What Does it Mean to Exercise Leadership? Leadership in Early Childhood Care and Education: Perceptions Practices and Possibilities
Author(s):
Geraldine Nolan (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2016
Network:
Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Format:
Paper

Session Information

ERG SES E 07, Education Practices

Paper Session

Time:
2016-08-22
15:30-17:00
Room:
OB-E2.18
Chair:
Francesca Gobbo

Contribution

Educational Leadership has been explored from several theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches. Numerous texts/models have emerged and definitions proliferate, yet, the understanding and practice of leadership remain elusive (Leithwood, Mascall & Strauss, 2009). This situation has been echoed transnationally within the early childhood care and education (ECCE) sector (Sumsion, 2006). Where research suggests that ECCE practitioners do not connect with or understand leadership; but rather view themselves primarily as educators (Hallet, 2013; Waniganayake, 2014). This status quo may be responsible for a workforce which is considered marginalised, with limited political power, poor social profile and a weak professional identity (Rodd, 2006). It would appear that the primary focus of current transnational research is the search for effective leadership practice in terms of quality and outcomes for children (what works) (Aubrey, 2011; Cheeseman, 2007) rather than researching and creating new methodologies to connect ECCE practitioners with leadership or developing leadership practice with the intention that the practice and the consequences of leadership practice will be more “productive and sustainable, more just and inclusive;” and ultimately change for the better the world they live and practice in (human flourishing) (Kemmis, McTaggart & Nixon, 2014, p. 66).

 

In Ireland, addressing the status quo is difficult as there is limited evidence available concerning ECCE leadership and very little leadership training. Consequently, it could be reasoned, that due to the limited research and training available, the current understanding of ECCE leadership also remains undeveloped, and may be contributing to the marginalisation of the sector. Therefore, this study set out to explore and explain ECCE stakeholders perceptions, practices and possibilities for leadership. A space was offered to the ECCE stakeholders, five leaders (4 female and 1 male), 12 practitioners, and 26 children in five ECCE settings to voice their meanings and experiences of leadership. To identify what was influencing the stakeholders’ practices and understandings of leadership and to listen to the stakeholders articulate their interventions to develop ECCE leadership. The objective was to generate leadership knowledge to advance the understanding and practice of leadership nationally and transnationally, as currently “we” have little understanding as to what “is going on” with ECCE leadership, nor do we know “why it behaves the way it does”. Until this gap in leadership knowledge is addressed, “we” will not  “be confident about introducing any intervention to change it” (Balikie, 2005, p. 60). The research questions included:

 

1. How do the stakeholders in ECCE understand leadership?

2. How is leadership practiced in ECCE settings?

3. What is influencing the ECCE stakeholders’ understandings and practices of leadership?

4. Which interventions have the possibility to develop leadership?

 

 

In choosing a theoretical framework for this study, the primary concerns were the research participants and the research questions. The researcher recognised that leadership is a socially constructed, and context-specific phenomenon that holds different meanings for various stakeholders of the sector (Nivala, 1997). Accordingly, this study assumed a constructivist paradigm; where the philosophical conviction is that individuals build their construction of knowledge (epistemology) based on interactions with others and the environment (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). The ontological position is that there are multiple realities and as such the methodical procedure employed was a collective case study, using multiple sites (Stake, 2000). The study was also mindful of feminist proposals for undertaking research (hooks, 2000; Harding, 1987; Hesser-Biber, 2012), as all feminisms embrace the notion of empowering [wo]men “to recognise their capacity and power to bring about change” (Stacki & Monkman, 2003, p.174). This study also looked to feminists’ theorist to ensure that the gender dimension was recognised and taken in to account in this research (Oliver, 2014). 

Method

The researcher held the view that a qualitative case study approach and methods of data collection had the most potential to reveal the experiences and understandings of the “people belonging to the case” (Stake, 1988, p.404). Five ECCE settings and the stakeholders belonging to the settings were selected on the premise that multiple case studies had the potential to strengthen the trustworthiness and validity of the study. The researcher took into consideration Miles et al.’s proposal that “five richly researched cases” is the minimum requirement for adequate multiple case sampling (2014, p. 34). The methods of data collection included semi-structured interviews with the ECCE leaders, a focus group discussion and spider map with the practitioners and a focus group conversation and drawing activity with the children. The semi-structured interview was chosen as it had the potential to give the five ECCE leaders a forum to respond spontaneously and in-depth (DeVault & Gross, 2011). There was the possibility some of the practitioners did not wish to participate in the focus group. As such, the most appropriate method of data collection to respond to this situation was considered to be the “spider map” as this method enabled the participants to take control of the pace and structure of the interview and gave them the privacy and time to reflect on their thoughts (Prosser & Loxley, 2008, p.4). The researcher having worked with children for thirty years, was confident that this art activity was a successful and inclusive research technique for listening to children (Robert-Holmes, 2011). This template was provided to the practitioners in the five ECCE schools; photographs of their art activities, were returned to the researcher. The Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2014) approach to qualitative data analysis was chosen (along with MAXQDA, a software package to manage/aid the coding of data) as the approach provides transparency and a clear chain of evidence from data collection to the interpretation of the data. Research proposes that the Irish ECCE sector is marginalised and disenfranchised (Moloney & Pope, 2013). Often, marginalised people do not question the influences that are acting on their everyday experiences and their explanations of leadership can be incomplete (Foucault, 1977; Gunter, 2009) Therefore, an interpretative focus group (IFG) (comprising of five Early Years Specialists) was asked to consider the findings from the data and engage in unravelling the meanings behind this data and provide background information (Leavy, 2007).

