Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 20:18:34 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
26 SES 16 A: Emerging Issues In Educational Leadership Part 2
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
26. Educational Leadership
Paper Small Rural Schools in Greece: Challenges and Factors Affecting Successful Leadership 1: Univercity of Crete, Greece; 2: Univercity of Crete, Greece Presenting Author:Small rural schools are mostly primary schools. Their purpose is to align with the constitutional requirement for obligatory education provision to every child in the Greek state; they differ from multi-teacher schools in terms of the staff number and the teacher–student ratio (set at 1:15). The number of teachers is smaller than the number of grades in such schools; as a result, a teacher teaches more than one. This requires multi-grade classroom arrangements and co-teaching practices. Such schools operate mainly in rural, mountainous, island, or border areas, where the student population is limited (Tsipa, 2021; Skyhar, 2021). According to the statutory framework, there are from one to five permanent teaching posts. Their administration is exercised by a principal or head teacher, who undertakes both teaching and administrative duties at the same time.. The timetable and organization of small rural schools differ significantly from those of multi-teacher schools, offering greater flexibility to address pupils’ specific educational needs. The compulsory morning programme runs from 8:10 to 13:30. The school may run full day programmes depending on the minimum enrolment requirements. Instructional organization is based on multi-grade teaching: in one-teacher schools, a single teacher teaches all six grades in one classroom, emphasizing mostly on the respective Language and Mathematics curriculum for each grade; in two- and three-teacher schools, pupils are grouped using suitable grade combinations, while in four- and five-teacher schools multi-grade teaching is more limited, depending on enrolment (Oikonomopoulos, 2013). In two- and three-teacher schools, head teachers are appointed for a four-year term through a formal selection procedure, whereas in one-teacher schools the head teacher is appointed annually on the managing post as s/he is the sole teacher. Small rural primary schools face challenges such as the management of multi-grade classrooms (Hargreaves, 2017), limited resources (Downes & Roberts, 2018), a sense of isolation within the school community (Skyhar, 2021), and the increased teaching and administrative workload of principals (Wildy & Clarke, 2012), while close relationships with the local community may complicate the exercise of educational leadership (Shaked, 2021). At the same time, the low pupil–teacher ratio favours individualized instruction (Hargreaves, 2017), strengthens school–family relationships (Hudson, 2024) and offers opportunities for pedagogical flexibility and innovation (Starr, 2016). The purpose of this study is to explore the factors which underline successful leadership in small rural primary schools in Greece. The research focuses on specific questions:
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used As specific, in-depth, reliable, valid, and multifaceted data were needed in order to fully understand school leadership in small rural primary schools, we adopted a qualitative approach, based on interviews with the rural school principals (Creswell, 2016). The protocols used were produced in the framework of the International Successful School Principalship Project (ISSPP), Greece being a member of this project. The initial protocols are grounded in the general ISSPP framework and state of mind, but they were adapted accordingly [where necessary] in order to reflect the particularities of the Greek educational system. Rural schools were approached as multiple case studies from different regions of Greece (Bassey, 2006), allowing for comparative analysis (Creswell, 2016). Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with head teachers and were analysed using Thematic Analysis. The sample included 13 small rural primary schools, selected through a combination of purposive and convenience sampling to ensure geographical and socio-economic diversity. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The findings of the study highlight that successful leadership in small rural primary schools is shaped through the highly multidimensional and demanding role of the school principal; principals are required to perform a wide range of roles and duties at the same time. This form of leadership is not limited to formal administrative functions. It also addresses challenges and has a social impact on small rural communities. A strong human-centered principal personality is necessary to fulfill the obligations of such roles. Personal commitment, dedication and passion, organizational capacity, pedagogical flexibility, and the existence of a clear and shared vision for the school were identified as key factors for rural school success. Particular emphasis is placed on the creation and maintenance of a positive school climate, as well as on the development of trustworthy relationships with teachers, students, and parents. The close connection between the school, the local community and stakeholders emerges as a critical factor in meeting operational needs and ensuring the smooth function of the