Search

Schools for specific purposes (SSP) are and have been a significant feature of the education ecosystem since the roll out of mass schooling in Australia and elsewhere. SSPs serve some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged communities. While their social and emotional worth to their communities (students, educators, families) is rarely questioned, the role of SSP in the pursuit of equity and inclusivity remains contested. This has significant implications for those charged with leading such schools, particularly principals. Drawing on the emerging field of relational studies, this paper undertakes a "relational" inquiry into the provision of education (RIPE) analysis of specific purpose schools for students with moderate and high support needs in the Australian state of New South Wales.

This paper describes and justifies the protocol for a research project investigating regional secondary school consolidation reforms in New South Wales, Australia. The study is designed to describe the experiences of those directly involved in the transition to a consolidated school in a way that has so far eluded educational leadership researchers. Identifying five themes from the international literature on school consolidation (leadership and governance; staff and student wellbeing; teaching and learning; curriculum and pathways; community satisfaction), the paper then articulates a systematic research protocol for examining the transition from individual schools through to a consolidated school. Previous studies have not systematically examined this transition and how it shifts practices and perceptions from different stakeholder perspectives. Using a purposeful merger of quantitative and qualitative forms of evidence, this study protocol has the potential to play a defining role in the area of school consolidation reforms. The applicability of the study design holds promise as an adaptable, focused, and sustainable protocol for generating understanding of school consolidation transitions and developing an empirical evidence base that is localised, internationally benchmarked, and critical for school decisions about investments and outcomes for educators, students, and communities.

As one of the central institutions of society, schooling is subject to significant public interest and scrutiny. Fads and fashion successfully developed elsewhere are often rebadged and relaunched in education for the purpose of improvement. Such interventions are often quickly identified as intruders and frequently fade into obscurity, but what of internal interventions, the education research that becomes widely accepted and promoted? In this paper I argue that contemporary thought and analysis in Australian school leadership has submitted to the cult of the guru. Specifically, I contend that dialogue (much less debate) has settled on the work of John Hattie's meta-meta-analysis giving rise to the Cult of Hattie. This paper is not an attack on Hattie as a person, or even his work, rather an argument about the conditions which have facilitated the rise of a guru. I argue that the uncritical acceptance and proliferation of this cult is a tragedy for Australian school leadership.

As a field of knowledge production, educational administration and leadership scholars do a substantial amount of talking past one another. These parallel monologues are a major issue for the advancement of knowledge. Original contributions can only be made in relation to others. That is, the innovation or significance of scholarship is an act of (social) scientific distinction. This means purposely engaging with the other. In this paper, I argue that the knowledge frontiers of educational administration and leadership are highly fragmented and siloed. I do not, however, see diversity of scholarship as a fatal flaw nor do I argue for a form of knowledge centrism. Rather, my intervention is to propose a social epistemology for moving knowledge claims.

Contemporary discourses in educational administration have exponentially grown the number of adjectival leaderships, challenged traditional organisational structures, and offered autonomy as a solution to performance issues. In this theoretical paper, I ask "what does the principalship look like after autonomy?" Despite the range of objections that could be raised in relation to thinking with and through an organisational role, it is the contention of this paper that it is in the principalship that we find important resources for theorising educational administration, even if, at first sight, these resources appear to bear little connection to, or resonance with, contemporary discourses of "leadership" in education. Working within a relational approach to educational administration that I am advancing, my argument is built around three key markers: the centrality of temporality, the (im)possibility of the local, and the imposition of "quality".

Purpose: "Leadership" is arguably the central concept of interest in contemporary scholarship on educational administration. Within this scholarly discourse, there is an explicit assumption that leadership is a "real" phenomenon that is not only important, but also necessary for educational institutions. However, few scholars engage with issues surrounding the confusion of a socially constructed label with an assumed empirical reality. The aim of this paper is to mobilise critical social theory and to discuss the concept of leadership in educational administration. Design/methodology/approach: To engage with this matter, the author mobilises critical social theory, specifically that of Pierre Bourdieu, to discuss the concept of leadership in educational administration. Findings: In doing so, the author argues that: "leadership" is a label taken from common language into scholarly discourse for the purpose of solving a perceived problem in the empirical world, and that this is made possible through a particular constitution of the social space. Research limitations/implications: The central argument of this paper challenges the hegemonic position of educational leadership scholarship, particularly its mobilisation of context, both time and space. Originality/value: Unlike scholarship focused on developing an explanation of what constitutes leadership, this paper engages with the abstraction of "leadership" as an educational administration concept. (Contains 5 notes.)

Strategy is a much debated concept in the field of educational leadership. This article draws on a variety of data from a larger research programme focused on reconceptualising strategy in the specific context of school leadership. Rather than offering a definitive voice, this article lays the foundations for further inquiry on the topic through a greater "practice" orientation. Drawing on policy analysis, questionnaire and interview data, this article proposes an alternate theoretical frame for strategy in educational leadership that takes into account the various social, political, historical and cultural forces which seek to influence the behaviour of both leaders and schools. (Contains 1 table.)

