Search results

The issue of training and appointment of school administrators has consumed substantial attention from educational scholars for several decades. The literature has witnessed a growing amount of research effort in investigating and identifying the effective ways of training and appointing school principals. However, there are also political, social and cultural aspects to this endeavour, which potentially influences the practices pertaining to training and appointment of school principals. This chapter represents scholarly efforts to discuss issues on the training and appointment of school administrators in Turkey within its historical and political background. Thus, first, it focuses on the historical journey of the field of educational administration in Turkey. This journey has been categorised under three phases: The Ottoman Era, Early Years of Turkish Republic and the 1950s Onwards. Second, this chapter discusses school principalship in Turkey with a specific focus on political and legal dimensions. Finally, the chapter ends with an overall evaluation of the practices and policies pertaining to school administration curriculum in Turkey.

In a global context characterised by a growing recognition of the role that educational leaders play in ensuring school effectiveness and the consequent need to design effective leadership preparation programmes, many educational leadership preparation providers around the world have borrowed international standards and frameworks in order to guide their programmes and assure their quality. This trend has been on the rise as a response to globalisation pressures and a growing interest in acquiring international recognition through accreditation agencies. However, this raises important questions about the potential repercussion of using foreign, mainly Western, frameworks to develop or assess national leadership preparation provision. Evidence from relevant literature indicates that these frameworks, when applied to local contexts, need to take contextual factors into account. In this chapter, we engage with existing literature in relation to leadership preparation, internationalisation and professional standards to reflect on our experience of using international standards to develop the Masters in Educational Administration programme offered by Sultan Qaboos University (SQU) in Oman. We hope to contribute to existing internationalisation literature by providing a different perspective on educational administration and leadership preparation from a non-Western tradition, thereby expanding the understanding of meaningful leadership preparation in general.

Sadegül Akbaba-Altun, PhD, EdD, is currently an associate professor of Educational Administration at Baskent University, Faculty of Education in Turkey. Dr. Akbaba-Altun's educational background includes a BSc in Guidance and Counseling and an MSc in Educational Administration and Supervision, both from METU; a PhD in Institute of Social Sciences with an emphasis on Educational Administration and Supervision from Ankara University; and an EdD in Curriculum and Instruction with the emphasis on Elementary Education from the University of Cincinnati. Her research areas include Chaos Theory, Leadership, Integrating Computer Technologies Into Education, and Supervision.

This chapter provides a critical and comprehensive review of the internationalisation literature. It starts with a brief discussion of the main factors and features that need to be considered when internationalising the educational administration and leadership field. This is followed by a critique of the internationalisation of education and the many challenges that hinder the achievement of proper internationalisation. The third section provides an overview of the internationalisation models and practices in different disciplines such as psychology, sociology and political science, which is followed by a discussion on the internationalisation of education organisations in different countries with some examples from Arab and non-Western countries. The final section presents a critical review of literature on internationalising the curriculum and how culture competency and knowledge acquisition are key factors in achieving effective internationalisation. The chapter concludes with an overview of the book collection and the main ideas and concepts discussed in each chapter.

In this chapter, the focus is placed on the interplay between the broader policy context and the content of postgraduate studies in educational administration and leadership in an effort to understand how it influences the conscience of future school administrators about their role and mission. The socio-cultural theory of Basil Bernstein is used for analysing the process of symbolic control regulated by the notions of classification, framing and meaning orientation which operate simultaneously for establishing dominant practices and forming individual consciences through postgraduate studies. Specifically, the analysis is based on information derived from the official websites of all the existing postgraduate programmes in school administration and leadership in two countries, Greece and UK, which represent two polar cases as regards the degree that new forms of educational management have permeated into their educational systems.

This chapter provides an overview of the postcolonial literatures and their critiques relevant to internationalising curriculum in the educational administration and leadership field. The aim is to both examine the problems culturally and institutionally with primarily Anglo-American globalised curriculum that still holds a hegemonic position internationally as well as identify proposals in diversifying the field to reflect context, policy requirements and practices, and cultural values and principles. Discussed also are a number of initiatives that have been taken that provide a foundation for furthering this kind of curricular development, and a set of principles for internationalising the field that indicate the various levels and factors involved.

Focusing on a 24-year period, specifically, 1980–2004, this chapter provides a historical and theoretical perspective on gender and educational administration in the United States. Drawing from extant literature on women in educational administration and on social theory, our analysis indicates that certain structural features of the public education system, namely the sorting rules for selection, retention, and promotion have critical consequences for all participants, especially for women. In order to identify the state of research on women in educational administration during this era, we discuss these concepts in relation to Shakeshaft’s “paradigm shift” model, which helps highlight where future researchers might add to the conversation. Based on our findings, we contend that future research on women administrators must move toward challenging and transforming extant leadership theories by incorporating women’s experiences.

The rise of managerialism in the 1990s entrenched bureaucratic practices as core education and training for educational administrators. As the educational divide between those who achieve and those who fall short continues to problematize the success of educational reforms, the work of administrators becomes critical to review. The current challenge for educational administration is to provide an environment that genuinely serves the interests of complex diversity and social justice in education systems by building the frameworks that respects differences, protects the weak, and regulates the strong. By taking a more prosocial stance with issues relating to cultural diversity, equity, and democracy, educational administration can transform society, the school, and the classroom, through humanistic and interpretive management practices, and influencing pedagogy, curriculum, educator training, and the socio-political system.

In 1992, Mexican authorities and Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación, (SNTE, National Education Workers Union) signed an agreement to decentralize the educational system called ANMEB (National Agreement on the Modernization of Basic Education), in which the Ministry of Education transferred basic education services to the 32 states of the country. Secretaría de Educación Pública (SEP, the Federal Ministry of Education) still had the power to allocate money and enforce a national curriculum. SNTE, considered the largest and most powerful union in Latin America with 1.5 million affiliates, allowed the reform with the condition of keeping its status as national union.