99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Leading with Hope in Times of Crisis: A Systems Thinking Approach
Patricia Virella
Montclair State University - Montclair,, United States of America
Presenting Author: Virella, Patricia
Hope is often talked about during a crisis. To believe in hope is to understand that there are parts of human emotions that can radically alter and improve the outcomes for ourselves and many. These parts coalesce and allow us to hope and imagine a better future. During crisis times, such as the last 36 months, leaders need hope to move forward to continue to lead. Although scholars and public rhetoric have pointed to the COVID-19 pandemic as the beginning of a global crisis, several crises have plagued the U.S. and international community such as the persistent war in Ukraine, the debacle of the Afghani war, racism, colonization, drought across the Horn of Africa and many others. Amid all of these crises, school leaders are tasked with recovery, providing a schoolhouse that advances educational outcomes. Studies closely exploring the lived experience of the school principals and their practices amid a virulent crisis, however, are rarely represented in the current body of research. Hope plays an integral role in educational and crisis leadership. Smith and Riley (2012) whose groundbreaking framework for crisis leadership in schools posits that one critical element of educational leaders’ response to a crisis is to engender hope. Through hope, they argue, leaders can effectively rally toward recovery, collaboration and restoration. Myrtle (2018) found leader effectiveness is determined by how well the leader responds to the leadership challenge. However, in times of crisis, leaders need a different set of behaviors and dispositions to lead through a crisis (Smith & Riley, 2012; Mutch, 2015; 2020; Author Under Review, 2021). Hope can lead to positive outcomes for leaders. Scholars (Bennis, 1999; Rath & Conchie, 2008) define hope as one of four provisions exemplary leaders exhibit that contributes to achieving positive outcomes. Yet, recent studies have not been conducted which apply hope theory to educational and crisis leadership (Urick et al., 2021; Byrne & Yoon; 2019). Thus, it seems necessary to discuss what I see hope as an affective infrastructure permitting leadership to be expressed beyond a technical or adaptive orientation. Therefore, I center this inquiry on the two following research questions: How do principals manifest hope in their leadership during times of crisis? What is the role of hope in leading through a crisis? This study aims to examine how principals lead through various crises with hope to highlight how hope is a central tenet in school leadership. Specifically, I examined how principals’ deployed hope through a systems thinking approach to respond to a crisis. While existing studies have analyzed principals and how they respond to a crisis, I draw on Snyder’s (2002) conceptualization of hope to understand the manifestations and parts that make up hope. I then apply my findings through a systems thinking lens to construct a model of how principals deployed hope. To describe principals’ leadership through hope, I use a constant comparative approach (Boejie, 2002) to present qualitative data generated with 50 school principals from 2019 – 2022. My intent was not to gather generalizable data, but to provide insights into how principals hope and how that hope influences their leadership. Thus, this paper provides a unique contribution to research on school and crisis leadership by shifting the focus from the technical and operational responses of crisis leadership in schools to a holistic picture of the ways principal navigate crisis, demonstrating a systematic approach to their responses. Finally, I describe how crisis leadership is conceptualized in the international and national settings, providing a whole picture of how scholarship has framed crisis leadership in schools, while omitting hope as part of the conceptualized frames.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedData collection consisted of interviewing 50 public school principals from across the United States who were identified via purposeful sampling. I selected principals who experienced a crisis during their tenure as principal—natural disaster, medical trauma, criminal violence, racial harm, the COVID-19 pandemic. Principals interviewed ranged in years of experience, age, and ethnicity. Data were collected from 2019-2022 using semi-structured interviews consisting of 18 questions that addressed how they lead through a crisis. Each interview was 50-65 minutes long. Also included in the interview were questions about hope, which were partly derived from Snyder’s (2002) Hope Scale, such as “How, if at all, did you feel hope during the crisis?”
