Search results

This chapter presents a rationale for the International Study of Principal Preparation, provides an overview of the study, offers descriptions of the assumptions that should underpin the pre-appointment experiences of school principals, and describes the context of the principalship. The chapter will close with commentary intended to assist and guide designers and providers of principal preparation programming.A central point of this chapter is that it is unlikely that a template for principal preparation can be designed for application in all settings. Indeed, attempts to create such a template are likely to result in culturally and educationally inappropriate approaches to leadership development and to ineffective principals. Instead, leadership development is best approached through a thoughtful and reflective awareness of a set of assumptions about leadership in cross-cultural settings and of the contextual variables impacting school leaders.

This paper aims to use the results of three research initiatives to present the life‐long learning leader (4L) framework, a model for leadership development intended for use by designers and providers of leadership development programming.

The 4L model is a conceptual framework that emerged from the analysis of one study conducted in Canada and two others conducted in international settings.

The 4L framework contains eight dimensions that leadership development programming should address: career stage, career aspirations, visionary capacity, boundary breaking entrepreneurialism, professional skills, instructional design and assessment literacy, crisis management, and approaches to leadership development.

As with all research, findings are subject to researcher biases and limitations.

The 4L framework can be used as the basis for graduate programs in leadership, small‐ and large‐scale leadership development initiatives, and cross‐cultural leadership development. Implications of the 4L framework are discussed in relation to stakeholder roles, e.g. leaders, professional developers, university leadership preparation programs, employers, policy makers, and researchers.

The 4L is a framework for leadership development not only applicable within the field of education but also in broader contexts such as business and industry, health and social services, sports, and government. The 4L framework merits serious consideration by professional development providers and institutions of higher learning as a vehicle for leadership training and nurturing. It is comprehensive in that it suggests particular learning content for leadership development initiatives but it also addresses the processes for effective professional development of adult learners.

This introductory chapter provides background information and an organizational structure for the book. The authors begin with a brief history of the research project that undergirds the work presented in each chapter. Drawing from the fields of enology and viticulture, the authors introduce the concepts of terroir, millerandage, and appellations as section headings that help to frame brief descriptions of each chapter. The authors conclude with an invitation for the reader to engage with the authors in a discussion about the contents of the book.

This chapter describes the assumptions underpinning the International Study of Principal Preparation. It outlines how cultural reference points for leadership have changed. It explores the changing conceptualization of contemporary leadership, highlights the new economic dimensions of leading, and discusses the changing face of educational personnel. It notes that educational leaders must utilize knowledge of how technology has altered how we perceive the world, live our lives, relate to others, and practice our profession. It highlights the complexities for leaders who must thrive in a milieu characterized by a desire to preserve a civil society, balance student–professional–union–community needs, develop cultural literacies for learners, and respond to accountability demands. Other complexities include the multiple allegiances of leaders, conflicting loyalties of community members, varying levels of digital awareness, and the need for interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences. The chapter closes with a set of principles and considerations for leadership development.

This report describes the evolution of a technology‐mediated leadership development network from its origin as a local e‐mail discussion group to a loosely‐coupled international leadership web. The report includes a description of the components of the network, which include face‐to‐face and online cross‐role discussion groups, annual seminar series, graduate degree programming, an online refereed journal, summer institutes, university partnerships, and cross‐cultural research. In addition, an explanation is offered of the challenges that the network poses for understandings of what counts as professional development, university regulations for planning and delivering instruction, communication of research, and teacher‐student roles. Then the paper offers a profile of the leadership development network in terms of its professional, role, environmental, and emotional dimensions. Finally, a set of questions is offered for readers interested in planning leadership development networks.

The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the principal preparation programming available to school leaders in Kenya and Tanzania.

The authors analyzed information about the educational leadership programmes offered by a range of public and private institutions in East Africa. Data were gathered primarily through document analyses based on publicly available information describing certificate, diploma, and degree programs related to principal preparation in Kenya and Tanzania.

