have alerted me and others that our continuing practices, even with recognizing methodological limitations, were flawed. The empirical examples presented here come mostly from US policies, Western theories, and traditional methods, but likely apply to other contexts worldwide. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transforming Educational Leadership)
13 pages, 558 KiB  
Article
A Typology of Multiple School Leadership
by Yin-Cheong Cheng
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(1), 70; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010070 - 8 Jan 2024
Viewed by 1314
Abstract
In facing the challenges of huge transformations in different areas of society, many educators, policy makers, social leaders, researchers and other stakeholders may doubt how schools and their leadership and management remain relevant to and effective for the future of education. Given that [...] Read more.
In facing the challenges of huge transformations in different areas of society, many educators, policy makers, social leaders, researchers and other stakeholders may doubt how schools and their leadership and management remain relevant to and effective for the future of education. Given that multiple school functions are needed to serve society at different levels, the required roles in school leadership are inevitably multiple, diverse and demanding. In past decades, many studies have been conducted with a focus on some aspects of leadership functions and processes. Unfortunately, there is a lack of a typology of school leadership to map out comprehensive leadership profiles and understand their multiple characteristics for leading school development and effectiveness in a fast-changing environment. Based on the framework of multiple school effectiveness, this paper aims to propose a typology of multiple school leadership that can provide a new, comprehensive way to re-conceptualize the multiple nature and characteristics of school leadership in a complicated context. Depending on the rationalities, concerns, actions, outcomes and contexts of leadership in practice, the typology of multiple school leadership may include six models: technological leadership, economic leadership, social leadership, political leadership, cultural leadership, and learning leadership. Within this typology, new possibilities and approaches to school leadership can be drawn for research, practice and development towards the future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transforming Educational Leadership)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

20 pages, 253 KiB  
Essay
The Work Environment of the School Leader in Australia: The Case for Sustained Change in Role and Practice
by Brian J. Caldwell
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(2), 190; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020190 - 15 Feb 2024
Viewed by 695
Abstract
The questions addressed in this essay are (1) how has the work environment of school leaders changed in the early years of the 21st century, (2) how have these changes affected the role of the school leader, (3) what is the association between [...] Read more.
The questions addressed in this essay are (1) how has the work environment of school leaders changed in the early years of the 21st century, (2) how have these changes affected the role of the school leader, (3) what is the association between an evident deterioration in the work environment and the trend to more autonomy for schools and their leaders, and (4) how can school systems be more effective in supporting school leaders? The essay is organised into three domains that emerged from a review of the literature on changes in the work environment: intensification–intimidation, autonomy–accountability and system–support. Six recommendations are derived from the evidence: principals should have greater control over their work environment, system leaders should remove many reporting requirements from schools, there should be “organised abandonment” of outdated practices, the potential benefits of AI should be realised, there should be more engagement in planning for the future, and there should be further research on processes and outcomes through randomised controlled trials of new practices. It is not so much new theories in leadership but rather new roles and new practices within different arrangements for governance, informed by ongoing research as the context changes, amid evidence of deterioration in professional wellbeing. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transforming Educational Leadership)
Back to TopTop