school, especially under conditions of geographical isolation and limited resources. The challenges of small rural schools — such as the limited number of staff, multi-grade teaching, increased bureaucracy, students’ social isolation, and the lack of immediate access to support services — are addressed mainly through informal, flexible, and adaptive leadership practices. Principals make use of planning, prioritization, and collaboration with teachers, municipalities, local educational authorities, local services, as well as informal support networks within the community. Within this context, difficulties are often transformed into opportunities for pedagogical and organizational development, with an emphasis on individualized instruction, differentiated pedagogical approaches, and students’ psychosocial well-being. Teaching methods and children’s needs are placed at the center of school life, while administrative work is scheduled around pedagogical demands, often at the cost of principals’ personal time and effort. References Creswell, J. W. (2016). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Ion Publications. Downes, N., & Roberts, P. (2018). Revisiting the schoolhouse: A literature review on staffing rural, remote and isolated schools in Australia 2004-2016. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 28(1), pp. 31-54. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.266568991636396 Hargreaves, L. (2017). Primary Education in Small Rural Schools: Past, Present and Future. In: Maclean, R. (eds) Life in Schools and Classrooms. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 38. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3654-5_14 Hudson, C. (2024). Leading a successful rural school in Australia. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 62, 4, 417 – 430. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2024-0037 Oikonomopoulos, D. (2013). Educational policy for multigrade primary schools and its impact on their operation according to teachers’ views (1976–present): The case of the Peloponnese educational region. National Documentation Centre. Shaked, H. (2021), Between center and periphery: instructional leadership in Israeli rural schools, International Journal of Educational Management, 35(7), pp. 1361-1374. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-2021-0147 Skyhar, C. (2021). Teacher-Directed Collaborative Action Research as a Mediating Tool for Professional Learning in Rural Contexts. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, Vol. 31(1), 12-29 Starr, K. (2016). Small rural school leadership: Creating opportunities through collaboration. In S. Clarke, & T. O’Donoghue (Eds.), School Leadership in Diverse Contexts (pp. 43-56). Abingdon, England: Routledge. Tsipa, S. (2021). Exploring teachers’ views on the prevailing collaborative culture and the conflict management styles they adopt in multigrade and single-grade primary schools. National Documentation Centre. Wildy, H., & Clarke, S. (2012). Leading a small remote school: In the face of a culture of acceptance. International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 40(1), 63-74. 26. Educational Leadership
Paper Superintendents Supporting Culturally Responsive School Leadership: Success Factors in the United States and Implications for Superintendents in Germany TU Dortmund University, Germany Presenting Author:Social inequality and demographic diversification require education systems to confront how school structures, practices, and expectations shaped by white middle-class norms systematically disadvantage learners from marginalized communities, and to create learning environments that are responsive to the needs of minoritized students (e. g., Ladson-Billings, 2006). Culturally responsive school leadership (CRSL) focuses on changing the organization and enabling educators to align their practice with their students’ lived experiences (Khalifa, 2018). It entails the development of an awareness of “invisible culture, the explanations for why we do things the way we do” (Nelson & Guerra, 2013, p. 76) as well as an understanding of students’ needs and reflective examination of everyday practices. To do so, CRSL adopts a normative perspective: With regard to dimensions of leadership, it draws on established concepts such as transformational leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994), but argues that the practices in these concepts should be grounded in equity values and a commitment to responsiveness to all students (DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2020). Khalifa et al. (2016) identify four dimensions of CRSL: critical self-awareness, culturally responsive curricula and teacher preparation, culturally responsive and inclusive school environments, and engaging students and parents in community contexts. While school leaders often want to be culturally responsive, many tend to struggle with the implementation in their leadership routines (Becks et al., 2025). In light of these conditions, research from the United States (U. S.) points out support strategies that can facilitate the development of CRSL in schools. The findings highlight the role of superintendents as change agents (Skrla et al., 2011) who emphasize the relevance of CRSL within a coherent vision, and support culturally responsive practices (Aguayo et al., 2023). How superintendents can support school improvement is a key challenge for