Leadership in Education Strong Leadership

Leadership in Education

Strong leadership is needed in the field of education perhaps as much or more than in any field. Certainly business and science are fields that cry out for strong leadership too, but if America's children are not challenged in school by strong leadership, the results of a poor education will send negative ripples through all other industries. Hence, this paper highlights some educational leadership strategies and perspectives that are available in the literature.

Scholarly Articles

Leadership for Principals in Underperforming Schools: Judith C. Houle has published an article that addresses the need for leadership in public schools that are so-called "underperforming" schools (Houle, 2006, p. 142). Houle, who is superintendent of public schools in Belchertown, Massachusetts, writes that because of the pressure on schools to perform -- under the legislation No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and other laws passed in various states -- the state of Connecticut has passed legislation that provides support for principals of underperforming schools. The recent push behind the legislation (called "An Act Concerning Education Accountability," passed in 1999) focused on the 28 schools that were struggling in the state. The legislation allowed the Connecticut State Department of Education (SDE) to establish an "Urban Principals' Academy" (UPA) which basically was designed to "enhance the leadership skills of the principals" of the 28 underperforming schools (Houle, p. 144).

Noting that principals already are burdened with paperwork, regulations personnel issues and more, Houle points out that principals from troubled schools nonetheless we required to gather at a neutral side to receive training in: a) instructional leadership; b) capacity building; and c) personal renewal (Houle, p. 147). After two years of these UPA training seminars for principals, if any of the 28 schools in question had not made "sufficient progress," the local board of education was authorized under the legislation to: a) close and "reconstitute" the school; b) "restructure grades and programs"; c) provide on-site management (from the state); and d) "provide interdistrict choice" (Houle, p. 147).

Multicultural Leadership: On the subject of urban school principals and their leadership roles, an article in the journal Urban Education points out that among their other responsibilities, principals must also serve as multicultural leaders. This article references the multicultural leadership abilities of six principals; the research examined the multicultural leadership "through in-depth qualitative case studies…through the course of a school year" (Gardiner, 2006, p. 563). The point of this research was to determine if principals in 4 elementary schools and 2 secondary schools in "urban" environments were promoting inclusion, were supporting "pedagogical practices" among their teachers, were being a catalyst for change -- and also, were the principals "building connections between schools and communities"? (Gardiner, p. 563).

All six of these administrators were Caucasian (3 men and 3 women); the research methods involved in-depth interviews with the principals, a thorough review of school Web sites, reports, catalogs, and other publications. The results of the research showed that "…not one administrator recalled focusing on multicultural issues during his or her principal credentialing"; in fact the principals' training had for the most part been focused on "traditional business management (e.g. planning, finance, management, human factors, and public relations)" (Gardiner, p. 567). Today, administration preparation programs require courses in diversity and multicultural leadership, but when these principals went through training there were no such requirements. "In general, diversity issues were not the focus" of the six principals, Gardiner writes (p. 568). Three of the principals (Caruthers, Brown, and Kroll) were "committed to becoming multiculturally proficient" and demonstrated "multicultural leadership" -- and Caruthers, in particular, embraced diversity. To wit, the principal believes that "all students can succeed" including "low-income learners" and ELL learners. "Your life at home may be the pits. It may be terrible. But you're at school now. What can we do to make you more successful?" Caruthers stated (Gardiner, p. 569). Caruthers has worked to bring low-income learners up to the gifted and talented level of class work: "Some people are surprised by that," Caruthers added (p. 569). It takes leadership to make cultural change work, Gardiner asserted.

Distributed Leadership: Are students able to achieve higher academic goals due to "distributed leadership" strategies? According to David Hartley writes that despite the positive publicity that distributed leadership (DL) has enjoyed -- and the number of schools that have embraced it -- "There is little evidence of a direct causal relationship between distributed leadership and pupil attainment" (Hartley, 2007, p. 202). Hartley's article seeks to determine why DL is so popular and yet there is confusion and "conceptual elasticity" surrounding the application of DL and the results of DL. What is distributed leadership? Basically Hartley explains that DL is leadership that is "shared across the organization" (p. 203). But at the time the article was published "policy is ahead of the evidence" that DL is succeeding in helping students progress academically (p. 204).

Another way to look at DL is that it reaches out for "flexibility and decentralization" and attempts to "empower" players who work down the ladder from the key school administrators. The word "democratic" is often associated with DL, Hartley writes (p. 205). Why did it get started? Hartley (p. 206) said it emerged after the failure of the "charismatic hero" that was associated with "transformational leadership." Also it was initiated in England partly because there are many more complex tasks associated with school leadership, hence the responsibilities have been spread around. Legislation and policies at the government level also have created a need for school leadership to embrace "greater partnerships and collaborations" (p. 206).

Feminine Leadership in Schools: Marian Court, senior lecturer and coordinator in Educational Administration at Massey University, New Zealand, believes that courses in gender, class and leadership can be "unwittingly stitched back into an individual's collaborative practices" (Court, 2007, p. 607). Mainstream institutions train leaders more effectively when they embrace the concept of "feminist consciousness, politics and relationships" within the academic structure, Court asserts (p. 607). This article details the "three-way teaching co-principal collective" that Court studied. Basically this research is designed to erase any doubts that "fully shared leadership/management approach" can be effective. In the example she shares in this article, three women, Liz and Jane (feminists) and Karen (traditionalist, non-feminist) accepted roles as co-principals and brought stability and innovation to a school (Court, p. 610).

Women as Leaders: Pat Taylor wrote a scholarly article in 1994 that although it is 16 years old, offers quality ideas about leadership, timeless ideas. For example, Taylor references noted scholar Alice H. Eagly, author (Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders) and Professor of Philosophy at Northwestern University. Eagly and a team of scholars reviewed the "most frequently researched aspects of leadership style" -- vis-a-vis gender and leadership styles -- which included: interpersonal orientation, task orientation, and "participative vs. directive decision making" (Taylor, p. 6). The results of the research revealed that "…the most substantial sex difference was the tendency for female principals to lead in a more democratic and less autocratic style than did male principals" (Eagly, p. 91). Taylor also quotes from Anita Roddick's definition of feminine principles of leadership which included "…making intuitive decisions, not getting hung up on hierarchy or all those dreadfully boring business-school management ideas" (Taylor, p. 7).