Session Information
26 SES 08 A, Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability
Paper Session
Contribution
Proposal information
The present paper investigates what recent research finds necessary to support school leaders and leadership teams in an age of accountability if they are to support their teachers to improve the quality of their teaching and increase student learning. The principal is the peak positional leader of the school, with overall responsibility and accountability. Middle leaders, as assistant principals and deputy heads, are positional leaders below the principal level, with defined and limited leadership responsibilities.
School leadership has received much attention in the last two decades, being acknowledged as important for school improvement and increased student learning (Aas, 2013; Cuthbert, Møller, & Ozga, 2013; Hallinger, 2003; Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008; Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008). Pressure for increased accountability on principals, and extending to other school leaders is a distinctive hallmark of the present period of educational reform where standards, student outcomes, documentation, competition and a market-orientation have become central issues in many countries (Gunter & Fitzgerald, 2013; Møller, Prøitz, Rye, & Aasen, 2013). School leaders in general but principals in particular, have experienced the demands of increased accountability, so much so that internationally there is a concern that the preparation of educational leaders has not changed enough to deal with the complex challenges of 21st century (Aas & Törnsén, 2016; Dempster, Lovett, & Flückiger, 2011; Pont, Nusche, & Moorman, 2008).
Møller (2009) distinguishes managerial accountability from professional accountability. Managerial accountability refers to a person’s position in a hierarchy and his or her responsibility towards superiors concering tasks that are delegated. This means that schools are accountable to higher levels of an education system and that they required to focus mainly on monitoring inputs and outputs. Professional accountability refers to how a person’s commitment to a community of professionals makes him or her perceive a duty to adhere to the standards of the profession. Both forms of accountability face different pressures when reform policies increase accountability demands on principals and their leadership teams.
Research question:
What kind of support do school principals and leadership teams need to lead their schools in an age of accountability? What does recent research point towards?
Objective:
The present study aims to identify supporting key factors which can contribute to developing confident and successful school leaders, and for improving their leadership practices in a context of managerial and professional accountability. For the purposes of the paper, from here on we refer to principals and others engaged with them as school leaders.
Theoretical framework:
This project draws upon a distributed perspective on school leadership, focusing on activity, as the interactions between people concerned with solving a problem or completing a task (Spillane, 2006). The leader plus-aspect (Spillane, 2006) focuses on structure, function and design, and acknowledges that there are both formal and informal leaders who assume leadership roles. This conception of activity sees leadership practice as constituted between leaders, followers and the situation. Constituted in the web of interactions of all three elements, leadership practice cannot be extracted from the socio-cultural context of structure and system in which it appears. Leaders’ practices emerge through interaction with other people and situations.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Aas, M. (2013). Ledelse av skoleutvikling [Leading school development]. Oslo: Universitetsforl. Aas, M. (2016). Bli en bedre skoleleder: gruppecoaching som verktøy [How to become a successful school leader: Using group coahing as a tool]Oslo: Universitetsforl. Aas, M., & Törnsén, M. (2016). Examining Norwegian and Swedish leadership training programs in the light of international research. Nordic Studies in Education, 35(02), 173-187. Clarke, S., & Wildy, H. (2011). Providing professional sustenance for leaders of learning: The glass half full? In T. Townsend & J. MacBeath (Eds.), International handbook of leadership for learning (pp. 673-690). Dordercht: Springer. Cuthbert, R., Møller, J., & Ozga, J. (2013). Leadership and the reform of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(2), 281-294. doi:10.1080/01425692.2012.761385 Dempster, N., Lovett, S., & Flückiger, B. (2011). Content and strategies to develop school leadership: A select literature review. Melbourne: The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Gunter, H., & Fitzgerald, T. (2013). New Public Management and the modernisation of education systems 1. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 45(3), 213- 219. doi:10.1080/00220620.2013.796914 Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading Educational Change: reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352. doi:10.1080/0305764032000122005 Huber, S. G. (2011). Leadership for learning - Learning for leadership: The impact of professional development. In T. Townsend & J. MacBeath (Eds.), International handbook of leadership for learning. Dordercht: Springer. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven Strong Claims about Successful School Leadership. School Leadership & Management, 28(1), 27-42. Møller, J. (2009). School leadership in an age of accountability: Tensions between managerial and professional accountability. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 37-46. Møller, J., Prøitz, T. S., Rye, E., & Aasen, P. (2013). Kunnskapsløftet som styringsform. In B. Karseth, J. Møller, & P. Aasen (Eds.), Reformtakter om fornyelse og stabilitet i grunnopplæringen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Pont, B., et.al, Nusche, D., & Moorman, H. (2008). Improving School Leadership, Volume 1: Policy and Practice. Retrieved from Paris: Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Differential Effects of Leadership Types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635-674. doi:10.1177/0013161x08321509 Spillane, J. (2006). Distributed Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. A Wiley Imprint.
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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.