German school improvement research and practice. However, little is known about how the German equivalent of superintendents – Schulaufsichtsbeamt*innen (SAB) – support CRSL, mainly due to an overall scarcity of research in this area. Only in the past decade, following administrative reforms and an ongoing shift in their role from bureaucratic oversight to leadership and advisory support, have SAB become the focus of more systematic research (Klein & Bremm, 2020). As a result, there is a need for effective approaches to support SAB in developing CRSL competencies. Given that their leadership role is new and systematic training remains limited, identifying standards for CRSL within German SAB practice is unlikely to be successful. The aim of this paper is therefore to use apolicy borrowing approach to identify the conditions necessary for supporting CRSL and the competencies required of SAB. Drawing on established models and documented examples of good practice, we conduct this analysis in the U. S. We address two central research questions: (1) Which standards and conditions characterize effective superintendent support for CRSL in U. S. districts? (2) How can these standards be applied to the training and leadership practice of German SAB? The paper outlines conditions and competencies that were identified in an interview study with U. S. experts. The focus is on superintendents’ support practices for CRSL, the relationship between superintendents and principals, and relevant political and administrative circumstances as well as characteristics of districts and district administrations. The study is part of a larger research practice collaboration focused on the development of a training program that enables SAB to navigate between administrative duties and equity leadership, fostering learning environments that strengthen culturally responsive practices in schools (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014). The project’s objectives are to identify empirically based standards for SAB support for CRSL; analyze their transferability to the German context; and derive design principles for a prototype training program. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study adopts a policy borrowing approach. First, we systematically identify support practices as potential models in the U. S. context. We then assess the transferability of these practices to the German context. Next, we develop adaptation strategies for the professional development of superintendents. Finally, we aim to disseminate these strategies by developing and piloting a prototype training program in two German states (Phillips & Schweisfurth, 2014). As a first step, we conducted twelve guided expert interviews (Meuser & Nagel, 2009) with three stakeholder groups from seven U. S. school districts: (a) (assistant) superintendents or other district administrators responsible for supporting CRSL; (b) experts in the training and development of superintendents; (c) principals. We selected the interview partners via purposive sampling. The selection criteria were professional engagement in CRSL or the demonstration of good practices in that context. All interviewees had professional experience or involvement with CRSL, either through participation in professional development programs or through recommendations by academic CRSL experts as good practice examples. We conducted the interviews remotely via video conferencing software in spring 2025. The interviews had an average duration of 64 minutes. They were guided by an interview protocol that covered the following topics, which we adapted for each of the three interview groups: • perceptions of CRSL by different stakeholders in the districts; • principals’ support needs in diverse contexts; • role and responsibility of interviewees in fostering CRSL; and • required competencies and preparation for superintendents. We audio-recorded all interviews, transcribed them verbatim, and analyzed them using qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz, 2016). For the analysis, we used a coding system developed both inductively and deductively, based on literature on CRSL (Khalifa et al., 2016) and related concepts such as transformational leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994). We developed inductive codes iteratively through careful reading of the transcripts to identify context-specific practices and interpretations (Kuckartz, 2016). To enhance reliability, each interview passage was coded by at least two researchers, and we discussed discrepancies until consensus was reached. After completing the interviews, we presented our findings to an expert workshop comprising researchers and practitioners specializing in school administration and equity. We discussed options for adapting the findings to the German context. Finally, we used additional conversations with experts from the German states in which the training program will be piloted to be sensitive to regional conditions. