26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Leading for Diversity: An Exploration of Useful Theoretical Frameworks
Carolyn Shields
Wayne State University, United States of America
Presenting Author: Shields, Carolyn
Diversity is sometimes seen as one of the major challenges facing educators today. In this century, educational organizations, including throughout Europe, face numerous changes and challenges including the recent covid-19 pandemic, global unrest, rapid migration, and so on. Amid these changes, attempting to educate students from a range of socio,-cultural and economic backgrounds, as well as of different genders, religions, and sexual orientations, is often seen as problematic.
Moreover, in 2015, 160 nations, including all entities in Europe, signed on to the Sustainable Development goals of the United Nations. The fourth of these calls for education to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” Here, these concepts imply that attention must be paid to diversity and inequity within all nations.
The 2023 EERA conference theme, “the value of diversity in educational research” implies the positive nature of diversity within the larger frame of educational research. This would therefore suggest that the theoretical frameworks which could best support educational research in the 21st century would pay explicit attention to diversity. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily seem to be the case.
The question, therefore, to be examined here is “what kind of leadership might foster the inclusion of diversity “into the core of educational values, educational practices, … , and educational research” to promote the sustainable development goal of inclusion and equity, for as the 2023 call for proposals states, this “is a complex, contested and at times contentious concept.”
Purpose: The purpose of this largely conceptual paper is to explore, drawing both on research related to leadership theories and on data from interviews conducted over 30 years with school and district leaders, the ways in which theory guides and inspires practice. The objectives are:
a) to distinguish among the abilities of various theories of educational leadership (positivist, neutral, and critical) to lead and serve multiple and diverse school communities, and
b) to identify the pros and cons of various kinds of theories as a foundation for inclusivity, equity, and excellence in the 21st century.
Background. Culbertson (1995) explains that one of the dominant beliefs that emerged from a seminal educational leadership conference held in Chicago in 1956 was that “ought” questions had no place in science, and hence, lie outside the study and practice of educational administration. From this conference, he argued, emerged the common wisdom that a theory of educational leadership should not be normative, but should instead be scientific and objective—a concept that continues to dominate the field both in North America and in Europe. This debate has been heightened in recent years, as scholars like Uljens and Ylimaki (2017) have powerfully asserted that educational leadership must be what they call non-affirmative – arguing that “non-affirmative education theory allows us to understand and promote recognition based democratic citizenship (political, economical and cultural) that respects cultural, ethical and epistemological variations in a globopolitan era” (p. 3).
Nevertheless, it is apparent from the work of scholars like Follett (1918) or Greenfield (1978) that values have never been far from the surface of educational leadership. Moreover by the 1980s, scholars were arguing, not only for a normative approach, but for a critical theory of leadership (Foster, 1986; Quantz, Rogers, & Dantley, 1991) that addressed the “needs of the billions of the world’s people in the direct want (Burns, 1978).
In an era of heightened awareness of diversity, a theory of leadership that attends explicitly to the concept of diversity may be necessary to overcome the hegemony of traditional dominant groups and to be inclusive and equitable towards diverse perspectives, cultures, and values.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedPrimarily conceptual, this paper draws on numerous studies describing approaches to leadership, both empirical and conceptual, and argues the need for a balance between positivist, technical approaches to school leadership and more critical, values-oriented approaches if we are to reform education to address the diversity of the 21st century. The paper also draws on 30+years of research related to leadership in schools often with heterogeneous and low-income populations in which the purpose was to understand whether (and if so how) theories of leadership have helped them to address the complex challenges of todays’ educational leaders.
Here, I use abductive reasoning (Evers & Wu, 2006) to examine various approaches to leadership. They cite a number of authors (including Josephson & Josephson, 1994; Lycan, 1988; and Walton, 2004) as they develop their argument that in abductive reasoning, “the justification of a generalisation relies on the fact that it explains the observed empirical data and no other alternative hypothesis offers a better explanation of what has been observed” (Evers & Wu, 2006, p. 513). In other words, it uses “inference to the best explanation” (p. 528). As will be seen, it is my belief that this approach may be used to examine the relevance of various leadership theories.
Oakes and Rogers (2006) argue that “technical knowledge is insufficient to bring about equitable education, even when attention is paid to changing the school’s professional culture … [and that] equity reforms must engage issues of power by extending beyond the school” (p. 31). I started from this critique of technical approaches and then also analysed more critical theories (Quantz et al. , 1991) in order to assess their applicability to issues of diversity. These theories included some approaches such as transactional, bureaucratic, transformational, servant, culturally relevant, and transformative leadership.
