Leadership Behaviour of a Headteacher in Building School Leadership Capacity: A Case Study

Author(s):

Sigríður Margrét Sigurðardóttir(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2011

Network:

26. Educational Leadership

Format:

Paper

Session Information

26 SES 05 B,

Paper Session

Time:

2011-09-14

10:30-12:00

Room:

JK 25/138,G, 20

Chair:

David Gurr

Contribution

This paper is built on a qualitative study where the aim was to investigate the coherence between leadership and leadership capacity and its dynamic relation to school improvement in an elementary school in Iceland. The study was relevant as little research has been done in Iceland on this particular topic. This paper focuses on the leadership behaviour of the headteacher, and in which way his leadership behaviour had influenced the leadership capacity of the school as well as the school improvement in general.

Leadership is defined as a reciprocal, purposeful and collective learning and leadership capacity as a broad-based skilful engagement in the work of leadership. It means that leaders, teachers, support staff, students and parents, as well as the wider school community, participate commonly in continuous learning where the aim is to improve students’ learning. A clear connection is made between the leadership capacity of the school and the school improvement, since the former is seen as a necessary basis for sustainable school improvement (Lambert 1998, 2003a, 2006).

Various scholars have demonstrated that for school improvement to occur in the long run, a capable headteacher is required (Fullan, 2007; Gronn, 2010; Leitwood, Louis, Anderson & Wahlstrom, 2004; Leithwood, Harris & Strauss, 2010; Sergiovanni, 2009). The same goes for building leadership capacity of a school (see Harris & Lambert, 2003; Lambert 2003a, 2003b, 2006). Researchers have also demonstrated that headteachers that succeed in school improvement have certain characteristics, abilities and behaviors in common that others lack or have to a less degree. Those include, among other things, knowledge of change and capacity to engage the whole school community in leadership action and continuous and common learning (see Leithwood et al., 2010; Fullan, 2007; Sergiovanni, 2009; Lambert, 2006).

In this study two conceptual frameworks were used to analyze the impact of the headteacher on building high leadership capacity and on the school’s improvement. One was Sergiovanni’s (2009) theory of the forces of leadership as essential to a successful headteacher. The other was developed by Lambert (2006) and looks at the personal attributes and the leadership behaviour of the headteacher in building high leadership capacity.

The results of this study outline the importance of the headteacher in building the leadership capacity of a school as well as the dynamic relations between the school leadership capacity building and the school’s improvement. This is in accordance with Lambert´s framework (2006). Furthermore, the findings fit Sergiovanni’s (2009) description of the headteacher’s role in school improvement. This indicates that both frameworks can be beneficial to guide improvement efforts of schools and the headmaster’s role in the process.

Method

Information was gathered during the school year 2008–2009 about planned improvement efforts in the school from the time they commenced, ten years earlier, until the present day. A school was selected that had the reputation as well as research indications of having made a positive shift in its culture and educational goals and where there had been the same principal from the beginning of this shift to the present day. A qualitative case study method was used (Hitchcock and Hughes, 1995) with around 30 visits to the school. Data was collected by observations, examination of documents, semi-structured interviews, informal conversation and a survey. Participants came from all sectors of the school community. The aim of the study, and the frameworks used in the study, marked the outlines of the data collection. In combination, data was analyzed as it was gathered, and themes that emerged used to guide further steps (see Charmaz, 2006).

Expected Outcomes

The findings indicate that the headteacher has the capacity needed, both to succeed in school improvement and to build high school leadership capacity, and that he has taken actions accordingly. It is clear that leadership capacity has grown, and the school has succeeded in many improvement projects. His personal attributes and leadership behaviour have been of great importance in the process of developing leadership capacity at the school and for general school improvement. Additionally he is found to have charismatic leadership characteristics. His vision and actions had led to a shift in the school’s culture towards a much stronger culture and a clearer sense of common purpose built on trust, respect and common values. It had led to involvement of other leaders, teachers and students in improvement work but less of support staff and parents. It had led to increased leadership capacity of teachers and students but less so of support staff and parents. The findings showed that the headteacher is still rather personally important for the school improvement. The future level of leadership capacity depends on how well he will manage to involve all groups and individuals in the improvement work and delegate more leadership tasks.

References

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Thousand Oaks. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4. ed). New York: Teachers College. Harris, A. (2008). Distributed school leadership: Developing tomorrow´s leaders. London: Routledge. Harris, A., & Lambert, L. (2003). Building leadership capacity for school improvement. Philadelphia: Open University. Hitchcock, G., & Hughes, D. (1995). Research and the teacher. A qualitative introduction to school-based research (2. ed.). London: Routledge. Gronn, P. (2010). Where to next for educational leadership? In T. Bush, L. Bell & D. Middlewood (editors), The principles of educational leadership and management (2. ed., pp. 70–86). Los Angeles: Sage. Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Lambert, L. (2003a). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: ASCS Association for supervision and curriculum development. Lambert, L. (2003b). Leadership redefined: An evocative context for teacher leadership. School Leadership and Management, 23(4), 421–430. Lambert, L. (2006). Lasting leadership: A study of high leadership capacity schools. The Educational Forum, 70(3), 238–254. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Strauss, T. (2010). Leading school turnaround: How successful leaders transform low-performing schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: Review of research. New York: The Wallace Foundation. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2009). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective (6. ed.). London: Allyn & Bacon.

Author Information

Sigríður Margrét Sigurðardóttir (presenting / submitting)

University of Akureyri

Faculty of Education

Akureyri

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.