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The analysis indicates that, in the U. S. districts studied, successful CRSL was tied to how superintendents themselves lead in a culturally responsive manner and to how they conceived and shaped their support for principals. Rather than limiting their role to compliance and formal oversight, these leaders created relationship-oriented, reflective, and collaborative environments where principals could critically examine deficit-oriented assumptions, engage with communities, and experiment with culturally responsive practices. The results particularly illustrated three interconnected standards that were reported as relevant by the interviewees: (1) developing and sustaining a coherent equity vision at district level; (2) ensuring visible, accessible presence in schools, and (3) establishing spaces for ongoing professional learning and mutual accountability related to CRSL (see also Aguayo et al., 2023). Applied to the German context, the analysis highlights both transfer opportunities and structural barriers. While U. S. superintendents leverage formal authority and accountability systems, German SAB traditionally emphasize organizational and legal oversight (Klein & Bremm, 2020). Drawing on the results of the expert workshop, we contend that the identified standards are nevertheless relevant as design influences for training programs in the German context: SAB can support CRSL for instance by explicitly focusing their advisory work on educational equity, using existing communication structures for reflective dialogue with and for principals, and encouraging principals to participate in professional development aimed at CRSL practices (see also Baars et al., 2023; Sigurðardóttir & Hjartarson, 2016). These efforts do not require formal changes to legal responsibilities, but rather a cultural and professional reorientation of SAB’s roles as change agents (Skrla et al., 2011). The prototype training program developed within the project will respond to this context by providing capacity-building activities that strengthen the SAB’s capacity to navigate between administrative duties and equity-oriented leadership. References Aguayo, D., Good, M. W., Diem, S., Herman, K. C., Burke, J., et al. (2023). District leadership for culturally responsive schooling: Supporting principals as equity leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 61(4), 512–530. Baars, S., de Ruig, C., Roeleveld, J. & van der Veen, I. (2023). Student voice in redesigning learning environments: Participation, ownership and equity. Learning Environments Research, 26(2), 245-266. Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness: Through transformational leadership. Sage. Becks, C., Czaja, S. J. & Klein, E. D. (2025). Kulturresponsives Schulleitungshandeln als Bedingung erfolgreicher Bildungsprozesse von Schüler*innen aus marginalisierten Herkunftsmilieus – Ein erster Kartierungsversuch für den deutschen Sprachraum. Jahrbuch der Schulentwicklung, 24, 181-213. DeMatthews, D., Izquierdo, E. & Knight, D. S. (2017). Righting past wrongs: A superintendent’s social justice leadership for dual language education along the U.S.-Mexico border. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(1), 1-28. Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Pearson. Khalifa, M. A. (2018). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press. Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A. & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally Responsive School Leadership: A Synthesis of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272-1311. Klein, E.D. & Bremm, N. (2020). Schulentwicklung im managerial geprägten System – Das Verhältnis von Schulleitung und Schulaufsicht in den USA (263-285). In E.D. Klein & N. Bremm (Eds.), Unterstützung – Kooperation – Kontrolle. Zum Verhältnis von Schulaufsicht und Schulleitung in der Schulentwicklung. Springer VS. Kuckartz, U. (2016). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Beltz Juventa. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the Achievement Gap to the Education Debt: Understanding Achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3-12. Meuser, M. & Nagel, U. (2009). The expert interview and changes in knowledge production. In A. Bogner, B. Littig & W. Menz (Eds.), Interviewing experts (17-42). Palgrave Macmillan. Nelson, S. W. & Guerra, P. L. (2013). Educator beliefs and cultural knowledge: Implications for school improvement efforts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(1), 45-90. Phillips, D. & Schweisfurth, M. (2014). Comparative and international education: An introduction to theory, method, and practice. Bloomsbury. Skrla, L., McKenzie, K. B. & Scheurich, J. J. (2011). Becoming an equity oriented change agent. In A. M. Blankstein & P. D. Houston (Eds.), Leadership for social justice and democracy in our schools (45-58). Corwin Press. Sigurðardóttir, A. K. & Hjartarson, T. (2016). School buildings for the 21st century: Some features of new school buildings in Iceland. CEPS Journal, 6(2), 29-49. 26. Educational Leadership
Paper Resistance and Conflicts Regarding School Discipline Guidelines: Qualitative Exploration of School Leaders' Dissent and “Guerrilla” Strategies The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel Presenting Author:Objectives The study explored the ways school leaders express and implement dissent from nationwide directives regarding discipline policy, and the "guerrilla" tactics they use to undermine or lessen policy directives they disagree with. The study explored the following research questions: RQ1: How do school leaders express and implement dissent to formal national discipline directives in their daily work? RQ2: What informal guerrilla tactics of dissent do school leaders use to undermine or mitigate policy directives they disagree with?