A description is offered of the intended client group for leadership preparation programmes along with an overview of programme content, structure, delivery modes, and credentialing. Gaps were noted in the areas of instructional leadership, educational technology, and visioning. Further, the authors noted the insufficient capacity of educational institutions in East Africa to prepare new principals or to offer ongoing professional development.

The study was limited to publicly available documents. There is a marked need for more detailed empirical reports of principal preparation in sub‐Saharan Africa.

The suitability of the content of existing principal preparation programs warrants closer examination.

This report contributes to the understanding of principal preparation in sub‐Saharan Africa in terms of its capacity, content, and delivery modes.

The International Study of Principal Preparation (ISPP) informs principal preparation in relation to change in schools. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The three-stage ISPP study utilized a mixed-methodological approach. Data were gathered in Kenya, South Africa, and Alberta, Canada utilizing a survey instrument that contained items that focussed on: problematic leadership responsibilities, prior leadership development experiences, and perceived adequacy of leadership preparation experiences.

Leadership preparation in Kenya and South Africa was relatively unstructured, compared to structured university-based leadership preparation in Alberta. The assumption in Kenya and South Africa was that classroom teaching was adequate preparation, while Alberta respondents perceived teaching and leadership as discrete knowledge sets. Content of preparation experiences in Kenya and South Africa was mainly about teaching and learning, while in Alberta it was more about instructional leadership. Kenyan principals felt prepared for the principalship. Alberta principals stated that they were ill prepared to deal with day-to-day responsibilities. Senior South African principals felt they were not prepared for school improvement while younger principals felt they were adequately prepared.

Findings suggest that providers utilize cross-cultural partnerships that incorporate technology-mediated dialogue and action research. Cross-cultural learning should be considered co-learning. Preparation should include partnerships between western institutions and informal groups of principals in settings such as Kenya and South Africa. The study informs policymakers, researchers, and school leaders.

The cross-cultural comparisons in this paper inform understandings of the principalship in relation to organizational change in schools.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the need for respectful open dialogue and trusting relationships among stakeholders in educational assessment. It is argued that this is a tenet of a democratic civil society.

A theoretical framework is presented for navigating assessment tensions frequently experienced by educational stakeholders operating in the interest of civil societies. The framework emerged from a two‐year mixed‐method study of assessment in Canada.

Five key assumptions, plus their ontological and epistemological orientations, that should guide assessment in the service of a civil society are described. The unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives related to student assessment are articulated along with associated tensions and opportunities. Implications are discussed for stakeholder groups including teachers, educational leaders, parents, unions, professional associations, department of education personnel, academics, informal community leaders, and politicians.

Educational stakeholders are invited to delve deeper into the meaning and purpose of assessment and to explore opportunities to reject alienating partisan perspectives.

Multidimensional perspectives at the micro‐through‐macro levels of society and educational organizations will promote enhanced student assessment policy and practice.

Adoption of multidimensional perspectives of student assessment can lead to constructive communication and relationships that strengthen the fabric of civil society through enhanced student success.

This article underscores the notion that democracy and the realization of a civil society are fragile and so too is the maintenance of a quality education system. Therefore, stakeholders must avoid the vilification of others and strive to preserve the precarious balance among competing interests.

This paper is intended to provide an overview of trends in European education and to offer a framework for considering the elements of school management.

This paper reports elements of the planning and implementation of a graduate‐level leadership development initiative in Bulgaria.

Several lessons learned were garnered from this project. First, models of leadership development must be adaptable to local organizational and system cultures. Second, international leadership development programs should expose participants to different approaches to learning and promote reflective analysis of the various approaches. Expansion of train‐the‐trainer models should be planned from the beginning of projects and consider status differences between trainers‐of‐trainers and trainees who become trainers. Finally, sustainability must be included in planning.

The international leadership development program is reported from the perceptions of those who participated in the delivery and in the accreditation process. Others may perceive the program differently.

Management training needs to be practiced so program participants should have opportunities to practice, receive feedback, and dialogue. Experiential learning is essential. New educational ideas may need long incubation periods in the settings where they are introduced.

Leadership development program in East Europe are a relatively recent phenomenon and lessons learned will resonate with providers of leadership preparation programs in other settings.