Principal leadership for outstanding educational outcomes

Journal of Educational Administration - Tập 43 Số 4 - Trang 338-356 - 2005
StephenDinham1
1Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia

Tóm tắt

PurposeAims to explore the role of Principals in producing outstanding education outcomes in Years 7 to 10 in New South Wales (Australia) government schools.Design/methodology/approachSites where “outstanding” educational outcomes were believed to be occurring were selected using a variety of data including performance in standardised tests, public examinations, various value added measures and nominations from various stakeholders. Sites were of two types: subject departments responsible for teaching certain subjects and teams responsible for cross‐school programs in Years 7 to 10. Sites were selected to be broadly representative. Some schools had more than one site, e.g. Mathematics and Student Welfare. A total of 50 sites across NSW from 38 secondary schools were studied.FindingsWith both subject departments and teams responsible for cross‐school programs, leadership was found to be a key factor in the achievement of outstanding educational outcomes. Often, this leadership was exercised by the Principal, but additional key personnel included Head Teachers (heads of faculties/departments), Deputy Principals, and teachers playing leading roles in faculties and programs. Analysis of data revealed certain attributes and practices of the Principals of these schools, which are explored, central to which is a focus on students and their learning.Research limitations/implicationsPrincipals were those of secondary schools from one educational system. Other papers will explore the role of leaders such as Heads of Department, Deputy Principals and teacher leaders.Practical implicationsThis article has implications for principal selection, training, appraisal and professional development.Originality/valueDetailed case studies have provided an examination of leadership effectiveness in a wide range of contexts, which much commonality confirmed.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Ayres, P., Dinham, S. and Sawyer, W. (2000), “Successful senior secondary teaching”, Quality Teaching Series, No. 1, Australian College of Education, Canberra, September, pp. 1‐20.

Bennett, N. (1999), “Middle management in secondary schools: introduction”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 289‐92.

Busher, H. and Harris, A. (1999), “Leadership of school subject areas: tensions and dimensions of managing in the middle”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 305‐17.

Busher, H. and Harris, A. (2000), Subject Leadership and School Improvement, Paul Chapman, London.

Dinham, S. (2004), “The role of leadership in producing outstanding education outcomes in junior secondary education”, paper presented at the BERA Annual Conference, UMIST, Manchester, 15‐18 September.

Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (2000), “Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 379‐96.

Goodson, I. and Marsh, C. (1996), Studying School Subjects, The Falmer Press, London.

Grossman, P. and Stodolsky, S. (1995), “Content as context: the role of school subjects in secondary school teaching”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 24 No. 8, pp. 5‐11.

Hannay, L.M. and Ross, J.A. (1999), “Department heads as middle managers? Questioning the black box”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 345‐58.

Hargreaves, A. and Fink, D. (2004), “The seven principles of sustainable leadership”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 61 No. 7, pp. 8‐13.

MCEETYA (1999), The Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty‐first Century, Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra.

Owens, R.O. (2004), Organizational Behavior in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School Reform, 8th ed., Pearson, Boston, MA.

QSR (2002), NUD*IST 6, QSR International, Melbourne.

Review of Teaching and Teacher Education (2003), “Australia's teachers: Australia's future advancing innovation, science, technology and mathematics main report”, DEST, Canberra.

Sammons, P., Thomas, S. and Mortimore, P. (1997), Forging Links: Effective Schools and Effective Departments, Paul Chapman, London.

Schein, E. (1985), Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Sergiovanni, T. (1995), The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective, 3rd ed., Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.

Siskin, L.S. and Little, J.W. (Eds) (1995), The Subjects in Question: the Department Organization of the High School, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.

Stodolsky, S.S. and Grossman, P.A. (1995), “The impact of subject‐matter on curricular activity: an analysis of five academic subjects”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 227‐49.

Stodolsky, S.S. and Grossman, P.A. (2000), “Changing students, changing teachers”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 102 No. 1, pp. 125‐72.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research – Grounded Theory, Procedures and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.

Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (1998), “Reconceptualising teachers' work”, paper presented at the Australian College of Education National Conference, Canberra, 28 September.

Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (2002), “Pressure points: school executive and educational change”, Journal of Educational Enquiry, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 35‐52.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Educational Administration

Tập 43 Số 4

338-356

Thông tin tác giả