Theoretical Framework Dissent and Guerrilla Tactics Much of the scholarship on the public sector focuses on attempts to comprehend the regulation of administrative behavior by means of rules and how it can guarantee consistent and logical outcomes. This scholarship, however, also acknowledges the tendency of individuals to resist, which creates divergence in public service (Gofen, 2014). O'Leary's (2020) work describes the types of conflicts that can emerge in government organizations, including disagreements on values, ethics, rules, superior directives, policies, and bureaucracies. Conflicts can result from personal tension between individuals and their roles, interpersonal tensions, differences between individuals and work culture, tensions between legal and ethical commitments, differences between policy and values, and more (Cox, 2025b). Such conflicts can lead to employee dissent (O’Leary, 2020). The importance of dissent in the public sector arises from the discretion afforded to public authorities and employees (Cox, 2025a; O’Leary, 2020). This discretion not only enables public employees to play a political role, but also positions them as moral agents who must decide how to exercise their power in ethically responsible ways (Cox, 2025b; Gofen, 2014; O’Leary, 2020). In some cases, public employees express their dissent by working against the wishes of their superiors, in what O'Leary (2020) called guerrilla government. Scholars suggest that the best way to address these phenomena is to divert employees' dissent toward formal and constructive measures, which can be accomplished by developing effective channels for the employees to express dissent (Cox, 2025a; O’Leary, 2010). The limited literature on the resistance of individual school leaders tends to focus on neoliberal policies such as high-stakes testing (Fuller, 2019; Hall, 2024; McKay et al., 2024). In general, educational leadership scholars found resistance to be a positive phenomenon. For example, Fuller (2019) did not accept the "dominant discourse of resistance as negative" (p. 34), and McKay et al. (2024) viewed resistance as "subverting and adapting policies to better meet the needs of students" (p. 204).
School Discipline as an Arena of Disagreements Between the Central Authority and Principals Despite being ineffective and discriminatory (e.g., Perry & Morris, 2014; Skiba et al., 2014), exclusionary disciplinary measures enjoy wide support from principals (Shabazian, 2020; Trudel & Davies, 2024). Recent studies show that school staff react to policy attempts to reduce exclusionary discipline by developing what researchers termed "hidden forms of school exclusion" (Power & Taylor, 2020) or "informal exclusionary discipline practices" (Steyer et al., 2025), which are not reported as exclusions, but exclude the student in practice and therefore share the formal disadvantages of exclusions (Power & Taylor, 2020; Steyer et al., 2025). The present study applied the lens of dissent and guerrilla government to principals' dissent toward discipline policy, to challenge both the common supportive attitude of dissent studies and the common approach in school discipline studies, which condemn exclusionary punishments categorically. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Participants and Procedure This qualitative study was based on semi-structured interviews with school principals. We used purposive sampling to ensure variation in participants’ age, professional tenure, gender, the age groups of students, and their socioeconomic status. Participants were recruited through invitations posted on social media aimed at educators. Individuals who expressed willingness to participate were contacted and provided with detailed information about the aims and procedures of the study. After the interview, participants were also asked to extend invitations to their colleagues. Participation was voluntary, anonymity and confidentiality were guaranteed, and all participants provided written informed consent. The participants were 12 school principals. This number was not fixed in advance but reflected the point at which thematic saturation was reached. The participants varied in gender (7 males, 5 females), professional seniority (1-14 years as achool principls, M=5.5), geographic location (5 different regions, 1-3 participants from each region), school levels (3 elementry schools, 5 middle schools, 3 high-schools), and the socioeconomic composition of their schools (Ranked 3-8 on the MOE's "care index", M=5.67). Interviews were semi-structured to enable in-depth inquiry of the principals' attitude toward the MOE's policy and allow flexibility. The interview questions focused on the disciplinary policy of the school (e.g., how would you describe the school disciplinary policy?), how it was formulated (e.g., how was the school's disciplinary policy formed? what people, tools, or documents were involved in the process?), interactions and disputes with teachers, parents, and superintendents about discipline (e.g., could you describe differences between your own approach to discipline to the MOE's approach? How do you handle those differences?) , and familiarity with the MOE disciplinary policy (e.g., could you describe the MOE's disciplinary policy?). All interviews were conducted by the researcher, took place over Zoom, and lasted approximately 40-90 minutes. Data Analysis Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We used the Dedoose© software for thematic analysis of the transcripts in accordance with the principles of grounded research theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The two authors analyzed the transcripts independently to achieve investigator triangulation, and their findings were later compared and discussed to refine the themes and resolve disagreements. Thick descriptions are used in the article to produce a detailed image of the participants' accounts. These combined methods were intended to satisfy the standards for reliable, transferable, credible, and