Leadership Capacity
Unquestionably, a principals primarily obligation is for the learning of the students, as such, leading instruction is the core business of the school leader. However, in truth, dedicating the time for planned and ongoing instructional leadership, as well as overcoming the pertinacious difficulty of devoting time to effective and sustainable instructional growth is an obstacle that school leaders on all levels face. Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, (2001) point out is the principal does not have to be the expert on everything, but is the instructional leader. The expertise can come from others in the building but such operation should be distributed through the school.
Moving away from one-person leading the school (Spillane, 2005; Lambert, 2002) and establishing greater capacity from within their team to carry and direct the load, principals can create opportunities by identifying teacher leaders and advocates who will clearly communicating the purpose the desired achievement gains. However, this intention can be potentially risked when expanding leadership as the development of a clear mission and sense of purpose can become perplexed with more moving parts and personal agendas (York-Barr & Duke, 2004).
An example could be, seen through the following analogy. A school leader was providing support to their teachers by popping in and being visible; however, due to the management and high administrative load they had was not able to impact the development of instruction throughout the school they desired. Therefore, with good intent, they handed this action of being visible and available to other leaders. Unfortunately for the leader, those who were given the job did not understand the principles of instructional rounds as desired by the leader, resulting in teachers feeling as this “pop in” by others was their practice being judged and assessed. Though the intention was to increase connection and capacity, the initiative broke down due to the transmission of intent and vision.
Multiple and Competing Goals
Adjoining this challenge for instructional leaders is multiple and competing goals. As schools set strategic plans, they often state targets in specific areas, unfortunately these priorities are not always congruent with each other and the timing of implementation may not be meticulously considered for example, rollouts of new syllabus’. It is essential; however, to look for strategies to manage change when dealing with the complexities of strategic goals and curriculum as these ensure the greatest success can be achieved (Leander & Osborne, 2008).
Skill Development and Mastery
Furthermore, challenges relating to skill development and mastery are considerable for instructional leadership. Strategic, interpersonal; planning; instructional observation; research and evaluation skills (Lashway, 2002) are all necessary to create an environment in which staff and student growth is expected.
What practices can educational leaders consider and implement in order to lead teaching and learning in their educational setting?
School leadership is a priority around the globe as the educational leader has an influential role in inspiring, motivating, affirming and also challenging or extending the practice and pedagogy of educators, along with increasing academic outcomes for students. With this in mind, Dinham states, “Educational leaders require a thorough grounding in instructional leadership for clinical teaching if real change towards evidence-based teaching practice is to occur” (2013, p.225). They also require a sense of where the organisation has come from and the culture in which it is becoming.
Though we face many challenges, they are worth working to overcome to ensure the greatest success can be achieved for the school and the learners within it.
Unquestionably, a principals primarily obligation is for the learning of the students, as such, leading instruction is the core business of the school leader. However, in truth, dedicating the time for planned and ongoing instructional leadership, as well as overcoming the pertinacious difficulty of devoting time to effective and sustainable instructional growth is an obstacle that school leaders on all levels face. Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, (2001) point out is the principal does not have to be the expert on everything, but is the instructional leader. The expertise can come from others in the building but such operation should be distributed through the school.
Moving away from one-person leading the school (Spillane, 2005; Lambert, 2002) and establishing greater capacity from within their team to carry and direct the load, principals can create opportunities by identifying teacher leaders and advocates who will clearly communicating the purpose the desired achievement gains. However, this intention can be potentially risked when expanding leadership as the development of a clear mission and sense of purpose can become perplexed with more moving parts and personal agendas (York-Barr & Duke, 2004).
An example could be, seen through the following analogy. A school leader was providing support to their teachers by popping in and being visible; however, due to the management and high administrative load they had was not able to impact the development of instruction throughout the school they desired. Therefore, with good intent, they handed this action of being visible and available to other leaders. Unfortunately for the leader, those who were given the job did not understand the principles of instructional rounds as desired by the leader, resulting in teachers feeling as this “pop in” by others was their practice being judged and assessed. Though the intention was to increase connection and capacity, the initiative broke down due to the transmission of intent and vision.
Multiple and Competing Goals
Adjoining this challenge for instructional leaders is multiple and competing goals. As schools set strategic plans, they often state targets in specific areas, unfortunately these priorities are not always congruent with each other and the timing of implementation may not be meticulously considered for example, rollouts of new syllabus’. It is essential; however, to look for strategies to manage change when dealing with the complexities of strategic goals and curriculum as these ensure the greatest success can be achieved (Leander & Osborne, 2008).
Skill Development and Mastery
Furthermore, challenges relating to skill development and mastery are considerable for instructional leadership. Strategic, interpersonal; planning; instructional observation; research and evaluation skills (Lashway, 2002) are all necessary to create an environment in which staff and student growth is expected.
What practices can educational leaders consider and implement in order to lead teaching and learning in their educational setting?
School leadership is a priority around the globe as the educational leader has an influential role in inspiring, motivating, affirming and also challenging or extending the practice and pedagogy of educators, along with increasing academic outcomes for students. With this in mind, Dinham states, “Educational leaders require a thorough grounding in instructional leadership for clinical teaching if real change towards evidence-based teaching practice is to occur” (2013, p.225). They also require a sense of where the organisation has come from and the culture in which it is becoming.
Though we face many challenges, they are worth working to overcome to ensure the greatest success can be achieved for the school and the learners within it.
References
Dinham, S. (2013). Connecting clinical teaching practice with instructional leadership. Australian Journal of Education, 57(3), 225-236.
Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational leadership, 59(8), 37-40.
Lashway, L. (2002). Developing instructional leaders.
Leander, K. M., & Osborne, M. D. (2008). Complex positioning: Teachers as agents of curricular and pedagogical reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(1), 23-46.
Spillane, J. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69, 143-150.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational researcher, 30(3), 23-28.
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of educational research, 74(3), 255-316.
Dinham, S. (2013). Connecting clinical teaching practice with instructional leadership. Australian Journal of Education, 57(3), 225-236.
Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational leadership, 59(8), 37-40.
Lashway, L. (2002). Developing instructional leaders.
Leander, K. M., & Osborne, M. D. (2008). Complex positioning: Teachers as agents of curricular and pedagogical reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(1), 23-46.
Spillane, J. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69, 143-150.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational researcher, 30(3), 23-28.
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of educational research, 74(3), 255-316.
Comments
Post a Comment