Hence, here I demonstrate, using abductive reasoning, that critical leadership theories best offer ways of attending to the diverse perspectives and values of today’s schools as well as to offer underlying frameworks to guide both dialogue and decision-making on the ground. In sum, I posit that the data from numerous school leaders support the argument that to effect significant educational transformation requires a critical, normative, equity-oriented approach.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsUnderstanding the distinctions among theoretical approaches is not simply an interesting academic exercise, but essential to move beyond decades of educational reform movements that have resulted in little significant change to address the educational challenges of the 21st century (Oakes & Rogers, 2006). The results of this investigation demonstrate how adopting a more critical and emancipatory theory that begins with an understanding of students lived experiences and of societal factors outside the school, can help leaders to avoid the trap of depoliticizing education (Weiner, 2003) and move the field forward towards both equity and excellence.
For example, a theory that focuses on improving people and developing followers may create an effective organizational culture, but superintendents have told me that focusing specifically on equity and justice provides a different kind of framework, one that might result in a partnership with local IT providers to ensure that low income students have access to the internet. Thus, an important consideration for scholars and researchers of educational leadership is whether the proposed theory is useful in practice to guide the equity work of educational leaders.
There is general agreement in the scholarly literature that positivist and technical theories which tend to focus on first-order change are effective in times of stability that call for straightforward tasks, and when the parts are compliant and consistent (Morgan, 2006). Yet this is no longer (if it ever did) describes 21st century educational organizations. A theory is needed that responds to the diversity and complexity of today’s schools, one which involves “questions of justice, democracy, and the dialectic between individual accountability and social responsibility (Weiner, 2003, p. 89). The abductive approach followed in this paper demonstrates the utility of more critical, social justice oriented and transformative leadership theories (Shields, 2016) for addressing the diverse challenges of todays’ schools.
ReferencesBurns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Culbertson, J. A. (1995), Building bridges: UCEA’s first two decades. University Park, PA: UCEA.
Evers, C. W., & Wu, E. H. (2006). On generalising from single case studies: Epistemological reflections. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40(4), 511–526.
Follett, M. P. (1918/1941). Dynamic administration. In H. C. Metcalf & L. F. Urwick (Eds.), Pitman, 1941.
Foster, W. (1986), Paradigms and promises, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.
Greenfield, T. B., (1978), Reflections on organization theory and the truths of irreconcilable realities, Educational Administration Quarterly, 14(2).
Morgan, G. (2006), Images of organization, Thousand Oakes, CA: SAGE.
Oakes, J., & Rogers, J. (2006). Learning power: Organizing for education and justice, New York: Teachers College Press.
Quantz, R. A., Rogers, J., & Dantley, M. (1991), Rethinking transformative leadership, Journal of Education, 96-118.
Shields, C. M. (2004). Creating a community of difference. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 38.
Shields, C. M. (2016) Transformative leadership in education, (2nd edition), New York: Routledge.
Uljens, M., & Ylimaki, R. (Eds.), (2017). Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Theory and Didaktik - Non-Affirmative Theory of Education. Springer, Dordrecht:
Weiner, E. J. (2003). Secretary Paulo Freire and the democratization of power: Toward a theory of transformative leadership. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 35(1), 89–106.