confirmable research (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The findings described conflicts between school principals and the state disciplinary policy, represented by either the school superintendents or the written state policy. The conflicts usually concerned the use of exclusionary discipline when principals wished to use such methods, that are prohibited by the state policy. Principals also described two guerrilla tactics they used to bypass the MOE policy and act according to their own inclination. The first was termed Letter-of-the-law obedience, which involved following the policy as written, but achieving an opposite desired outcome by exploiting policy loopholes. This strategy included persuading students to drop out of school or not attend a school trip, excluding the student de facto, while avoiding using prohibited exclusionary punishments. In a few cases, principals used this strategy to avoid enforcing regulations they considered impractical. The second was deliberate non-compliance, which generally involved not reporting exclusionary punishments to the superintendents, although reporting was mandatory. Usually, it was a covert action, but in two cases it was detected and the superintendents chose not to act against the principals, practically engaging themselves in acts of guerrilla government. The disadvantages of exclusionary punishments (e.g., Perry and Morris, 2014; Skiba et al., 2014) should not be overlooked. At the same time, studies suggest that dissent ought to be regulated and listened to (Cox, 2025a; O’Leary, 2010). This study suggests that principals' advocacy of exclusionary practices should be listened to as well, as it expresses their concerns and difficulties. An inquiry into schooling constraints and the real or perceived advantages of exclusion may be required to develop practical alternatives or guidelines for a constructive use of exclusionary punishments. Some scholars have already offered alternatives that form a bridge between traditional disciplinary methods and novel dialogue approaches (McGillicuddy, 2024). References Cox, C. D. (2025a). Leading with dissent: Guerrilla government and the ethical art of disobedience. Public Management Review, 27(9), 2030–2048. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2315564 Cox, C. D. (2025b). Systematic review and metasynthesis: Dissent and guerrilla government in public administration research. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70024 Fuller, K. (2019). "That would be my red line”: An analysis of headteachers’ resistance of neoliberal education reforms. Educational Review, 71(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1522042 Gofen, A. (2014). Mind the gap: Dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 473–493. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut037 Hall, D. (2024). Resistance and the permanent instability of educational neo-liberalism. In A. McKay, P. Thomson, & J. Blackmore (Eds.), Resistance in Educational Leadership, Management, and Administration (pp. 95–108). Routledge. https://www-taylorfrancis-com.ezproxy.haifa.ac.il/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003279334-8/resistance-permanent-instability-educational-neo-liberalism-david-hall Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications. McGillicuddy, S. (2024). Responding to challenging behaviour in post-primary schools: Exploring a new authority. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100778 McKay, A., Thomson, P., & Blackmore, J. (Eds.). (2024). Resistance in educational leadership, management, and administration. Routledge. O’Leary, R. (2010). Guerrilla Employees: Should Managers Nurture, Tolerate, or Terminate Them? Public Administration Review, 70(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02104.x O’Leary, R. (2020). The ethics of dissent: Managing guerrilla government (3rd ed.). CQ Press. Perry, B. L., & Morris, E. W. (2014). Suspending progress: Collateral consequences of exclusionary punishment in public schools. American Sociological Review, 79(6), 1067–1087. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414556308 Power, S., & Taylor, C. (2020). Not in the classroom, but still on the register: Hidden forms of school exclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(8), 867–881. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1492644 Shabazian, A. N. (2020). Voices that matter: Chief administrative officers’ role in the student discipline gap. Urban Education, 55(1), 66–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916651319 Skiba, R. J., Arredondo, M. I., & Williams, N. T. (2014). More than a metaphor: The contribution of exclusionary discipline to a school-to-prison pipeline. Equity and Excellence in Education, 47(4), 546–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.958965 Steyer, L., Provençal, M., Pearman, F., & Obradović, J. (2025). De facto suspensions: Informal exclusionary discipline practices in public preschool and early elementary settings. AERA Open, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584251375062 Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Sage. Trudel, L. E., & Davies, W. (2024). Safely navigating the “dangerous space between good intentions and meaningful interventions”: A study on the use of school suspensions in manitoba, canada. Exceptionality Education International, 34(2), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v34i2.17155 26. Educational Leadership
