Leading Research in Educational Administration: A Festschrift for Wayne K. Hoy

The field of educational administration (EA) has gradually become a deep and broad field of study over recent decades (Oplatka, 2010). This is a multifaceted process and has included the development of theory, research and implications, which contribute to our understanding of the schooling process, especially in an era of reform (Fink, 2010). Nevertheless the epistemology, foundation disciplines and themes of research and its implications have still not been sufficiently established to ensure EA’s recognition as an independent discipline. This special edition contributes significantly to the establishment of EA as a broad and comprehensive field, expanding our understanding of schools through empirical study and theoretical analysis initiated by Wayne and Miskel, leading researchers in the field.

The volume by Michael F. DiPaola and Patrick B. Forsyth, Leading Research in Educational Administration, attempts to assess and describe the contribution of Wayne and his colleagues to fill the gap in knowledge concerning EA. Its strong empirical focus shows how Wayne’s original research has been extended; pointing up the commonalities and differences reflected in the “why” questions about schools. The book details the contributions of Wayne over a long distinguished career and is revolving on analysis of school contexts including review of the constructs studied and researched by Wayne and his protégés, namely, school climate, interpersonal trust, efficacy, academic optimism, organizational citizenship and mindfulness. All the authors had some personal connection with Wayne and his research as co-researchers, colleagues and students.

In an attempt to understand the personality of Wayne and what it was like to work with him, the book enlists the memories of his Co-author, Anita Woolfolk Hoy, and those of a former Student, Karen Stanberry Beard, conjuring up the atmosphere of their direct work with Wayne in his world of intellectual curiosity and disciplined research describing Wayne as an engaging Teacher, monitor and colleague. Attempting to sum up this contribution Woolfolk Hoy explains: “In his over 40 years of research, Wayne has found only three school level predictors of achievement: academic emphasis, collective teacher efficacy, and teacher trust in students and their parents” (p. xix).

Chapters 1 and 2 deal with different dimensions of trust between school stake-holders: Tschannen-Moran shows how she developed on herself the definition of trust that she had developed with Wayne, continuing to explore the links between trust and other organizational processes such as collaboration, collective efficacy, organizational citizenship and teacher professionalism and how these terms affect students achievement and school effectiveness (p. 9). After three decades of researching trust in schools she defines trust as: “one party’s willingness to be vulnerable to another party based upon the confidence that the latter party is benevolent, honest, open, reliable, and competent” (p. 3). She exemplifies this process by showing how the school principal who creates successful trust relations can provide a vibrant environment for successful school performances. Tschannen-Moran shows how consideration and institutional integrity serve as the strongest predictors of faculty trust in the principal, and morale and principal influence as the strongest predictors of faculty trust in colleagues (p. 4) and explains how this understanding formed the basis for her work with Wayne to develop a measure of faculty trust in four referent groups: the principal, teacher colleagues, students and parents (p. 4).

In Chapter 2, Page Smith and Carl Scarbrough review the conceptual understanding underpinning of two constructs: mindfulness and trust, bringing examples from empirical research that demonstrates these concepts in the school (p. 19). They found that teachers who exhibit high levels of trust in their principal are more apt to perceive their principal as being more mindful in leading the school, also teachers who trust their colleagues were more apt to believe that faculty was mindful in their organizational practices (p. 26).

In Chapter 3, John McIntyre reviews the research on another construct delineated and explored by Wayne: “efficacy” in relation to successful school study and achievements. McIntyre discusses links between efficacy and other social processes in schools, including trust and decision making, and describes how collective efficacy affects academic optimism (p. 69).

Chapters 4 and 5 relate to the issue of “academic optimism,” a unified construct relating to the dynamics between efficacy, trust and home academic press that function together. In Chapter 4, Curt Adams and Patrick Forsyth extend the construct beyond faculty academic optimism and individual teacher academic optimism by exploring the viability of the individual student’s academic optimism and self-efficacy (p. 77).

In Chapter 5, Karen Beard examines the concept of “academic optimism” in relation to “teacher flow,” discussing the relationship between possible psychological and structural correlates of flow and individual academic optimism and their impact on student achievement (p. 91). Beard also provides evidence that individual teacher optimism is conceptually similar to collective academic optimism and confirms that flow and academic optimism are positively correlated.

The construct of efficacy is further discussed in Chapter 6 by Jeffrey, Jackson and Michael DiPaola pointing up a positive correlation between teacher efficacy and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). In Chapter 7, John Tarter and Darrell Cooper describe how they hypothesized that “efficacy” relates to OCB, and report their study on OCB, efficacy and students achievement. They show how school effectiveness is reflected in two dimensions: teachers’ perceptions of organizational effectiveness based on school efficiency, flexibility, adoptability and innovativeness and students achievements scores in mathematics and science (p. 136).

In Chapter 8, Wayne’s former Student Steven Denig and his colleagues, explain how they developed a quantitative survey instrument based on the decision-making process. They found that superintendents with smaller student populations are more inclined to implement a variety of different problem-solving and decision-making approaches.

In Chapter 9, Anika Anthony shows how technology can be harnessed to bring innovative design to school organization, she indicates that school and district administrators need to show sensitivity and gradually process social, cultural, structural and political influences in order to facilitate the adoption of technologies that support teaching and learning and administrative practices that improve leaders’ practices (p. 168).

In Chapter 10, Heather Bandeen attempts a new look at education policy analysis with a feminist post-structural approach. Employing a content analysis of teachers’ interviews, she identifies subject positions and power techniques to explain the ways that power operates across policy and teacher discourses (p. 188).

The last two chapters relate to school leadership and urban school improvement. In Chapter 11, Leigh McGuigan recommends different strategies for productive research partnerships with urban districts; while in Chapter 12 Gail Schneider, another of Wayne’s colleagues describes their study of leadership in urban districts investigating the issues of capacity building, recruitment, induction, mentoring and sustainability of school leaders and investigating leadership succession policies, strategies and practices (p. 216).

As a Scholar of leadership in education, I found this a fascinating book, as both the editors and the authors illuminate Wayne’s distinctive intellectual identity and research heritage, which together with the writings and scholarship of Wayne’s former students and colleagues of Wayne over the last 50 years have helped to reinforce the status of EA as a field of research that informs school practice, across contextual and international arenas.

The book is highly recommended for the scholars of EA and leadership. It can serve as an instructive guidebook for teachers who aspire to lead and school leaders who seek to promote high quality and effective schools, to reinforce the validity of their field work with strong relevant theory based on the constructs developed by Wayne and his colleagues, such as “trust”, “academic optimism”, “faculty cohesion”, with their obvious significance for student success. It is especially important to be aware of the significance of these constructs in an era of educational reform and decentralization of authorities from governments, which impose additional accountability on school principals. It provides useful knowledge that can inform leadership preparation programs and should generate new thinking about leadership.