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Big Conversation for Better Schools, Developing Discourses for Equity and Diversity in Schools: A Case Study
Gerry Mac Ruairc1, Manuela Heinz1, Maria Jesus Rodriguez Entrena2, Sara Gartland3
1University of Galway, Ireland; 2Universidad De Murcia; 3Univeristy of Delaware
Presenting Author: Mac Ruairc, Gerry;
Heinz, Manuela
The main theme of this project, funded by Leargas (Ireland) 2019-1-IE01-KA201-051528, was to support schools to engage with the bigger questions that frame the context of education and specifically to exlpore a more explicit and nuanced consideration of diversity, equity and democracy in leaders and teachers professional learning (Lumby, Crow & Pashiardis,(2008), Netolicky, D (2019) This part of the project had two objectives (i) enhance leaders and teacher knowledge base with respect to the three themes (two of which are considered in this paper ie.e diveristy and equity) by co-constructing a suite of action learning sets that would frame seminars designed to facilitate interprofessional dialogue on these issues and (ii) to work in a ways that would break down any barriers, either real or imagined, between the knowledge that exists in research and scholarship and the pedagogy of practice in schools. In working towards this objective we started from where schools were and in particular, where students were at in their thinking (Ruffin and Simon 2022). This baseline research work in the schools provided a real-time, picture of what was happening in each school. The student views, in particular, resonated with the teacher groups in the action learning set development sessions. When teachers and leaders witnessed quotes from students as to how they saw/ experienced these themes they recognised their roles in the development of these topics among themselves as professionals and in their own classroom practice. The team recognised the need to target the minds and hearts of the participants. In some cases, this involved a change of mindset, in others the need was more in the development or awakening of nascent mindsets. We knew we had ambitious expectations for transformative outcomes but we were not naive enough to think that working through an action learning set on diversity, for example, was going to change the world. We had hoped however that it might begin to change the questions asked and the assumptions that gave rise to these questions. Formative evaluations of an action learning sets therefore focused on picking up these changes and shifts in ideas and thinking. This paper will present finding from the school based case study on how leaders, teachers and students viewed diversity and equity, it will then outline the methodology used to scaffold the seminars with leaders and teachers and finally will present evidence of shifting ideas and thinking among leaders and teachers. It was important to recognise that issues related to these complex themes are not resolvable in a short timeframe however, once the initial commitment was made by the participating teachers the turn towards a more deliberative approach to an exploration of these themes started and consequently a more developed understanding was achieved by everyone who participated in the work. The next step was to recognise that the themes are difficult with inconclusive and evolving perspectives that will always be in flux - it was, therefore, essential to review ideas, change minds and revisit thinking this was achieved by the methodology and approach taken to the project activities.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis was a phenomenological study of how best to work with school leaders on teacher on explicating difficult and contest topics that emerge in inter-professional dialogue as well as in classroom practice. Evidence was gather and collated using a qualitative and interpretivist approach with a high level of participant check in because the interventions (such as they were) were co-
constructed with the participants. The study took place over a three year period which facilitated the development of bespoke interventions and ways of working that directly and positively impacted the outcomes. A series of formative and summative surveys containing open ended questions were used throughout out the project to capture key professional leaning outcomes. One of the key methods that informed the tone and trajectory of the action leaning set intervention was the focus that was placed on a development of a 'rights of the learner' approach originally developed in the field of mathematics education Kalinec-Criag (2017). This component of the methodology provides a compelling methodology for framing the exploration of the difficult, sensitive topics. Essentially, in the original research on mathematics, there were four rights (1) the right to be confused; (2) the right to claim a mistake;
(3) the right to speak, listen and be heard; and (4) the right to write, do, and represent only what makes sense. The framework was originally intended to promote equity in the mathematics classroom and helps children and teachers to embrace productive struggle and mistakes as valuable steps in the process
of learning mathematics (and learning to teach mathematics). We took these four steps as the core framework and added a fifth right i.e. the right to change one's mind and offer new revised ideas and opinions. This approach took the emphasis off particular content knowledge and ways of knowing and expressing this knowledge and instead placed a very explicit emphasis on developing knowledge, of not knowing everything, of a move aware from the binary right and wrong towards a more emergent type of knowledge and understanding (hooks, 2014) which is exactly where mindes set need to be in order to progress thinking and teaching when working with and on these themes.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsQualitative data from the participants Key finding of the research on this professional learning initiative include:
1. The importance of trust building to develop a sense of shared mission with respect to the purpose of the initiative and the participation in the research dimensions of the study
2. The need to acknowledge the variety of individual response to ideas and discourses and to accurate this in the professional learning context
3. The efficacy of the methodology on the right of the learner in supporting the tone and timbre of the professional learning interactions
ReferencesLumby, J., Crow, G., & Pashiardis, P. (Eds.).
(2008). International handbook on the preparation and development of school leaders. Routledge
Netolicky, D. M.Transformational professional learning: Making
a difference in schools. Routledge.
Ruffin, Jean F. and Simon, Marsha E. (2022) "Developing Culturally Proficient Leaders Through Graduate Coursework: Examining Student Perspectives," School Leadership Review: Vol. 16: Iss. 2, Article 2. Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/slr/vol16/iss2/2
Kalinec-Craig, C. A. (2017). The Rights of the Learner: A Framework for Promoting Equity through Formative Assessment in Mathematics Education. Democracy and Education, 25 (2), Article 5.
hooks, b. (2014). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge.
