Given flow-on effects of a global pandemic, increasing wealth disparities, acute environmental concerns and ever-changing technological options, school principals may arguably be in greater need of help than ever before. What help do school principals need and what resources do they seek and utilise for assistance? Principals of small rural schools face a number of specific challenges regarding seeking sources of help and guidance. This presentation reports on research that examined what kind of help principals of small rural schools seek, who and where help comes from, and the boundaries and constraints to patterns of principal help-seeking. 

Under self-management or other decentralized models of school education policy, principals face increased and intensified responsibilities. School principal decision-making and negotiating a way forward—ideally to positive resolutions of issues—between individuals and groups with multiple and diverse views on what is the ‘right’ thing to do in any particular situation remains a complex and relational undertaking that can stimulate anxiety and weaken principal wellbeing.

Work overload has been identified with high levels of principal stress along with the challenges of relational demands of school leadership. Adrian Carr (1994) proposed that a factor that contributes to principal stress and depression is that they are in contradictory positions of being ‘managers and supervisors’ responsible for disseminating and implementing government policy, while not having control over capital, of “the apparatus of production as a whole” (p. 29). Carr goes on to point out:

Principals have progressively had their individual authority diminished as the whole authority structure of the public education system has become more bureaucratized and the government insists on principals having a technical orientation to their work- an insistence that only serves to exacerbate the tensions which arise from their contradictory class location (Carr, 1994, p. 29)

Although Carr was referring to Australian government moves to position school leaders within and by managerialism, is recognisable in other countries, including England and Wales (see, e.g., Thrupp & Wilmott, 2003; Archer, 2018[2002]).

Changes in demands and expectations on school principals accompanied by higher levels of accountability has increased tensions for principals caught between requirements of education authorities and the needs of students, families and the school community, and their feelings of uncertainty and instability (“Are we doing enough? Are we doing the right thing? How will we measure up?” [Ball, 2001, p. 212]). Social and professional isolation may also be factors for rural school principals impacting on the range of sources they can access for advice and guidance (e.g. Ewington, et al., 2008).

Multi-levels of governance add complexity to systems and priorities in political, regulatory and financial landscape of education and schools. The OECD (2021) reported that the COVID-19 pandemic has meant that “National, regional, and local governments find they cannot count on following a straight or linear course of policy action (p. 2) and that “Clear, transparent, rapid, and accurate communication among all parties is fundamental on many levels” (OECD, 2021, p. 100). Education (and Health) authorities have faced a need to provide clear, timely, and practical guidance in a rapidly changing landscape due to the impact and flow-on effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. This presentation seeks to examine the question, what can be learned from pre-pandemic patterns of principal help seeking that could inform the provision of access and types of help sought? The provision of appropriate and useful help for busy school leaders is important to principals—and those who care about the human beings employed in positions of school leadership—in times of high demand on governments’ and community’s social and financial resources.

Much of the evidence was gathered from face-to-face (pre-pandemic) interviews with principals, past and present, of small rural schools in New Zealand. Further insights were gained through perusing Education Ministry documents, literature review, and some clarification with participants. Small schools were defined as those with up to 150 students and 6-8 teaching staff). Interviews were semi-structured (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009) and averaged an hour in length. Transcripts, field notes and researcher journals were analysed utilising abductive processes (Brinkmann, 2014; Earl Rinehart etc) within a contemporary-pragmatist theoretical approach (Dewey, 1938; Frega, 2015; Rosiek, 2013). This evidence was re-evaluated to answer the following sub-research questions: 1. What help do school principals seek? 2. Where do school principals of small rural schools find the help they seek? 3. What can be learned from patterns in principal help-seeking to inform the provision of help for school principals in our current pandemic era? That is, how can past strategies positively inform present and future decision-making? Abductive processes aim not to arrive at any universal or fixed knowledge but to reveal what is viewed to be good or desirable (Koopman, 2011) to improve and extend what is happening in the present for progressive improvement (Colapietro, 2011, Frega, 2017). The aim of analysis in this study was to seek what can be learned from patterns in principal help-seeking to inform the provision of help for school principals in our current pandemic era.

To summarise, principals in this study sought help with situations arising, relational tensions, and ethical issues. Types of help needed ranged from just-in-time advice on where to access financial resources and expertise to reflective conversations—opportunities to vent, retell and reshape past instances or ongoing situations. Reflective conversations helped these principals to find the lessons or humour in situations, and develop their sense of perspective, which supported resilience and strengthened coping strategies. These principals had learned where and from whom they could get help. They had direct phone numbers of expert individuals in relevant organisations (such as the local Ministry of Education Office, the police or social services), whom they could call on for guidance. These principals had colleagues-in-support, often other principals in similar but not competing school settings, who they had developed one-to-one relationships with for semi-regular and mutual sharing of current challenges and difficulties to explore next-step options. They had also established relationships with individuals who served as mentors for discussions about difficult situations. Some sought helpful knowledge from published authors and some from previous lecturers they had come to know through their higher education study. Network events, organised principal tours, and conferences provided opportunities to observe other schools, hear stories of other principals’ experiences, and to confer regarding available official sources of resources and expertise. Online network spaces were used for information gathering but none of the principals interviewed would record challenges they were experiencing in any public, or potentially public, forum. The key characteristics of people principals sought out needed to be trustworthy and hold confidences. Generally, these relationships had grown naturally over time and were not based on any formal arrangements. In the session, I will explore the learning from this study that can inform the provision of help for principals of small rural schools.

Archer, R. (2018). Education Policy and Realist Social Theory: primary teachers, child-centred philosophy and the new managerialism. Routledge. Ball, S. (2001). Performativities and fabrications in the education economy: Towards the performative society. In D. Gleeson and C. Husbands (Eds.), The Performing School (pp. 210-226). RoutledgeFalmer. Brinkmann, S. (2014). Doing without data. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(6) 720-725. Carr. A. (1994). Anxiety and Depression among School Principals - Warning, Principalship Can Be Hazardous to Your Health. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(3), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239410063094 Colapietro, V. (2011). Customary reflection and innovative habits. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 25, 161-173. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company. (Reprinted 1986, in J.A Boydston (Ed.), K. Poulos (Text Ed.), E. Nagel (Introduction). John Dewey, The Later Works, 1925–1953 (Volume 12: 1938, pp. 1–527). Southern Illinois University Press. Earl Rinehart, K., (2021). Abductive analysis in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(2) 303-311 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800420935912 Ewington, J., Mulford, J., Kendall, D., Edmunds, B., Kendall, L., & Silins, H. (2008). Successful school principalship in small schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(5), 546-561. Frega, R. (2015). Beyond morality and ethical life: Pragmatism and critical theory cross paths. Journal of Philosophical Research, 40, 63-96. doi:10.5840/jpr2015111653. Frega, R. (2017). A tale of two philosophies. Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 31(2), 260-272. Koopman, C. (2011). Genealogical pragmatism: How history matters for Foucault and Dewey. Journal of Philosophy of History, 5, 533-561. doi 10-1163/187226311X599943 Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. ISBN 978-0-7619-2542-2 OECD (2021). The territorial impact of COVID-19: Managing the crisis across levels of government. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/the-territorial-impact-of-covid-19-managing-the-crisis-across-levels-of-government-d3e314e1/ Rosiek, J. (2013). Pragmatism and post-qualitative futures. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 692-705. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2013.788758 Thrupp, M., & Willmott, R. (2003). Education management in managerialist times: Beyond the textual apologists. Open University Press