Search results

“If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time, but if you have come because your liberation is bound with mine, then come, let's work together”. These words of Lill Watson, an indigenous activist, frame the context for this article. The purpose of this research was to examine the historical evolution of “grassroots movement leadership” model and its incarnation in the present time. A corollary purpose focused on how this model can transform urban schools by focusing on “movement” efforts of one large urban school district that espouses the values of this form of leadership. As part of a larger reform effort, the district engaged students, parents, teachers, school leaders and communities in becoming equal partners in urban school reform in an effort to co‐create schools and communities that might lead all of us toward liberation and learning.

Theory and practice come together through the lens of three researchers who operate from a similar philosophical stance for educational transformation, best described in the words of grassroots leader Ella Baker, who said, “We are the people we have been waiting for”. Qualitative research procedures (i.e. interviews, field notes and observations) were used to generate data on a “movement model” for grassroots leadership. This model is best demonstrated in various youth‐oriented initiatives (i.e. Student Exhibits, Action‐Research Projects, Algebra Project) within a local urban school district. This model, influenced by Civil Rights legend Robert Moses, has implications for educational leadership and urban school reform and simultaneously grounds our scholarship and research in liberation epistemology.

It is argued that children are often the victims of ideas, structures, and actions that come to be seen by the majority of people as wholly natural, preordained, and working for their own good, when in fact they are constructed and transmitted by powerful minority interests to protect the status quo that serves those interest. The words of Ella Baker epitomize the authors' struggles to steer away from models of hierarchal leadership in education and stay connected to the practice of excavating community wisdom through the “Movement Model”.

This study bears a substantive argument for community leadership efforts that focus on “grassroots leadership”. It further fosters new insights and propositions for future research in the form of a “Movement Leadership Model”.

The purpose of this paper is to explore theoretical connections between educational leadership for social justice and support for immigration. The authors seek to identify strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for further study and improved practice.

This is a theoretical research paper that introduces, evaluates and expands two frameworks for understanding leadership and immigration.

Findings suggested that there is a need for educational leadership scholars to more purposefully investigate issues related to social justice and immigration.

This study offers a novel theoretical perspective on leadership, social justice and immigration.

This chapter focuses on how leaders of learning and learners of leading are developed and prepared to address and advance powerful and equitable student learning. Discussion focuses on several areas identified in the literature as critical including: leading and learning in context (Knapp, Copland & Talbert, 2003); leaders’ response to changing expectations and learning agendas, and professional development of leaders of learning (Normore, 2004). Earlier research by Knapp, Copland, and Talbert (2003) and the socialization processes of leaders of learners (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004; Leithwood, Steinbach, & Begley, 1992; Normore, 2007, 2004) will serve as the foundation for several areas of action identified by these researchers including: establishing a focus on learning by persistently and publicly focusing leaders own attention and that of others on learning and teaching; professional and organizational socialization processes; what leading for learning looks like in practice (Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr, & Cohen, 2007); professional development including pre-service preparation, field-based learning, and personal and professional formation (Daresh, 1997; Gross, 2009; Normore, 2004); and creating coherence by connecting student, professional, and system learning with one another and with learning goals (Knapp et al., 2003).

Problems of competence grow out of institutional culture and from the way these institutions shape the profession and its members. Toward that end, this chapter is organized around three general considerations. First, we discuss some general issues about leader quality. Second, the present shape of the leadership corps in higher education will be discussed. Finally, we introduce several 21st century leadership core competencies (Brooks & Normore, 2009) for consideration to hiring personnel so they do not repeatedly select and promote unqualified leaders who stifle creativity and encourage conformity.

A growing concern among education reformers and their communities is whether emerging and practicing education leaders are prepared to face political, economic, cultural, and social pressures and create schools that advocate for education that advances leadership for learning. Schools are thrust into the realistic notion that they must prepare children and communities for participation in a multicultural, multiethnic, multireligious, multiability, and a multinational society. Research suggests that leadership development and preparation programs ought to engage in innovative ways that promote a broader and deeper understanding of issues related to reforming educational leadership for learning and learning for leadership (Brandt, 1998; Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr, & Cohen, 2007; Jean-Marie, Normore, & Brooks, 2009; Knapp, Copland, & Talbert, 2003).