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Mission (im)possible - Bridging the Achievement Gap Between Boys’ and Girls’ in a Swedish Municipality
Britt-Inger Keisu1, Björn Ahlström2, Ida Johansson1, Magnus Larsson2
1Department of Sociology, Umeå University, Sweden; 2Center for Principal Development, Umeå University, Sweden
Presenting Author: Keisu, Britt-Inger;
Ahlström, Björn
The Swedish school law and curriculum calls for a leadership that promotes equal opportunities for all children and students. International research on educational leadership, school leadership, and its relation to students’ educational outcome is extensive (e.g., Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, 2020; Heck & Hallinger, 2014; Schrik & Wasonga, 2019). There is also an interest in international research about the relevance of school leaders for equity (Leithwood, 2021) and how different ways of perceiving and operationalising concepts like inclusion have an impact on equality (Alexiadou et al., 2016).
One of the biggest challenges in relation to schools’ work for equal opportunities for students is gender based differences in outcomes. Grade levels among boys are lower than among girls when they leave compulsory schools in Sweden (Skolverket, 2022). These gender based differences have consequences for boys' chances to attend upper secondary school, and ultimately higher education. In the long run this also affects boys' ability to find work that demands a certain level of education which in turn affects their well-being. Other factors beyond gender, such as educational level of the parents and the students’ migration background, also affect the overall grade. However, boys receive lower grades than girls even when considering these background factors (Skolverket, 2022).
From an international perspective there has been an interest in the phenomena of gender differences in educational outcomes for a long time (Salisbury, Rees & Gorard, 1999; Collins, Kenway & McLeod, 2000). However, there has been little consensus about what causes the differences. Previous research has shown that different norms of masculinity constitute limitations for boys. One example is the discussion on how anti-study culture or anti-effort culture affect how boys relate to their studies, which also affects their outcomes (Zimmerman, 2018).
In a Swedish context, equity in education can be described in three strategies: equal access to education, equal quality of education and that education is organized in such manner that all students can succeed in school (SOU 2020:28). The third strategy can be described as the school's assignment to counteract inequalities that arise on the bases of the students' different prerequisites based on socioeconomic, gender and migration background. In Sweden it is the principal's responsibility to ensure that the education is aligned with the goals formulated in the steering documents for Swedish schools (Lgr22; SFS 2010:800; SFS 2008:567). In addition, principals in Sweden are responsible to organize strategically and use resources effectively, while the municipality (school organizer) has an overriding responsibility to organize and allocate resources to different schools based on their different prerequisites. One obligation in this work is to counteract gender differences and tighten the gap between boys' and girls' outcomes. Given this governing structure principals and representatives for the school organizer are key agents in counteracting these gender differences.
The purpose of the study is to explore how principals and representatives for the school organizer in one municipality in Sweden understands and describes the problem of gender differences in educational outcomes. Further, how they work to promote equity. We are guided by the following research questions:
- How is the problem formulated by the interviewees? What are the underlying assumptions in their reasoning?
- What measures and strategies do the informants find necessary to address the problem?
- What potential consequences do the informants' way of thinking and acting have for gender equity?
Our analysis builds on Bacchis WPR-approach (Bacchi, 2012). Since this approach is both a theoretical framework and a methodology it is presented under the section. Methods/Methodology.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe analysis presented here is part of a collaborative project between researchers and a Swedish municipality with the focus on gender based grade differences. Data consists of three focus group interviews with principals (both preschool and compulsory school), one focus group interview with gender- social- and ethnic equality workers at a strategic level, one individual interview with the superintendent and one with the operation manager. The questions focused on the informants´ perception and on how the work with gender based grade differences was conducted in practice, by whom and for what reasons, in order to get accounts of different actors’ experiences and perspectives. The interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and MAXQDA2020 software was used to facilitate the qualitative analysis.
A basic assumption of the study is that perceptions of what causes the inequalities in student outcomes influence what measures the principals, or other actors included in the study, take to tighten the gap. The analysis of data was therefore inspired by policy analysis as presented by Carol Bacchi’s (2012, se also 2018) approach that focuses on “the unexamined assumptions and deep-seated conceptual logics within implicit problem representations” (2012 s.22) in relation to the gender based differences, to identify different problem representations of the informants, and to enable an analysis of what possible effects and consequences these might have. In the qualitative analysis, the data were read and reread exploratory. The following analytical questions form the WPR approach were related to the data:
Question 1: How are the problems of gender based grade differences represented?
Question 2: What are the assumptions and presumptions underlying these representations?
Question 3 How has this representation of the ‘problem’ come about?
Question 4: What is left unproblematic in this problem representation? Where is the silence? Can the ‘problem’ be thought about differently?
Question 5: What are the effects produced by the problem representations described?
