MGT601 Dynamic Leadership

1. What difference does educational leadership make in schools
2. How does educational leadership influence schools and student outcomes
3. What are the four main lenses that Harris identifies  Write a brief summary of each and list examples from your own experience or context.
4. What kind of work needs to be done in the future in terms of describing educational leadership in Harris’ view.

School leadership has emerged as an important aspect of student learning recently. Many researchers now focus on it as a factor on its own rather than as a part of school administration and management. Harris (2005) states that education leadership has the ability to make a difference in the capability of any learning institution to improve. This is through influencing the quality of teaching and motivation of instructors hence determining the failure or success of an institution.

Harris further identifies four major lenses used to evaluate various leadership theories in education as managerial, transformational, interpretive and instructional.

1. Managerial

A leadership approach that is more concerned with structures rather than people. In this system, the leader focuses on the purpose and goals of the organization and help people to achieve those goals.

1. Transformational

It is an approach more concerned with the norms of an organization rather than the established structures. It focuses on commitment and capacities of the people. Instead of exercising control over people, the leader engages them for mutual benefit.

1. Interpretive

This approach involves listening and talking with teachers and students and acting on new possibilities that emerge from the interaction. It views organizations as communities emphasizing creativity as a social process rather than an individual genius.

1. Instructional

It seeks to build the capacity of student and teachers by developing social, academic and professional capital (Sergiovanni 2001). It comprises communication with instructors, encouraging their professional development and promoting instructor reflection.

In conclusion, a lot still need to be done in future. According to Harris, more research need to be done on relationship between leadership and organizational success. The matter of contextual difference between institutions need to be addressed. The leadership style that best suit also be established since it is an area that has not been properly addressed. Lastly, the effects of organizational change on leadership and different type of leaders need to be established.

1. Leadership in the vocational education and training sector

Recent changes in expectations and roles of leaders in the Australian vocational education and training sector has prompted a lot of interest in the field. This has led to many research projects being undertaken to try and establish the new leadership expertise required for effective performance. Managers are now required to adopt best practices in the running of academic institutions hence transforming from the traditional functional and operational model to a more corporate model. They are expected to maintain the financial viability of these institutions which is a shift from the past. One may argue that there is a deliberate attempt to employ private sector policies in managing the public sector.

The emphasis is no longer in cost cutting and efficiency only but also the quality of service just like the private sector. Falk & Smith (2003) refers to these changes as corporatization of the vocational education and training sector. Different studies have also tried coming up with best ways in which these new management expertise can be nurtured and how the older generations can be trained to keep up with these changes. This is because the older generation make up the bigger percentage of education managers.

Mulcahy (2003) emphasizes that strong leadership in vocational education and training requires acknowledging a sense of the ‘high tension zone’. That there is an urgent need for the integration of different set of characteristics and processes for effective leadership. A holistic approach should be used in formulation and implementation of vocational education policies.

2. Leadership, Management and Administration

Management, leadership and administration are terms usually used synonymously. Leadership involves setting up of organizational goals, providing means of achieving them and making others follow them willingly. Management involves setting up policies and having them accomplished through others while administration is the general act of governing an organization (Oplatka,2009). The difference is that management is normally answerable to the administration. Education administration simply refers to the management or running of educational institution (Bush, 1999). According to Oplatka (2009), globalization, where international institutions now have a bigger influence on all spheres of life is the cause of the recent greater attention being given to education by governments. Education administration has taken center stage in addressing the issue of quality in the learning institutions. There is a universal agreement that the only way to realize greater improvement in our schools is through effective leadership and management. More people are therefore advocating for a critical examination of the effectiveness of the current policies being used in the field.

However, Oplatka argues that the current literature available on effective leadership and management for improvement of learning institutions are not adequate in addition to the already observable disagreements on the right direction to be followed. For instance, he mentions that the research available on the field are deficient in proper quality and form (p.24). There are also concerns that the information available are irrelevant to current problems. That the research available are more theoretical than practical hence the difficulty in applying them successfully. The conventional research available in this field are also not easily accessible by education policy makers and administrators.

In view of the above problems, Oplatka states that there is a need for the integration of research studies into conclusive evidence for the benefit of administrators. There should be a well-structured relationship between the field researchers and the practitioners. Formal channels for funding and facilitating of research should be established.

References

Bush, T. (1999), Crisis or crossroads? The discipline of educational management in the late 1990s, Educational Management and Administration, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 239-52.

Harris, A. (2005). Leading from the chalk-face: An overview of school   leadership. Leadership and Organization Development, 1(1), 73-87

Mulcahy, D. (2003). Leadership and management in vocational education and training. Staying focussed on strategy - Volume 1 Available from http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/39516/20040212-0000/www.ncver.edu.au/gda.pdf

Falk, I. & Smith, I. (2003) Leadership in vocational education and training. Leadership by design, not by default, Leabrook: NCVER.

Oplatka, I. (2009). The field of educational administration: A historical overview of scholarly attempts to recognize epistemological identities, meaning and boundaries from the 1960s onwards. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1), 8-35

Sergiovanni, T. ( 2001) Leadership: What’s in it for Schools? London: Routledge Falmer.