The doctoral theses studied in this report mainly comment on individual research objects, but also some common themes for future research. The further research projects presented in the doctoral theses mostly concern more advanced or extensive research into the theme of the thesis in question. The perspectives suggested by the doctoral researchers mainly remain confi ned to expanding and deepening the themes of their own research. Some researchers would expand their research by comparing it with another corresponding research topic (Kanervio 2007) or by including perspectives of other school staff besides principals and teachers in the phenomenon being studied (e.g. Juusenaho 2004; Lahtero 2011; Pesonen 2009).
Among further research objects, it is possible to distinguish three research themes put forward in several doctoral theses. The fi rst of these is research into change and develop- ment work. Hellström’s (2004) doctoral thesis focusing on implementation of a develop- ment project suggests a number of research ideas focusing on carrying through change as research objects for the future. Likewise, Kirveskari (2003) and Kunnari (2008) put forward further research topics concentrating on the change and development of schools. A second future research theme mentioned in several doctoral theses is studying leader- ship at different levels of school and municipal organisations. Several objects of leader- ship and management taking place at different levels were mentioned. One of Kirveska- ri’s (2003) further research objects is examining the role of the management team’s work in long-term planning. Lahtero (2011) and Pesonen (2009) suggest studying assistant principals and network management, respectively. Both Pesonen (2009) and Mustonen (2003) propose investigating the most effective methods of centralising and decentral- ising tasks and decision-making processes at municipal and school levels. Since 2008, the University of Jyväskylä’s Institute of Educational Leadership has carried out a national research programme funded by the Ministry of Education and Culture, charting the status of and changes in educational leadership in general education at municipal, school and class levels. The programme has rapidly become international and will probably produce signifi cant basic information about management and leadership at different levels of municipal educational administration as soon as within the next few years.
A third future research theme that seems to be common to some extent is distributed leadership. Doctoral theses have suggested that distributed leadership and research into the theme should focus on a school level (Kirveskari 2003; Pesonen 2009; Raasumaa 2010). The increasing focus of future research needs on different levels of leadership and distributed leadership are well in line with the signifi cance of distributed leadership described in Chapter 5 and its understanding in broader terms beyond unit level. In Chapter 5, the authors of this report suggest broad pedagogical leadership as a key perspective of the school system, municipal educational administration and school management. Several doctoral theses examining principals’ work and duties also high- light the need for pedagogical leadership and bemoan its scarce resources. Nevertheless, pedagogical leadership is not raised as a signifi cant future research topic in the further research objects covered. According to the analysis set out in this report, however, broad pedagogical leadership should be an essential further research topic for the future. In
addition, the doctoral theses produced to date have mainly examined principals’ work here and now. The new role of educational administration as an agent of the future requires a perspective focusing more and more on studying what future principalship is and should be like.
Management of early childhood education and care should also become one of the essential future research themes at the latest by the time when early childhood educa- tion and care will be transferred from social to educational services in accordance with the Ministry of Education and Culture Development Plan for Education and Research for 2011–2016. It is necessary to examine the change and unifi cation as well as leadership in early childhood education and care. It would be desirable that, in addition to the two doctoral theses focusing on leadership in early childhood education and care (Halttunen 2009; Nivala 1999), the topic would be equally important as a research topic as princi- palship, because the same bugbears and future challenges are also visible in leadership in early childhood education and care as in other sectors of educational administration. While the doctoral theses produced in Finland during the 21st century are quite extensive
and their data has often been collected from many different parties, they do have one distinct defi ciency: only two theses examined the perceptions of pupils or students and only one studied those of their parents. The small amount of research into the percep- tions of pupils, students and their parents is probably also refl ected in the fact that only one doctoral thesis (Kuukka 2009) examined principalship in a multicultural educational institution. Even that research did not include perceptions of pupils, students or parents, but the data consisted of principals’ views instead. Johnson’s (2006) doctoral thesis focusing on basic education included a survey conducted for pupils and Tiusanen’s (2005) doctoral thesis examining polytechnics contained a few interviews with students. Kangaslahti’s (2007) doctoral thesis relating to basic education, in turn, covered a survey conducted for parents in the initial stages of research.
It is defi nitely understandable that the research topic limits the group on which the research is focused, but raising the voices of both pupils and parents would also have befi tted several of the studies carried out during the review period. Pupils, students or parents are only mentioned among further research projects suggested in two doctoral theses. Antikainen (2005) mentions studying the interactivity of the teacher/pupil rela- tionship through a pupil survey or interviews as one further research project, while also referring to the necessity of conducting a longitudinal study. Vulkko (2001), in turn, would continue research relating to decision-making by examining parents’ experiences of educational decision-making processes at a municipal level.