Question 6: How and where has this representation of the “problem” been produced, disseminated, and defended? How has it been and/or how can it be disrupted and replaced?
Step 7: Apply this list of questions to your own problem representations
In the data several representations were found. However, in this article the three main representations were chosen in order to illustrate the dominant pattern. Besides being the three largest representations, these were also present among all the informants included in the study.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe municipality formulates a willingness to work towards change. There are three types of representations. Firstly, one problem articulated is that companies find it difficult to recruit staff to male dominated occupations. This representation derives from a socioeconomic viewpoint that highlights the labor market’s need for an educated workforce.
Secondly, the interviewees articulate a problem that became visual through their quality assessment work. When comparing student outcomes in relation to other similar municipalities their analysis shows that their scores were lower. One way of improving their scores is to promote the lowest performing group, the boys. This is a rational that can be linked to ideas derived from New Public Management (NPM).
Thirdly, articulations also visualize an ethical perspective. They challenge the assumption of an individual perspective on students, and knowledge development in relation to educational goals. Rather, they attribute the gender based differences to societal norms which also affect the students stay in school. Therefore, the society as well as the school have a responsibility to challenge these norms.
The measures the municipality imposes are directed toward several areas. One was to contact a university and start a collaborative project focusing on equity. Another example is that the municipality is directing money into several development programs initiated by educators and principals. One of these programs has gender theory and learning in focus. Further, this project engages pre-schools and compulsory schools.
Finally, what potential consequences does this way of thinking and acting have for gender equity? Key actors are important for the problem to be raised. However, some of the representatives of the school organizer primarily argue for the sake of lifting the grades from a socioeconomic- or NPM-standpoint. This may hinder efforts to deal with the structural aspects and might hinder the efforts to promote development.
ReferencesAlexiadou, N. et al. (2016) ‘Managing inclusion in competitive school systems: The cases of Sweden and England’, Research in Comparative and International Education, 11(1), pp. 13–33. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499916631065.
Bacchi, C. (2012). Introducing the ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ approach. In Bletsas A. & Beasley C. (Eds.), Engaging with Carol Bacchi: Strategic Interventions and Exchanges (pp. 21-24). South Australia: University of Adelaide Press.
Bacchi, C. (2018) ‘Drug Problematizations and Politics: Deploying a Poststructural Analytic Strategy’, Contemporary Drug Problems, 45(1), pp. 3–14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0091450917748760.
Collins, C., Kenway, J. and McLeod, J. (2000) ‘Factors Influencing the Educational Performance of Males and Females in School and their Initial Destinations after Leaving School’.
Heck, H.R. and Hallinger, P. (2014) ‘Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning’, Journal of Educational Administration. Edited by P.F.R. and D.E.K. Professor Tobias Feldhoff, 52(5), pp. 653–681. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2013-0097.
Leithwood, K. (2021) ‘A Review of Evidence about Equitable School Leadership’, Education Sciences, 11(8), p. 377. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080377.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2020) ‘Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited’, School Leadership & Management, 40(1), pp. 5–22. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077.
Lgr22 (2022) Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet. https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=9718 [Hämtad: 6 september 2022].
Schrik, P. and Wasonga, T.A. (2019) ‘The Role of a School Leader in Academic Outcomes: Between Self-efficacy and Outcome Expectations’, ATHENS JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 6(4), pp. 291–306. Available at: https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.6-4-3.
Salisbury, J., Rees, G. and Gorard, S. (1999) ‘Accounting for the Differential Attainment of Boys and Girls at School’, School Leadership & Management, 19(4), pp. 403–426. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13632439968943.
Skolverket (2022) ‘Statistik’. Skolverket. https://www.skolverket.se/skolutveckling/statistik [Hämtad: 4 oktober 2022].
SFS. 2008. Svensk författningssamling, [Swedish Codes of Statutes], Diskrimineringslag [The Discrimination Act], 2008:567. Stockholm: Fritzes.
SFS. 2010. Svensk författningssamling [Swedish Codes of Statutes], Skollagen [The School Law], 2010:800. Stockholm: Fritzes
SOU 2020:28 En mer likvärdig skola – minskad skolsegregation och förbättrad resurstilldelning [A more equitable school – reduced school segregation and improved resources], Stockholm: Fritzes.
Zimmerman, F. (2018). Det tillåtande och det begränsande: en studie om pojkars syn på studier och ungdomars normer kring maskulinitet [The allowing and the limiting – A study about boy’s view on studying and youth’s norms of masculinity]. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
|