Data analysis for this project was conducted in a six-step process to illuminate themes presented in the data. I used as a Braun and Clarke’s (2006) framework to analyze the data. My interpretive understanding of participants’ experiences was derived exclusively from existing data—not on a priori codes, preexisting frameworks (e.g., Gerzon, 2015), or current theories of hope theory (Thorne, 2016). Data analysis also included dialogic engagement with educational leadership scholars. Dialogic engagement also involved comparisons of my emerging findings from step 2 to our interpretations of step 1 data. This process served as a form of analytic triangulation which allowed consideration as to how my interpretations in step 1 data challenged or supported ideas emerging from step 2 analysis (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). At the conclusion of step 1, I wrote analytic and reflective memos (Thorne, 2016).
The second step of data analysis began with multiple cycles of coding. Initial coding represented the first cycle of coding and facilitated a deep, open exploration of data that allowed codes to emerge (Saldaña, 2014). I reduced the data using structural coding (Namey, 2008). This was an important process due to the large number of interviews. Further the structural coding allowed for the reworking of initial codes into more incisive categorical codes derived from the literature (Namey et al., 2008). I used these codes to identify themes within the data. Finally, I compared data, codes, and emerging themes between school leaders (e.g., years of experience, race, gender) and between crises (e.g., COVID-19, student health, school safety). I ensured rigor in conducting this study by using Stahl and King's (2020) criteria for trustworthiness.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsI determined how principals manifested hope through a systems-thinking approach. This systems-thinking approach, when manifested, no matter the crisis being experienced, yielded positive outcomes for leaders by building their confidence and potentially reducing burnout, creating a positive climate for teachers, students, and families. I found that leaders exhibited beliefs, identified systemic problems during the crisis that needed to be changed – setting goals around this issue, and enacted behaviors to achieve the goal. I categorized the beliefs and identification as agency thinking because of how participants discussed leading with hope through a crisis. Additionally, I found that the leaders' beliefs were tethered to the systemic action they identified. I found several examples where principals could trace their agency and pathway thinking and achieve their goals. Leaders who exhibited a core set of self-concepts enabled self-efficacy through their descriptions of confidence, perseverance, or resilience. Leaders explained how these dispositions enabled them to strategize efforts that would lead toward recovery during a crisis. Additionally, they had a positive attribution or optimism, which allowed them to preserve and through goals even during cataclysmic events. To operationalize hope, I found that principals identified systemic problems that required immediate attention. No matter the crisis experienced, principals who demonstrated hope in their leadership could assess what issues surfaced and identify high-leverage problems to develop solutions. In some cases, such as principals who discussed the COVID-19 pandemic's disruption to access to academic engagement, they identified how their particular school could increase achievement while acknowledging how the crisis impacted multiple stakeholders.
In this study, I describe how the principals in this sample deployed hope through pathways thinking. These behaviors were modeling, collaboration, and mimicking mentors. These principals demonstrate how hope can be a visible and tangible part of a leader's response to a crisis through several targeted means.
ReferencesAuthor Under Review (2020; 2021; 2022).
Bennis, W. (1999). Five competencies of new leaders: Emerging leaders are purveyors of hope. Executive Excellence, 16, 4-5.
Boeije, H. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality and Quantity, 36(4), 391-409. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020909529486
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101
Byrne-Jiménez, M. C., & Yoon, I. H. (2019, January). Leadership as an act of love: Leading in dangerous times. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 3, p. 117). Frontiers Media SA.
Gerzon, N. (2015). Structuring professional learning to develop a culture of data use: Aligning knowledge from the field and research findings. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1-28.
Mutch, C. (2015). Leadership in times of crisis: Dispositional, relational and contextual factors influencing school principals’ actions. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 186-194.Myrtle, R. C. (2018). The challenges of leadership. The health care manager, 37(2), 158-163.Namey, E., Guest, G., Thairu, L., & Mutch, C. (2020). How might research on schools’ responses to earlier crises help us in the COVID-19 recovery process. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 2, 3-10.Johnson, L. (2008). Data reduction techniques for large qualitative data sets. Handbook for team-based qualitative research, 2(1), 137-161.
Rath, T., & Conchie, B. (2008). Strengths based leadership. Great Leaders, Teams, and Why People Follow, 2008.
Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Validity: Process, strategies, and considerations. Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological, 185-214.
Saldaña, J. (2014). Coding and analysis strategies.
Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological inquiry, 13(4), 249-275. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1448867
Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership and Management, 32(1), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2011.614941Stahl, N. A., & King, J. R. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1), 26-28.
Thorne, S. (2016). Interpretive description: Qualitative research for applied practice. Routledge.
Urick, A., Carpenter, B. W., & Eckert, J. (2021). Confronting COVID: Crisis leadership, turbulence, and self-care. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.642861
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
A Systematic Literature Review on the Practice of Dialogic Leadership: Its Role Within Education and Outcomes
Shiza Khaqan, Gisela Redondo-Sama
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain
Presenting Author: Khaqan, Shiza
Leadership research has looked at what aspects of leadership lead to successful outcomes in the educational, health or corporate contexts (Campos, Aubert, Guo & Joanpere, 2020; Lemmetty & Collin, 2020; Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008). In this vein, educational leadership research has aimed to identify the ways in which leadership is linked with achieving successful outcomes at the school level (Karadağ, Bektaş, Çoğaltay & Yalçın, 2015) and how school leaders can contribute to student achievement through the practices and changes that they implement, which can in turn transform the school culture (Karadağ et al., 2015). So, school leadership that can have transformative outcomes, is of great interest to those seeking to bring about reform in educational practice. However, in recent years, societies worldwide have become more diverse due to increased globalization, and this has called for a leadership approach that embraces greater diversity (Santamaría, 2014).
Within this context, an emerging form of leadership is dialogic leadership which identifies how different members of the community come together and through shared dialogue develop a sustainable leadership practice (Padrós & Flecha, 2014). Dialogic leadership was conceptualized as a result of the success of the INCLUDE-ED project from the 6th Framework Programme of the European Commission. While aiming to analyze the best educational practices in schools, the project identified the strength of dialogue as its use among community members led to very positive outcomes (Padrós & Flecha, 2014). The role of dialogue in educational leadership was highlighted earlier when it was demonstrated that using a strategy to encourage meaningful dialogue between the board members and staff at a school, led to overall organizational success and achieved positive outcomes for individuals (Deakins, 2007). However, the more recent conceptualization of dialogic practice calls for participation by the whole community in schools, which is achieved by the inclusion of the voices of all members in important processes like decision making (Redondo-Sama, 2015). In the schools taking up this form of leadership, families, teachers, students and volunteers from the community all get involved in supporting the school through active engagement in school activities, which helps the school and also strengthens the neighbourhood (Padrós & Flecha, 2014). Importantly, the dialogic practices in these schools are helping to achieve improvement in academic outcomes (Redondo-Sama, 2015), which has been a foremost objective of educational leadership (Witziers, Bosker & Krüger, 2003).
The dialogic practices support further learning and cognitive development, and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory can be used to understand these as the underlying theoretical framework as proposed by Mercer and Howe (2012). The sociocultural theory emphasizes the importance of interactional dialogue on learning (Mercer & Howe, 2012). Knowledge is constructed through interactions among individuals, so, the schools implementing these strategies are achieving effective results with increased dialogue (Redondo-Sama, 2015). Less is known yet about the role of dialogic leadership in student success, so, the purpose of the current systematic literature review is to review the literature on dialogic leadership. The main aim of the current research is to analyse the development of dialogic leadership practice and contextualize it within the educational leadership research.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) model was followed for the current systematic literature review (Page et al., 2021). During the first phase, the authors narrowed down the journals from the JCR and Scimago databases. The journal list was maintained and updated in an excel file. Firstly, on JCR the categories ‘Education and educational sciences’ and the category ‘Social sciences – interdisciplinary’ were searched to find relevant journals. Similarly, a search was carried out on Scimago and consequentially 111 journals were selected from both databases, after removing duplicates. During the next phase of journal selection, the number of articles in each journal related to educational leadership and dialogic leadership was examined. So, the final selection was made based on the topic relevance and the number of relevant articles which resulted in 30 journals.
