Abstract
Happy New Year and welcome to volume 53 of EMAL. This opening issue illustrates the dramatic change in the field of educational leadership and management over the past half-century. The 12 articles from eight countries on three continents are in sharp contrast to the Anglo-American dominance of this field in the 1970s. The expansion in research and scholarship around the globe is also evidenced by the submission of manuscripts to EMAL from 77 countries in the past 12 months. This is a reason for celebration for those academics, policymakers and practitioners who recognise the great significance of leadership in promoting educational improvement and student development.
The first article in this issue, by Daniel Nordholm, Maximilian Real and Christopher Bezzina, focuses on the professional identity of newly appointed Swedish principals. They surveyed 87 principals who were embarking on the National Principal Training Programme, which is mandatory for new principals. The survey questions invited participants to think about five aspects of professional identity: knowledge, understanding, experiences, values and beliefs. The authors conclude that the identity of this sample of principals is diverse and fragmented.
Identity and socialisation are related concepts that help to understand the process of transition from teacher to principal. Ori Eyal and his colleagues explore the latter notion in respect of principal mentoring in Israel. Numerous studies in various contexts attest to the value of mentoring in helping novice principals to adapt to the demands of school leadership. The authors sampled 14 new principals (seven primary and seven secondary) to examine the impact of mentoring on their socialisation. They conclude that mentoring focusing on the organisation were mostly concerned with managerial skills development while a more personal approach was associated with emotional support.
Distributed leadership is the most frequently discussed model in our field, with many papers in EMAL and other journals. Peter Okiri and Maria Hercz extend this notion to discuss distributed pedagogical leadership. They report on a systematic review mapping literature on this phenomenon. The search led to only ten sources being included in the review, indicating the need for this joint construct to be investigated. They report that important dimensions of distributed pedagogical leadership are teacher involvement, quality improvement and the role of stakeholders. They conclude that further research is required to develop a more robust theoretical underpinning for this dual theory.
Middle leaders typically have a central role in implementing pedagogical leadership, through their enhanced subject knowledge. Youmen Chaaban, Rania Sawalhi and Adrian Lundberg examine how middle leaders in Qatar made sense of the demands imposed on them during the Covid-19 pandemic. They are often perceived as ‘brokers’ between senior leaders and teachers, a role even more demanding during the pandemic. A number (27) of subject coordinators participated in the authors’ study and they were asked to consider three dimensions of sensemaking: intrapersonal, relational and institutional. Limited decision-making autonomy was a common theme identified by these middle leaders who also commented on their minimal professional development opportunities.
Teacher leaders are also central to successful pedagogical leadership, as they operate close to the classroom, while also contributing to subject and wider school leadership. Wen-Yan Chen examines what motivates teachers to lead, and how they develop role identities. The author surveyed 498 high school teachers in Taiwan, to establish their role expectations, role identities and teacher leadership behaviour. The participants perceived that their main role was teaching, in line with public expectations, and consistent with much of the global literature. They also recognised themselves as professionals, but this did not significantly facilitate leadership behaviour.
Transformational leadership is an enduring concept, which remains significant within and beyond education. Guanghui Wang and colleagues examine the relationship between this model and teachers’ voice behaviour in Chinese universities. The authors’ research focuses on seven universities in South China, with teachers who are subordinate to college deans. They found that, where teachers perceive deans to be displaying transformational leadership, they are more likely to raise institutional issues and to provide suggestions for improvement. They conclude that university leaders should lead by example and inspire teachers to speak openly about institutional problems and events.
Higher education is also the focus of the next paper, by Jennifer Wilkinson and Trevor Male. They explore whether the Covid-19 pandemic impacted disproportionally on women. They interviewed six senior women leaders in the UK to uncover insights into their lived experiences during this period. The authors comment that the pandemic tested senior HE leaders in unprecedented ways, forcing them to adapt in the face of constant external change. Their research identified three main themes: trust, change and relationships. They conclude that these senior women had changed their leadership approaches to be more inward-facing, people-focused and situational.
Greeni Maheshwari and her colleagues provide a rare contribution to the limited research on university leadership in Mexico. They explore the barriers and enablers for women leaders in this context. They interviewed 22 women, 14 of whom were already senior or middle leaders, while the other eight aspired to such positions. The research identified four enablers: family support, vision to make an impact, desire to grow professionally and a wish to act as a role model for younger women. They also found four barriers: work-life balance, fear factors, lack of institutional support and social stigma. These findings confirm previous studies and are particularly significant in the Mexican context.
Daphnee Lee examines how internal and external influences impact on school collaborative culture in Hong Kong. She surveyed 638 ethnically Chinese teachers and leaders in ten secondary and three primary schools. The author found a relationship between school hierarchy, reflected in their bandings, and their school collaborative culture. She concludes that apparently arbitrary and tacit school cultures may be traced to beyond school cultures and inherited social status.
The effects of Covid-19 on staff wellbeing have been extensively examined in schools but less so in other educational sectors. Stephen Corbett and his colleagues consider the pandemic's impact on workforce wellbeing in English further education, and on its societal and social impact. They report on a national survey of staff, with 347 responses. They argue that the turbulent nature of the further education sector tests the workforce's resilience but add that this has been exacerbated during and following the pandemic. They describe this as a significant change in mood and wellbeing but also note that many of these issues were also present before Covid-19.
Nechama Nadav, Pascale Benoliel and Chen Schechter explore the links between principals’ system thinking and school effectiveness in Israel, linked to collective teacher efficacy. They researched 71 secondary schools, focusing on both senior management team members (211 responses) and other teachers (212 responses). They found that system thinking has direct and indirect effects on school effectiveness, notably in respect of school and teacher academic emphasis.
Yinyang Wang and Joonkil Ahn examine construct content validity in school leadership literature. They argue that validity depends on six criteria: content relevance, theoretical understanding, structural data, generalizability, external correlates and consequences of score interpretation. They report that 500 constructs were used between 1999 and 2018 in four top educational leadership journals, including EMAL. They draw on TALIS data to navigate what they call the ‘terminological jungle’ of the school leadership literature. They carried out a systematic search, leading to 29 sources being included in the review. They discuss theoretical and operational definitions and claim that there is often misalignment between them.