Understanding School Leadership

Citation

Ranger, G. (2006), "Understanding School Leadership", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 421-423. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230610676613

This is an ambitious book in that it draws on the extensive research background of the joint authors to analyse first the changing role and nature of headship, and second the different facets of “distributed leadership”, a modern‐day mantra for one characteristic of effective leadership, linking this to school improvement. The work is helpfully organised into two such sections. This book stands apart from many on the subject because of its empirical bases. The authors have succeeded in making research findings on school leadership readable, partly through the use of case study but also because of significance they place on values and ethics in shaping leadership. This is well illustrated by a chapter on failing and dysfunctional leadership, manifested in “failing” schools, using the parlance favoured by Ofsted, the central inspection agency in England.

The book's readability level is high. Each chapter is prefaced by a short overview of the coverage, and the use of subheadings will help the student as well as the more experienced, selective reader. It will appeal to those studying educational leadership, as well as those reflective practitioners keen to look towards an empirical basis for their ideas. The work is up‐to‐date, drawing in particular on the UK experiences of the two authors, notably but not exclusively at the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER).

Interestingly, Earley and Weindling explore notions of “leadership” and “management” from the outset of the book, pointing out that the issue is not a semantic one, but that the two functions overlap and inter‐relate. Dominant foci, developed during the latter chapters, are the effect of leadership on the led, rather than on over‐emphasis on the qualities of the individual, and the need for leadership to be demonstrated at all levels and not just at the top. They conclude that the current view of school leadership is that it focuses strongly on the leadership of learning and that demonstrated by the CEO or headteacher/principal is crucial. A further analysis of the role of “headteacher” vis‐à‐vis the principal, or even CEO, would be fascinating. The authors draw on the British distinctions between leadership, management and governance in describing how organisations are shaped.

Drawing on longitudinal studies such as the stages “enjoyed” by headteachers over more than a decade, chapters are usefully illustrated. The authors state what is felt by many, clearly, amusingly and always empirically. Any newly appointed headteacher/principal will recognise the finding that new heads do not start with a clean state, seeing the “shadow” of one or more predecessors in much of what they do or want to do. “Reculturing” the school, fighting the “that's the way we have always done it” mentality is a challenge facing many school leaders. The intelligent questions asked in the NFER survey, as well as the answers to them, are illuminative. After ten years in post, for example, headteachers surveyed were very ready and able to articulate what worked and what did not, giving important lessons to pre‐service qualifications which tend to emphasise the technical rather than the socio‐political challenges. Serving headteachers will also value these chapters, as they, perhaps, struggle in the loneliness of self‐relfection. The changing role, as well as the changing appeal of headship is well treated. The question “why become a headteacher?” is not the approach of this book. Rather, let's look at an evidence base and ask why people have chosen to become headteachers, what motivates them and what do they find demotivating. Interestingly, given the seas of change in education at school level, the reasons aspiring heads give for wanting to take on the headship role are similar to those given in the 1980s, according to Earley and Weindling. Aspirant heads talk of perceiving headship as “making a difference”, or “having an influence” or “implementing their own vision”. The factors that motivate and demotivate heads are also found to be much the same over the three decades. The authors found the factors of “people management” most motivating “for heads”, especially the interactions with staff and students (parents and other stakeholders are not mentioned). A further important motivator was school success, expressed by many in terms of harmonious relationships as well as academic and other successes.

The demotivators cited have a distinctively English resonance, sadly, such as bureaucracy and paperwork, government interferences, constant change, low status, and negative media image. By 2001, change and innovations were seen as manageable by some heads, who saw the government‐driven initiatives as a means towards fulfilling the aims and objectives they had set for themselves. Such schools had seemingly established a “virtuous circle”, a phrase coined by the authors to describe the cycle of resource injection, low staff turnover and high morale engineered by high‐quality leadership. The notion of “specialist school” leadership is alluded to but the concept could be analysed further, along with the head's role as marketer, entrepreneur and manager of funding proposals. The authors do not extend to making judgements on the effects of the post‐1988 government education reforms in England and Wales, although they point to some heartening trends. As Alison Wolf (2002) points out, education in Britain is big because it is seen on the engine of economic growth. Hence, during the first three years of the first Blair administration, the equivalent of one educational initiative or set of instructions was issued for every single day of the year.

Governance demands attention and receives appropriate emphasis in the text, reflecting the research background of the authors in the state (i.e. government) sector of England and Wales. The headteacher's relationship with the governing body was cited as a conically important internal factor influencing the role of the head. Much more time became spent on governance matters following the Education Reform Act of 1988.

The increased workload on headteachers, including that concerned with “managing” the governing body is reported as contributing to a change in the distribution of responsibilities. By the mid‐1990s, the authors report, headteachers were more confident and relaxed in distributing significant responsibilities, and operating less hierachically. Heads were found to delegate some functions more readily than others: those more likely to be retained included budgetary management and appointment of staff, and one in five felt they needed to retain responsibility for staff and student discipline. Teaching commitments of headteachers are considered, and although time spent in the classroom remains important to many, teaching commitments seem to be reducing through the 1980s and 1990s. The research yielded some interesting insights into why headteachers wanted to teach including, from one, “therapy on bad days”. Much depends on the lesson. I suppose.

Earley and Weindling contribute valuable chapters on outstanding leaders, accountability, ethnically responsible school leadership and images of leadership.

The meat of the book, for me, is in Part 1, in their analysis of headship, and Part 2 builds on this by considering distributed leadership and school improvement. Governors as leaders are considered, as is the crucial role of middle leaders in the context of distributed leadership. Linked to school improvements, the role of leadership is, for me, over‐egged in the context of “failing schools”, and the socio‐economic context of housing and social policy is under‐emphasised. Again, however, valuable research data are used to explain in‐school influences and outcomes.

In the final chapter on “Developing Leaders”, a good overview of leadership development programmes is linked to the previous research findings on school improvement and school leadership. Overall, this is an excellent, well‐written, extensively referenced, empirically based contribution to school leadership thinking. Although drawing heavily on the government sector in Britain, Earley and Weindling offer valuable insights for all of us: serving headteachers/principals, advisory and distinct‐wide policy makers and aspiring headteachers.