Another source identified for the literature was the CORDIS website where other EU-funded projects related to the current project were identified, in order to incorporate the European context. The literature search was carried out from November to December 2022 from the selected journals and the EU- funded projects. Only articles from 2000 onwards were to be included in the literature search. To conduct a thorough literature search, literature was also searched on the following databases: Web of Science, SCOPUS and Google Scholar. Boolean operators were used to make search terms more specific. While ‘educational leadership’ and ‘dialogic leadership’ were used as keywords, the search term “(dialogue) OR ("dialogic leadership") AND (leadership)” was also used.
Finally, 22 articles were selected for the literature review after deleting the ones that were recurring or not relevant. Since there is limited research on dialogic leadership, an exploratory approach was taken for the analysis. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted, and themes were extracted from the literature after a thorough reading of the selected articles. During the first round, the abstracts of the articles were read and then categorized together based on similar topics in a matrix. Afterwards the articles were read through, and several descriptive themes were identified. After scrutinizing the descriptive themes, the articles were re-read to gain an understanding of how these descriptive themes are connected. These descriptive themes were then categorized based on similarities to reveal four main analytical themes for the current review.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe main aim of this systematic review was to analyze how dialogic leadership fits in the educational leadership research and to understand the role of dialogic leadership in education. The thematic analysis revealed four themes which address the objectives stated earlier.
1) Social justice orientation: While a transformation of the ethnic makeup of societies has resulted in greater diversity, it has also brought with it a challenge for educational leadership (Furman, 2012). There was a need within educational leadership to adopt a multicultural perspective with an emphasis on social justice (Santamaria, 2014). The practice of dialogic leadership within education as evidenced so far has seen the inclusion of diverse members of community and it has ensured equality by giving equal importance to the voice of each member (Padrós & Flecha, 2014).
2) Social Cohesion: One of the effects that the implementation of the dialogic model has had is the reduction of miscommunication because of increased dialogue (Deakins, 2009) and consequentially it has led to the development of a sense of community and togetherness (Temple & Ylitalo, 2009).
3) Improved well-being: Another outcome that was observed in institutions observing dialogic practices, is an improvement in the general well-being of the individuals involved which was believed to improve performance (Yliruka & Karvinen-Niinikoski, 2013). This improvement in well-being has been noted as an indirect effect that the exchange of dialogue can produce.
4) Improved academic outcomes: The main effect of the dialogic leadership model being implemented in schools was an improvement in the students’ academic outcomes (Redondo-Sama, 2015). This model enabled teachers, parents and children to interact, share knowledge and to become empowered, which led to success (Padrós & Flecha, 2014).
Overall, it can be concluded that dialogic leadership practices are paving the way for embracing diversity, building community, and enhancing educational achievements.
ReferencesCampos, J. A., Aubert, A., Guo, M., & Joanpere, M. (2020). Improved leadership skills and aptitudes in an excellence EMBA program: creating synergies with dialogic leadership to achieve social impact. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00017
Deakins, E. (2007). The role of meaningful dialogue in early childhood education leadership. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 32(1), 38-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693910703200107
Furman, G. (2012). Social justice leadership as praxis: Developing capacities through preparation programs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(2), 191-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11427394
Karadağ, E., Bektaş, F., Çoğaltay, N., & Yalçın, M. (2015). The effect of educational leadership on students’ achievement: A meta-analysis study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(1), 79-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9357-x
Lemmetty, S., & Collin, K. (2020). Moment of dialogic leadership in Finnish IT organisation. Industrial and Commercial Training, 52(4), 195-207. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-01-2020-0007
Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001
Padrós, M. & Flecha, R. (2014). Towards a Conceptualization of Dialogic Leadership. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 2(2), 207-226. https://doi.org/10.4471/ijelm.2014.17
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Redondo-Sama, G. (2015). Dialogic leadership in learning communities. Intangible Capital, 11(3), 437-457. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.651
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635-674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
Santamaría, L. J. (2014). Critical change for the greater good: Multicultural perceptions in educational leadership toward social justice and equity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(3), 347-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13506594
Temple, J. B., & Ylitalo, J. (2009). Promoting inclusive (and dialogic) leadership in higher education institutions. Tertiary education and management, 15(3), 277-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880903073024
Witziers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Krüger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 398-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X03253411
Yliruka, L., & Karvinen-Niinikoski, S. (2013). How can we enhance productivity in social work? Dynamically reflective structures, dialogic leadership and the development of transformative expertise. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27(2), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2013.798157
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Algerian Middle School EFL Teachers’ Perceptions and Reported Practices of Teacher Leadership
Imene Messalem
University of the West of Scotland, United Kingdom
Presenting Author: Messalem, Imene
Educational institutions are constantly scrutinized concerning their successes or failures in meeting their educational goals. School principals alone are generally unable to cope with the increasing demands within their schools because a single leader does not have all the time, expertise and energy to lead reform (Spillane, 2006). Such challenging circumstances have intensified the need for a collaboration between all members of educational institutions and a distribution of leadership powers within schools. For Harris (2013a, p 12), distributed leadership is a term used to refer to “leadership that is shared within, between and across organizations”. One strand of distributed leadership prevalent in the literature is teacher leadership. Educational institutions are, accordingly, required to extend their sources of change, decision making and influence and incorporate teachers as agents of change in school improvement (Muijs & Harris, 2006). The concept of teacher leadership has, thus, evolved as a paradigm shift in school leadership, from the centralized top-down perspective to a more decentralized and distributed approach to school leadership, giving empowerment to teachers to take on leadership roles (Mangin, 2007). Teacher leadership has been a recurrent theme in educational reforms landscape since the mid-1980s (Murphy, 2005; York-Barr and Duke, 2004) and strong arguments have been provided by scholars advocating its value for students, teachers and schools as a whole. Despite increasing interest in teacher leadership research, consensus on a definition of the concept is still missing in the existing literature. According to Neumerski (2012), lack of consensus in defining teacher leadership is mainly because it “tends to be an umbrella term referring to a myriad of work” (p.320). In a similar way, Cooper, Stanulis, Brondyk, Hamilton, Macaluso and Meier (2016) explained that teacher leaders’ roles vary depending on the research and the school context. Defining teacher leadership is, thus, not an easy task as a number of authors have put forward various competing and overlapping definitions of the concept (Muijs & Harris, 2003). Although many studies have investigated teacher leadership in various contexts, it could be clearly noted that research in this area remains pre-dominantly Western (Nguyen et al, 2019; Wenner & Campbell, 2017), with very few studies conducted in non-western contexts. More specifically, no study of this kind has been conducted in the Algerian context to the best of my knowledge. Given that contexts matter, this study aims to contribute to the existing body of research on teacher leadership by providing a knowledge base of Algerian middle school EFL teachers’ perceptions and reported practices of teacher leadership. This paper, which is part of a more extended doctoral research, is thus, guided by the following research questions:
- What perceptions do middle school EFL teachers hold regarding teacher leadership?
