Search results

With this issue The Journal of Educational Administration commences its twenty‐fifth year of publication. Just five years ago, on the occasion of its twentieth year of publication, I reviewed the role of the J.E.A. in a special editorial — “Twenty Years A Journal: An Anniversary Statement.” Since that time there have been several developments in the publication of the J.E.A. that are perhaps worthy of comment on this our silver jubilee.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the key individuals, associations and significant events contributing to the establishment and first 50 years of successful publication of the Journal of Educational Administration.

This paper is historical in design. Information relevant to its 50 years of publication has been obtained from the JEA's 172 Editorials and from minutes of Editorial Advisory Board and Management Committee meetings, supplemented by personal editorial memoranda.

Recognised as one of the leading generalist international journals in its field, the Journal of Educational Administration has until recently been edited in Australia. The most eminent international scholars in the field have published in the JEA throughout its lifetime. Esteemed scholars have also occupied positions on its Editorial Board. The JEA has enjoyed close and supportive associations with several prominent professional organisations including UCEA and CCEA.

This paper does not include detailed information about the content of the almost 1,000 articles published throughout its history. This is the subject of other specific research undertakings.

The JEA was the first generalist international journal in the field of educational administration. Its first volume appeared in 1963. It has reached the age of 50 years and hence this paper's report of such may provide a basis for similar studies of other journals as they achieve significant milestones.

The second International Intervisitation Program held in Australia in August, 1970, must now be considered a milestone in the development of the study and practice of educational administration. From the second Program emerged the establishment of the Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration. Membership of the Council, which is determined on an individual rather than an institutional basis, is open to all interested in the administration of education. The Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration has a seven point programme of objectives: 1. To foster close links between those concerned with the improvement of educational administration in Commonwealth countries. 2. To foster a high standard in the practice and study of educational administration at all levels. 3. To hold Commonwealth‐wide and regional conferences on various aspects of educational administration. 4. To facilitate the dissemination of knowledge about research and practice in educational administration. 5. To foster high standards in the preparation of administrators. 6. To facilitate the exchange between member countries of teachers, students and practitioners of educational administration. 7. To encourage the establishment in Commonwealth countries of national associations of those concerned with the improvement of educational administration. Financial support for the Council was provided initially by the second International Intervisitation Program and “The Journal of Educational Administration”. Further generous and significant assistance has been given by the University of New England and the Commonwealth Foundation.

The Journal of Educational Administration enters its twentieth year of publication with this edition. In this anniversary statement the Editor briefly examines the original “mission” of the Journal and commits it to a continuation of its international orientation. The history of the Journal encompasses a period of great development in the study of educational administration. In many respects the Journal has been uniquely situated to monitor this exciting growth. It has witnessed the establishment of international organizations and programs, new associations, training programs, and journals. Some of the criticisms of the Journal are considered and commitments for the future are made.

Bureaucratic theory, systems theory and a review of research on innovation, provide a conceptual framework on which seven predictions are posited. The predictions relate to the innovative behaviour of a bureaucratic education system throughout a period of twenty years. An innovation is defined as a new structure or process that appeared for the first time in the education system. One hundred and sixty four innovations are identified and classified. The predictions are tested and the implications discussed.

Bureaucratic theory, systems theory and a review of research on innovation, provide a conceptual framework on which seven predictions are posited. The predictions relate to the innovative behaviour of a bureaucratic education system throughout a period of twenty years. An innovation is defined as a new structure or process that appeared for the first time in the education system. One hundred and sixty‐four innovations are identified and classified as task‐oriented, personnel‐oriented and organization‐oriented. When tested the predictions reveal inter alia, (1) an upward trend in the annual frequencies of innovation through the period 1946 to 1965, (2) educational policies of state governments appear to be distinguished by different rates of innovation, (3) the frequency of innovation tends to increase following the succession to office of a new Director‐General and (4) innovation tends to occur least in the central office system.

For almost a decade the OCDQ has proven to be one of the most “popular” instruments in research in educational administration. Developed by Halpin and Croft, the instrument claims to measure eight dimensions of a school's organizational climate. Such scores are then used to classify the school according to which one of six climate categories it belongs. Increasingly, the OCDQ is being subjected to closer scrutiny. Currently in the U.S.A. intense validation studies are in progress. This article reports on a similar study conducted in a sample of 72 primary schools in South Australia. Data from 727 respondents are analysed to produce a four factor solution. The factors are identified as supportiveness, operations emphasis, intimacy and disaffiliation.

The award of a Commonwealth Visiting Fellowship enabled the writer to investigate preparation programmes for educational administrators in twelve prominent Canadian universities. Interviews with professors, students and practising administrators, participation in lectures, seminars and assessment procedures provided the basis for the writer's impressions. An analysis of pre‐Master's, Master's and doctoral programmes revealed that, in general, students must select courses from (i) organization and administration theory, (ii) educational personnel supervision, (iii) education in Canada and (iv) a series of options. Evidence of a combination of discipline, theory, problems and career‐based approaches was found in most programmes. The writer argues that Canadian professors of educational administration are (i) anxious to improve the quality of the courses offered and grappling with the problem of programme relevance, (ii) not generally concerned with teaching as a skill and restricted in methods used, particularly simulations, (iii) somewhat insular in outlook and (prior to the establishment of CASEA) lacking an adequate means of inter‐departmental communication. Future developments in the preparation of educational administrators are foreshadowed by the writer.

The purpose of this research is to report on the values practised by five effective secondary principals and to seek to identify common values that underpin their work practices.

Principals were observed, each for two days, at work in their schools. From the observations of each principal activities were recorded and the principals' behaviours therein were subjected to analysis. Values manifest in the principals' behaviours were confirmed through an exhaustive process of triangulation – comparison with the espoused values that emerged through completion of both the Senge and Rokeach Scales and through private interviews.

The values identified have been placed in three categories – those relating to Interpersonal Relationships, Operational Style, and Personal Qualities/Attributes. An unexpected outcome was the identification of principals' “interruptibility” – the willingness to be interrupted because of the value placed on quality interpersonal relationships, to enable principals to attend to others' concerns, and to allow the person interrupting to feel valued in terms of his/her concern taking priority over whatever else the principal was doing.

That element of “efficiency” advocated in much of the time management literature – “Thou shalt not be interrupted” – is apparently ignored by effective principals. Principals apparently accept this as part and parcel of their work in schools.

The study reflects some of the limitations of qualitative investigations – “sample short but data heavy”. Generalisations may be difficult to extract. Because of the severe triangulation process much data were discarded and thus other findings may have been masked.