Purpose: This paper seeks to take up the challenge of complex social, political and cultural influences, uncertain economic conditions, ever advancing technologies and increasingly diverse student populations. The challenge for educational leadership scholars and practitioners is to figure out what their work as leaders should be in new times. The paper aims to discuss the issues. Design/methodology/approach: Drawing loosely on the theoretical work of Pierre Bourdieu, and a continued research agenda, this paper outlines a framework for educational leadership that can be measured, but is not prescriptive. Findings: The central argument of this paper is that viewing leadership as a complex social activity that is not directly observable has the prospect of moving scholarship and understanding beyond the superficial measurement of what is directly observed to a thick description of educational leadership. Originality/value: The framework presented privileges the philosophical and scholarly elements of being an educational leader over the administrative and managerial. It is argued that this is what is needed in the leadership of educational institutions for the future and a framework for preparing the next generation of leaders.

This paper seeks to engage the field of educational leadership in a methodological conversation. It outlines a methodological position taken by the author (a focus on leadership practice using Bourdieu) in a currently funded project and seeks discussion with the wider field. The paper is structured to provide the reader with background to the theoretical position of the author and the implications this has for the study of school leadership practice. The discussion highlights the need for multi-layered descriptions of leadership and the dual purpose of leadership research. This provides for a greater understanding of the phenomenon of leadership, and the subsequent implications for leadership practice and, potentially, preparation. The intent of this paper is not merely to critique existing works in the field, nor to create a modernistic binary between the positions of others and those presented here. Rather, the value of this work is its potential to intervene in the scholarship of the field and disrupt the status quo, highlighting the benefits of embracing the complexity, ambiguity and moment-by-moment contestation that defines the social practice that is school leadership.

A persuasive solution for governments and systemic authorities seeking to improve the quality and equity of outcomes for students has been the localized management of schools. Believed to provide opportunities for context-sensitive decision-making, what remains unclear is how does shifting increasing management to the school-level generate the type of leadership necessary to improve outcomes? Drawing from a subset from an Australian study of school autonomy, we argue that reforms simply cannot improve outcomes as they generate work that takes leaders and educators away from teaching and learning activities and sustain if not advance enduring inequities in the system.. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