- What are middle school EFL teachers’ reported practices of and experiences with teacher leadership?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe current research adheres to the interpretive paradigm’s relativist ontology, perceiving teacher leadership as ‘reality’ as socially and experientially constructed, and is not independent from Algerian EFL teachers’ consciousness. Participants’ perceptions of teacher leadership, thus, constitute its multi-realities as understood and experienced by them. Consistent with the interpretive paradigm, a qualitative case study design was employed to meet the aims of this research, the case being Algerian middle school EFL teachers. Purposive and convenience sampling strategies were employed to recruit the sample, which involved both positional teacher leaders and teachers who do not hold a positional teacher leadership role. To collect relevant and sufficient data, this research employed 13 individual semi-structured interviews, 10 reflective essays and 4 online focus group discussions. Each focus group involved four teachers; one of them is a positional teacher leader. Overall, 19 participants took part in this research. However, it is important to note that not all of them contributed to the three data collection methods (i.e. some teachers, for example, participated in individual interviews and wrote reflective essays but did not take part in the FGDs). Issues related to ethical considerations were addressed prior to beginning the fieldwork or approaching potential participants. These involved providing an information sheet and a consent form, ensuring participants confidentiality, anonymity and freedom of withdrawal at any stage of the research. Individual interviews and online focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed and translated when needed. The collected data was analysed thematically following the 6 phases of thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clark (2006). A report, as the final stage of thematic analysis, was produced with data organised in relation to each of the two research questions outlined earlier.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis research provided a detailed overview of teacher leadership within the Algerian middle school context. Although the term ‘teacher leadership’ itself seemed not to be commonly used in the participants’ work context, their perceptions and definitions of the concept indicate their awareness of what constitutes teacher leadership. Findings in this regard support multi-dimensional nature of teacher leadership and revealed teachers’ clear orientation to relate it with non-positional roles. In other words, participants’ definitions of the concept covered a wide array of practices that teacher leaders could engage in and traits that characterise those teachers, and were clearly focused on perceptions of teacher leadership as influence through collaboration, professional support and role modelling rather than a designated position or authority. Teacher leadership was defined in relation with: practices within the classroom, practices beyond the classroom, teacher leaders’ traits and participation in decision-making. The latter, despite being perceived by the interviewees as an essential aspect of teacher leadership, was reported as being limited in their work context. Although none of the participants defined teacher leadership in relation with positional roles, data revealed that they were aware of positional teacher leadership roles within their context, relating these roles to the selection and promotion process that teachers have to undergo. However, it was noted that they had limited awareness of the additional responsibilities that come with these roles, which poses questions related to role clarity and teachers’ preparation for these positional teacher leadership roles within the study context. Participants’ reported practices of teacher leadership were largely consistent with their perceptions in that they were mainly non-positional in nature and were not restricted to the classroom context. Their reported practices, overall, reflected their innovative teaching practices, continuous professional learning, care for their learners and the direct or indirect influence that they have on their peers.
ReferencesBraun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative
research in psychology, 3(2), pp. 77-101. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cooper, K.S., Stanulis, R.N., Brondyk, S.K., Hamilton, E.R., Macaluso, M. and Meier,
J.A. (2016) ‘The teacher leadership process: attempting change within
embedded systems’, Journal of Educational Change, 17(1), pp. 85-113. doi:
10.1007/s10833-015-9262-4
Harris, A. (2013a) ‘Distributed leadership: Friend or foe?’, Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 41(5), pp. 545-554. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1741143213497635
Mangin, M. M. & Stoelinga, S, R. (2008) Effective Teacher Leadership. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2003) ‘Teacher leadership: Improvement or empowerment?
An overview of the literature’, Educational Leadership and Management, 31(4),
pp.437-448. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0263211X030314007
Muijs, D. and Harris, A. (2006) ‘Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership
in the UK’, Teaching and Teacher Education. 22, pp. 961-972. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.010
Murphy, J. (2005) Connecting Teacher Leadership and School Improvement.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Neumerski, C. M. (2012) ‘Rethinking Instructional Leadership, a Review. What Do
we Know about Principal, Teacher and Coach Instructional Leadership, and
Where Should we Go from Here?’, Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2),
pp. 310-347. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013161X12456700
Nguyen, D., Harris, A., and Ng, D. (2019) ‘A Review of the Empirical Research on
Teacher Leadership: (2003-2017) Evidence, Patterns and Implications’, Journal
of Educational Administration, 58(1), pp. 60-80. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2018-0023
Spillane, J.P. & Diamond, J.B. (2007). Distributed Leadership in Practice. New York:
Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
Wenner, J.A. and Campbell, T. (2017) ‘The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher
leadership: a review of the literature’, Review of Educational Research, 87(1),
pp. 134-171. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654316653478
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004) ‘What Do we Know about Teacher Leadership?
Findings fromTwo Decades of Scholarship’, Review of Educational Research.
74(3), pp. 255-316.Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543074003255
|