Paper Leadership Competences Enabling Participatory Interventions in Sustainability Education 1: University of Jyväskylä, Finland; 2: Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas, CIEMAT; 3: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona Presenting Author:Although education is fundamentally oriented towards the future, much of current educational practice lacks clear consideration of future and even present realities of sustainability crises (Sterling 2024). A shared vision of the role of education in promoting sustainable futures is essential help when navigating uncertainties in the era poly crises. Educational leadership plays a decisive role in enabling collective efforts for a better future in education and teachers’ and students’ active participation that can foster resilience in challenging circumstances. This paper aims to deepen understanding of the transformative leadership competences that enable successful implementation of sustainability education responding to the evolving complex sustainability crises that threaten our wellbeing and future. Sustainability means different things to different groups of people at different times. We refer to the definition of sustainability in GreenComp, the European Sustainability Competence Framework that was published in 2022 by the ERC, European Research Center as part of the European Green Deal. According to GreenComp, “sustainability means prioritizing the needs of all life forms and of the planet by ensuring that human activity does not exceed planetary boundaries” (p.12). We also emphasize the role of education for promoting planetary wellbeing that underlines the dependence of human wellbeing on healthy ecosystems through dialogical approaches (Aaltonen et. al. 2023). The sustainability competences defined in GreenComp aim to empower learners to embody sustainability values, and embrace complex systems, generate visions for sustainable futures to take or request action that restores and maintains eco-system health and enhances justice (p. 12). Even though the focus of GreenComp is on individual life-long learning as it defines sustainability competences as knowledge, skills and attitudes, sustainability competences should not be understood only as individual. Collective competences like collaboration or other collective, cultural and material practices are very relevant for fostering sustainability competences and resilience of individuals. Collective competences refer to the innate quality of an organism or system, or the organization’s ability to act on a given issue as a community, in a collective way (see Vare, Rieckmann & Lausselet 2022). Collective competences can be divided into three areas such as regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive competences, referring to institutional theory of Scott (2001) Nokkala & al. 2024). Collective competences are relevant for developing a holistic whole-school approach where implemented in all school activities as a common goal. This kind of approach has been indicated as essential for successful implementation of sustainability education (Mathie & Walls 2022; Mogren et. al 2024). The whole school approach emphasizes the need to integrate sustainability in entire school context and organization including institutional practices, employee capacity building, community connections, curriculum, and pedagogy. This demands both 1) shared leadership managing participation by communication, feedback systems and collegial structures, and 2) transformational leadership (Hallinger 2003) that establishes a holistic vision that is based on a shared understanding of sustainability (Mogren & Gericke, 2017). Furthermore, interdisciplinary approaches (Eilam & Trop, 2010) and fostering openness toward society to enhance the relevance of education for learners (Gericke, 2022) have been indicated as crucial for the effective implementation of sustainability education in ways that respond to continuously evolving societal demands and pressures. This paper aims to deepen understanding of the transformative leadership competences in the context of sustainability education. The paper responds to the question: what kind of leadership competences are essential in collective implementation of both pedagogical and structural interventions for sustainability education through a participatory approach? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Empirically, the study draws on the findings from a participatory action research project, called ECF4CLIM project (A European Competence Framework for a Low Carbon Economy and Sustainability through Education 2021-2025), funded from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 101036505. During the ECF4CLIM project 159 both behavioral/pedagogical and structural interventions promoting sustainability competences were implemented in thirteen demonstration sites consisting of Finnish, Spanish, Portuguese, and Romanian primary and secondary schools and universities. This presentation focuses on insights from primary and secondary school contexts in partner countries and enlightens the project’s findings from leadership perspective. The findings are based on the data deriving from teams and committee meetings during the innovative hybrid participatory action research process. The hybrid participatory approach included six separate Sustainability Competence Teams for students, teachers and administrators and six Sustainability Competence Committees, where the representatives from the teams and wider education community, such as families, experts, authorities and NGOs came together to debate the results and insights from the teams. During this process each of the thirteen demonstration sites co-designed, co-implemented and finally evaluated 3-11 interventions best suited for their context. Intervention reports and reflective interviews with school management on their learning experiences complement the findings. The main data analyzed from the perspective of leadership derived from the 5th sustainability competence team meetings with a roleplay like activity was conducted and 5th committee meetings where the results of the roleplay activity where debated and reflected together. During the role play from the perspective of their chosen role, and considering the responsibilities associated with it, participants argued which factors contributed to the success or failure of the intervention. The method helped participants articulate concrete insights and ensured active engagement from all participants. The findings of the role play were debated afterwards both at the end of the roleplay, in the committee meetings and next team meetings. The leadership competences were analyzed related to different areas of sustainability competences defined in GreenComp and also related to the collective competences and linked with the Roadmap for sustainability competences that was also created during the process. The leadership competences for sustainability education are defined related to engaging, fostering awareness of connections, enabling change and action. