Search results

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 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.