University administrators are increasingly using a range of metrics to evaluate the "quality" of work being undertaken at their institutions. The unit of analysis for these assessments varies from Department (England), field of research (Australia), and the like, but inevitably the assessment works its way to individual researchers. This poses a major challenge for administrators and even more so for researchers. Shifts in institutional policy to meet the challenges of funding and reputation/ esteem of rising in the ranks raise a number of questions concerning the temporality and value of academic labor. Notably, decisions about the worth of academic labor are often well removed from the undertaking of that labor and this separation removes the human side of scholarly work and reduces knowledge production to numerical indicators and the achievement of key performance indicators. In this chapter I draw on shifts in an institution's policy position and the impact that this has on researchers. Particularly I explore the implications of historically mapping research performance using different metrics than were available at the time and expecting researchers to adopt alternate strategies immediately (irrespective of delays in the publication process). Although I do not doubt that administrator decisions are arguably made in the best interests of advancing the institutions position in the increasingly global academy, the presentism of such strategies is in many ways at odds with the long-term focus of building coherent and sophisticated research programs. Alternate means of understanding the challenges and tensions of administrator strategy has the potential to impact on policy and the development of programs for current and aspiring researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past two decades, there have been calls by scholars for a more concerted effort to develop empirically grounded research studies on educational leadership management and administration in an indigenous context rather than hegemonic western contexts. This paper presents a review of contemporary literature on educational leadership from Africa in three internationally prestigious journals for the period 2008–2014. A descriptive and analytical perspective is used to understand the methodological approaches used by researchers studying educational leadership from and in Africa. The study identified a preference for qualitative research methods, an underdeveloped engagement with theory and causal claims. The volume of work published was relatively low, with a small number of countries being the focus of studies. We conclude that scholarship from Africa remains in its infancy and calls for greater attention to advance scholarship that is based on empirical evidence that is grounded in perspectives from different regions and societies in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose -- The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the quality of the current provision for school leadership in Kenya, the extent to which they have an impact on student outcomes and the return on school leadership preparation and development investment. Design/methodology/approach -- The paper draws from educational leadership, management and administration courses delivered by universities and other institutions to aspiring and practising educational leaders in Kenya. It employs a method for evaluating return on leadership development investment first articulated by Eacott (2013). Findings -- While there is growth in provision, consistent with international trends, this provision is more recognised for its standardisation than points of distinction; there is minimal attention to identified dimensions of leadership leading to higher student outcomes which raises questions regarding the universality of school leadership preparation and development curriculum; and the high course costs of current provision is an inhibiting factor in assessing the return on investment in school leadership preparation and development. Research limitations/implications -- The study was limited to publicly available documents from a limited sample of institutions. There is a need for more studies in the area. Practical implications -- Institutions seeking to offer school leadership development have grounds on which to make decision about what programs their school leaders should undertake in terms of cost and quality. The study provides institution offering school leadership development courses evidence on which to base future policy direction. Social implications -- The findings provide a case for investing in school leadership development given the impact courses may have on student outcomes. Originality/value -- The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current provision on school leadership preparation and development in Kenya. It contributes to its understanding in Africa in terms of quality, performance impact and return on investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When it comes to organizational performance, leaders matter. Without significant attention to the preparation and development of school leaders, government initiatives aimed at building world class education systems are unlikely to succeed. Across the Anglophone world leadership preparation and development has become a key leverage point in education policy, with many nations establishing systems of licensing, accreditation and mandatory programmes. Outside the Anglophone world and central powers of the global north, school leadership preparation and development exists in a highly contested space that balances colonial legacy, deficit thinking and an unrelenting desire to compete on a global scale, with calls for localized knowledge, values and histories. In this article we problematize this context by arguing that the ontological complicity of policy interventions – particularly those funded by the global north – is shaping African developments in a manner that is exclusive of localized knowledge and in doing so, constrains that which it sort to improve in the first place. We build our argument on two key points: first, the centrality of preparation programmes in our understanding of educational leadership, management and administration, and second, the apparent absence of interrogation of the socio-political work of constructing the research object. What we propose is a greater need to focus on the epistemological preliminaries of research, rather than just the confirmation or disconfirmation, of the researcher’s model of reality. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose – This paper highlights the potential value of "return on investment" analysis for leadership development investment methods to better providing research informed decision regarding improving organisational outcomes. Design/methodology/approach – Working with published research on leadership dimensions with greatest impact on student outcomes, return on leadership development formula, and empirical research on Australian university-based educational leadership programmes, this paper demonstrates an illustrative example of estimating the return on leadership investment. Findings – Using an illustrative example of Australian university-based educational leadership programmes, this paper argues that methodologies for estimating the return on leadership development offers a powerful tool for making research informed decisions at the individual, organisational and systemic levels. Research limitations/implications – This paper provides the basis for substantial further work on the measures of impact of leadership preparation and development such as matters of duration of effect, instrumentations of quality, costing and causal models of effect. Practical implications – The methodology demonstrated in this paper provides a basis for individuals, organisations and school systems to make decisions regarding the resourcing, or not, of school leadership preparation and development. Social implications – The methodology demonstrated in this paper provides a basis for individuals, organisations and school systems to make decisions regarding the resourcing, or not, of school leadership preparation and development. Originality/value – The application of return on investment analysis has been rare in educational leadership preparation and development programmes and its value opens up information for rigorous debate on the resourcing, or not, of programmes by systems, government and individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge production in educational leadership, management and administration has been, and continues to be, seduced by fads. One of the most significant trends in recent decades has been the ascendancy of ‘leadership’. In this introductory paper, I both introduce the contributions to this special issue and, more importantly, locate this collection within the intellectual tradition of disruptive Australian scholarship and the discourses of JEAH. Specifically, I argue that this collection of papers provides new ways for thinking about leadership, leaders and leading grounded in histories not bounded by historical categories, images and metaphors. This issue is however not the final word, and I encourage the reader to think with, beyond and where necessary against what is argued in the spirit of the intellectual enterprise. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Despite the ‘practice’ turn in the broader management literature, very little work in educational administration has engaged in a theoretical discussion about what constitutes leadership practice. Theoretically informed by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, this paper contributes to the long-established critical tradition in the educational administration literature, to argue that: (i) ‘leadership’ is a label of the managerialist project of the state; (ii) leadership should be thought of as a disruptive practice; and (iii) Bourdieusian theory can enable this thinking, but not as it is frequently mobilised in the educational administration literature. The alternative put forth in this paper is not merely replacing one external narrative (managerialism) with another (Bourdieusian), but rather advancing a theoretical position on what is leadership that paves a way forward for a research programme. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In an era where managerialism is proliferating throughout almost all school practices it is easy for scholarship that mobilises social theory to present negative images of control. Drawing from a single case study within a larger ongoing research program on school leadership, this article explicitly seeks to ask questions of what is it we recognise as leadership. Using the social theory of Pierre Bourdieu, this article does not identify the various structures that inhibit leadership but rather provides a productive means of re-thinking leadership. In doing so, the central argument of the article moves beyond the reproduction of the status quo and provides potential avenues for further inquiry and discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Strategy is a much debated concept in the field of educational leadership. This article draws on a variety of data from a larger research programme focused on reconceptualising strategy in the specific context of school leadership. Rather than offering a definitive voice, this article lays the foundations for further inquiry on the topic through a greater 'practice' orientation. Drawing on policy analysis, questionnaire and interview data, this article proposes an alternate theoretical frame for strategy in educational leadership that takes into account the various social, political, historical and cultural forces which seek to influence the behaviour of both leaders and schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]