Topic 1 Discussion

Consider your current professional setting and identify leadership practices which resemble or can be traced to one or more of the leadership perspectives traced in Topic One.

Hierarchical Leadership - There is a clear structural component to the system of people within the organisation and the roles and responsibilities within the hierarchy.

Management vs. Leadership - Many of the tasks that our senior leadership team is focused around the management of people and resources rather than moving people towards a common goal of change. These could include ensuring planning is executed, editing reports, leading meetings with updates, etc. There are also times when the leadership team is inspiring teachers to make transformational changes such as focusing on the mission when implementing new change to appeal to the values of the staff rather than just behaviour.

Role Theory - Teachers are given a very clear outline of their job description (as are all employees within the school). However, the role and responsibilities may be perceived differently depending on who the Head of Primary is (we’ve had some turnover in the last few years). The expectations of teachers by different stakeholders may at times come into conflict making it difficult to navigate to ensure everyone’s expectations can be met.

Is there one perspective which seems dominant?

I believe the hierarchical approach to the organisation is the dominant perspective. While there are growing opportunities for collaborative approaches within the system, the overarching focus remains a top-down approach to the final decision making.

What evidence is there for your conclusion?

While there is no government dictating curriculum etc, the teachers must still follow the directions of their superiors. All final decisions are signed off on by the Head of School. As I’ve mentioned in some of my blog posts, while there is teacher voice within some of the decision making processes to encourage buy in, teachers have limited influence on the final decisions. Policies and procedures are purely created by the senior leadership team and followed by staff. Through the hierarchy model, decision making can be more efficient and often higher quality, however, missing the important aspect of buy-in.

How does the evolution of leadership perspectives impact on current leadership practice in your professional setting?

I believe that the school is trying to move to a more collaborative approach to leadership. Change in mindset, culture and processes take time. It is optimistic that the school providing opportunities for more teacher input such as plus/deltas with events, policies and procedures. Knowing that the school would like to value teacher opinions more, I believe that in time and with an effective leadership team facilitating change management, we will see even more of a shift towards a collegial system.

Recent Constructions of Leadership

Recent Constructions of Leadership

“Much of the current debate about educational leadership . . . has its roots in the larger debate about whether organisations (e.g., your professional setting) are best understood as hierarchical, bureaucratic systems or as collegial, collaborative systems”. (Owens, 2001:55)

• Is it a simple either – or? What factors influence your conclusion?
• To what extent, if any, does the task at hand play a role in understanding organisational purpose and by association the nature of educational leadership?
• What other factors may, can or do influence the debate?
• To what extent do you think the debate is important or even necessary?

Owens suggests there is a debate around the type of system an organisation operates under. However, within most systems, a simple either - or approach is never the case. Education is no exception. In a traditional and historical perspective, the hierarchical systems were more predominant. However, as many schools move towards an inquiry and collaborative  model of teaching and learning, this also flows into the staff rooms in terms of planning and execution of different aspects of the organsiation. I believe that organisations tend to be more hierarchical or collaborative but will also have tendencies of the other type of system given certain situations or tasks.

I believe that my school still functions as a hierarchical system in most departments and overall systemic structure. In a number of our policies, the structural organisational flowchart diagram is evidence showing who reports to who and who holds what responsibilities at each level. This further perpetuates the idea that a hierarchy exists.

That being said, my education technology department operates much more as a collaborative team. When designing our digital citizenship curriculum, it began with a clear mission and vision from my supervisor. However, the creation and execution was collaborative not only between the department but also with parents, students and staff.

I also find many examples where something is implemented (for example report cards moving online only) and then feedback is asked for after and sometimes before. This feedback is used to continually refine the decisions of the senior leadership team in their vision and execution of ideas with the final say being made by those in higher power.

Factors that influence the debate include the government or governing body of the school. Some private schools have board members instead of a government dictating certain aspects of the school while other schools may have higher parent community say.

Our school does use a more collegial, collaborative approach for a number of initiatives. Our working groups in Primary are divided by interest (inquiry, mathematics, language). The groups meet about once a month to discuss what they would like to research in and how this impacts the school. Much of our curriculum programme developments have been explored through this avenue before being signed off on by the senior leadership team (which does perpetuate the hierarchy) but then the training and implementation is lead by the developing staff members. This helps to empower all staff members to be contributing members to the ongoing development of our school programmes with current teaching and learning strategies.

Readings

Owens, R. (2001). Mainstreams of organizational thought. In Organizational behavior in education : instructional leadership and school reform (7th ed.) (pp. 34-54). Boston : Allyn and Bacon.

Owens, R. G. (2004). Organizational theory in the modern period. In Organizational behavior in education : adaptive leadership and school reform (8th ed.) (pp. 104- 150). Boston: Pearson/A and B.

Owens, Robert G. (2011) Organizational Behaviour in Education: Leadership and School Reform (pp 199-221). Boston: Pearson.

Foucault's Quote

Response to the following quote:

‘Is it surprising that prisons resemble factories, schools, barracks, hospitals, which all resemble prisons?’ (Foucault, 1991, page 228)

While the comparison is a bit extreme, it does hold some value. These are all institutions set up to hold particular roles and responsibilities within a community. The comparison between factories and schools have long been connected as schools creating pupils to do specific jobs post graduation with Fordism. In all institutions mentioned there is a hierarchy of leadership to ensure the roles, rules and responsibilities are done as expected.

That being said, schools have changed a lot over time. With inquiry learning, student voice is becoming more and more important in the classroom, leading teachers to facilitate learning and learn alongside their students.

References

Foucault, M. (1991). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin.

Hierarchical Forms of Leadership

In response to MacBeth, how relevant is this account of the authority of the King in Elizabethan times to contemporary understandings of authority?

During Elizabethan times, there were distinct hierarchical forms of leadership with the King having absolute power, and various tiers below with the peasants/farmers on the lowest rung. The power and leadership are driven in a top-down model. There were very clear structures in place whereby people had very specific roles and did not change in the hierarchy.

Comparing to contemporary understandings of authority in my current school, there is a senior leadership team. However, there is much more of a top-down AND bottom-up approach depending on the situation. Middle management leaders take charge of different various portfolios and individuals have the opportunity to grow and be promoted. At times, the Head of School or Senior leadership team do need to make strong decisions but the gathering of opinions and feedback often inform decision making.

References 

Shakespeare, W. (1974). The Tragedy of Macbeth. In The Riverside Shakespeare (pp. 1306-1342). USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.