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings ECF4CLIM projects results indicate that leadership competences are very relevant for collective competences enabling successful implementation sustainability education. They either enable or constrain whole school’s engagement and collaboration for integration of sustainability into operational culture. During the ECF4CLIM project leaders had a crucial role also in looking after the continuous development of interventions and in maintaining positive networks of actors. Finding and allocating resources for participatory approach and collaborative development of interventions were dependent on principles’ competences. Boundary-crossing leadership was essential in collaboration between teachers and other relevant stakeholders, and strategic leadership for looking for solutions for emerging problems creatively. Emotional competences encountering resistance, negotiation, inclusive approach respecting multiple opinions, avoiding conflicts and fostering resilience, wellbeing and encouraging change were considered also as very essential as sustainability as a sensitive issue. Clear and coherent communication were relevant for engagement the whole school in sustainability. Moreover, sharing and defining responsibilities clearly was import enabler for successful project management. The project results support findings of earlier research how leadership plays a key role in successful implementation sustainability education (Mogren et. al 2024). Individual educational leaders’ sustainability competences impact collective competences. Realization of international and national regulations for sustainability depends on individual competences of educational leaders. By sharing and disseminating good practices within networks school leaders can also have positive impact on regulative competences. Establishing participatory approaches and carrying out meaningful collective interventions enables improvement of the whole school community’s sustainability competences. The extent to which students can gain meaningful experiences of participation in collective sustainability efforts and hopeful futures perspectives depend on the leadership competences. Whether the severity of the sustainability crisis is acknowledged within the school community or whether students are left alone with their concerns about the future and teachers are left unsupported in their efforts to advance sustainability education. References Aaltonen, V. A., Hiljanen, M., Layne, H., Lehtonen, A., Löyttyniemi, M., Mykrä, N., ... & Heikkinen, H. L. (2023). Education for planetary well-being. In Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Planetary Well-Being, 246-258. Bianchi, G., (2020). Sustainability competences, Joint Research Centre, European Commission. Available at https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC123624 Bianchi, G., U. Pisiotis, and M. Cabrera Giraldez, (2022). GreenComp, European Framework for Sustainability Competences, M. Bacigalupo and Y. Punie, Editors. 2022: EUR 30955 FI, Eur., Luxemburg. DOI: 10.2760/595099. Eilam, E., & Trop, T. (2010). Education for sustainable development pedagogy: A guide for the perplexed. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(1), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958961003674665 Gericke, N., & Torbjörnsson, T. (2022). Supporting local school reform toward education for sustainable development: The need for creating and continuously negotiating a shared vision and building trust. The Journal of Environmental Education, 53(4), 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2022.2102565 Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of education, 33(3), 329-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764032000122005 Mathie, R. G., & Wals, A. E. J. (2022). Whole school approaches to sustainability: Exemplary practices from around the world. Wageningen University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18174/572267 Mykrä, N., Prades, A., Lechón, Y., Lehtonen, A., Almeid, M., Becerra Villanueva, J. A., ... & Zografou, C. (2025). Roadmap for Sustainability Competences. Finnish Institute for Educational Research Reports and Working Papers, (17). Mogren, A., Forssten Seiser, A., Gericke, N., Berglund, T., & Olsson, D. (2024). Leadership actions that enable or constrain accommodation of education for sustainable development. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2024.2418623 Mogren, A., & Gericke, N. (2017). ESD implementation at the school organization level, part 1 investigating the quality criteria guiding school leaders’ work at recognized ESD schools. Environmental Education Research, 23(7), 972–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2016.1226265 Nokkala, T., Lehtonen, M., Lehtonen, A., Trenc, J. E., Mykrä, N., Heikkinen, H., & Lopez, A. P. (2024). Collective sustainability competences of universities as a nested institutional space. Higher Education Quarterly, Early online. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12552 Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage. Sterling, S., (2024). Learning and Sustainability in Dangerous Times: The Stephen Sterling Reader. Agenda Publishing. DOI: 10.1017/9781788216920. Vare, P., Rieckman, M. & Lausselet, N. (2022). Introduction. In: Vare, P., Lausselet, N. & Rieckmann, M., Competences in Education for Sustainable Development: Critical Perspectives. Springer. | ||