Expected Outcomes

The study found that ECCE stakeholders had a somewhat limited understanding of what leadership involves. There appeared to be a contradiction between the leaders’ descriptions of leadership as a democratic process and the practitioners’ interpretations of how it tended to be an autocratic practice. The discovery that leaders and practitioners do not connect with leadership echoes existing literature. Several influences that seemed to be impacting on leadership were identified, including a low professional identity, lack of government support and the political/economic philosophy that may be underpinning the current discourse/ reforms in ECCE. These influences may account for the disconnected and limited manner in which ECCE leadership is understood and practiced, and may also have contributed to the marginalisation of the sector. The high level of leadership potential exhibited in the study and the responses from the stakeholders as to how to advance leadership, may be the impetus to begin the process of connecting ECCE with leadership and advancing leadership, and may also answer the question who should be leading educational research? The stakeholders were skeptical of professional development programmes and alternatively, requested assistance and a space to develop the skills and knowledge necessary to solve their problems as a group. This study proposes that researchers have an individual and collective responsibility to meet this leadership challenge and accept the invitation to join with the stakeholders and share their knowledge and research skills with the ECCE stakeholders’ experience and expertise. Unless this vision of leadership is realised, there is the possibility that the ECCE sector will remain marginalised in the wider political and educational field, with the potential to impact negatively on the well-being of all the ECCE stakeholders This study may have revealed the necessity of a collaborative, participatory form of research within the contemporary educational research landscape.

References

Aubrey, C. (2011). Leading and managing in the early years. London: Sage Publications. Cheeseman, S. (2007). Pedagogical silences in australian early childhood social policy. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(31), 244-254. Retrieved May 28, 2009, from http://search.proquest.com/professional /australianeducationindexdocview/764321462/1483B88ED4F10F2C609/1? De Vault, M., & Gross, G. (2012) Feminist qualitative interviewing: Experience, talk and knowledge. In Hesse-Biber, S. (Ed.), The handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 206–236). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, S. (2011). The sage handbook of research. California: Sage Harding, S. (1987). Introduction. In S. Harding (Ed.), Feminism and Methodology (pp. 1–14). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Hesser-Biber, S.N. (2011). Handbook of feminist research: Theory and practice. CA: Thousands Oaks. hooks, B. (2000). Feminist theory: From the margin to the centre. London: Pluto Press. Hallet, E. (2013). “We all share a common vision and passion: Early years professionals reflect upon their leadership of practice role. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 11(3), 312-325. doi:117777/147666718x13490889 Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014).The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer Leithwood, K., Maschall, B., & Strauss, T. (2009). Distributed leadership according to the evidence. London: Routledge. Miles, M., Huberman, M., & Salanda, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. California: Sage Moloney, M., & Pope, J. (2013). Where to now for early childhood care and education (ECCE) graduates? International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 3(13), 1-11.doi:10.1080/03004279.2013.782327 Nivala, V. (2002). Leadership in general: Leadership in theory. In V. Nivala & E. Hujala (Eds.), Leadership in early childhood education: Cross cultural perspectives (pp.13-23). Finland: Oulu University Press Oliver, V. (2014). Gender issues, In Coghlan, D. & Brydon-Miller, M. (Eds) The sage encycplopedia of action research (pp.374-378). London: Sage. Prosser, J. & Loxley, A. (2008). ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper Introducing Visual Methods. Retrieved November 13, 2014, from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/420/1/MethodsReviewPaperNCRM-010.pdf Robert-Holmes, G. (2012). Doing Your Early Years Research Project. London: Sage Publications. Rodd, J. (2006). Leadership in early childhood education. England: Open University. Stake, R. E. (1988). Case Studies. Retrieved June 26, 2014, from www.tlu.ee/UserFiles/.../K.%20Maslov/Case%20studies_Lecture_4-5.pdf Stake, R. E. (2000). Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.443-467). California: Thousand Oaks. Waniganayake, M. (2014). Being and becoming early childhood leaders: Reflections on leadership studies in early childhood education and the future leadership research agenda. Journal of Early Childhood education research, 3(1), 66-81.

Author Information

Geraldine Nolan (presenting / submitting)
Trinity College Dublin
Co Carlow

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.