All of the above-mentioned themes put forward in the doctoral theses are certainly worth- while research objects for the future. In this respect, the resources available to conduct this research will become a challenge. A doctoral thesis is most commonly produced by a single individual, which means that both qualitative and quantitative research will remain relatively limited in terms of data, for example. At the same time as it is neces- sary to attract new postgraduate students, it would also be important to safeguard other types of research. Today, research should be increasingly carried out in research teams and through research programmes. Building more extensive research schemes could deepen and expand research into educational administration which has, to date, been more or less dominated by doctoral theses. More extensive research programmes could
also result in interdisciplinary research, which could broaden 21st century research based
on an educational science orientation.
The University of Jyväskylä’s Institute of Educational Leadership has focused its research on the following four areas: The principalship and the development and identity of the educational leader; Understanding school change and developing organisational culture; Creating and leading a professional organisation and individual competencies; and Management structures and evaluation procedures in education. Doctoral theses have been produced in all these research areas and all are also represented in the further research objects described in this chapter. However, each research area also includes signifi cant black holes. These black holes can only be partially fi lled by doctoral theses produced at different universities. In addition to producing fragmented information, each research area could form its own research programme. When planning new research, it is also important to ask what sort of information we need. Chapter 2 points out that a quantum world requires understanding of both global and glocal situations – this means that research needs are also both global and glocal.
Along with creating more extensive and long-term research programmes, another essen- tial aspect is how the research information obtained will be used and made available. As the report points out, 28 doctoral theses have been produced on principals during the 21st century – what is yet to be established is how well these have spread to the attention
of principals and other people working with education. At the same time as we need support for research, we also need good channels to disseminate research information.
References
Aho, E., Pitkänen, K. & Sahlberg, P. 2006. Policy development and reform principles of basic and second- ary education in Finland since 1968. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available online at: http://www. see- educoop.net/education_in/pdf/workshop/tesee/dokumenti/education-in-fi nland-2006.pdf.
Ahonen, H. 2008. Rehtoreiden kertoma johtajuus ja johtajaidentiteetti. [Leadership and leader identity as
narrated by headmasters.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 352.
Antikainen, E-L. 2005. Kasvuorientoitunut ilmapiiri esimiestyön tavoitteena – Tapaustutkimus ammattiko- rkeakoulussa. [Growth-oriented atmosphere as a goal of leadership – A case study at a polytechnic.] Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1088.
Alava, J. 2007. Koulutuksen käytäntö. Teoksessa A. Pennanen (toim.). Koulun johtamisen avaimia. [Practice
of training. In: A. Pennanen (ed.). Keys to leading a school.] Jyväskylä: PS–kustannus.
Alava, J. 2008. School Management Training. Country Report: Finland. HEAD Country Report 2005. Norwe- gian School of Management. Studies in Education Management Research, No 31. Oslo: BI.
Aula, P. 2000. Johtamisen kaaos vai kaaoksen johtaminen? [Chaos of leadership or leadership of chaos?] Juva: WSOY.
Barth, R. S. 2007. Culture in Question. In: M. Fullan (ed.). Educational Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
Blasé, J. & Blasé, J. 2001. Empowering Teachers. What Successful Principals Do. California: Corwin Press. Flessa, J. 2009. Educational Micropolitics and Distributed Leadership. Peabody Journal of Education 84. Halttunen, L. 2009. Päivähoitotyö ja johtajuus hajautetussa organisaatiossa. [Day care work and leadership
in a distributed organization.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 375.
Harris, L. C. & Ogbonna, E. 2000. Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: empirical evi- dence from UK companies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 11 (2).
Hellström, M. 2004. Muutosote. Akvaarioprojektin pedagogisten kehittämishankkeiden toteutustapa ja on- nistuminen. Helsingin yliopiston soveltavan kasvatustieteen laitos: Tutkimuksia 249.
[The way of change – the implementation and success of pedagogical development projects at the experimen-
tal schools of the Aquarium project. Department of Applied Sciences of Education: Research Reports 249.]
Huuhka, M. 2004. Johtaminen luovassa asiantuntijaorganisaatiossa. [Leadership in a creative expert organi-
sation.] Oulu: Oulun yliopistopaino.
Hybertson Lysø, I., Stensaker, B., Aamodt, P.O. & Mjøen, K. 2011. Ledet til ledelse. Nasjonal rektorutdan- ning i grunn- og videregående skole i et internasjonalt perspektiv. Delrapport 1 fra Evaluering av den nasjonale rektorutdanningen. Oslo: Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskining og utdanning. [Towards leadership. The national training programme for school leadership in primary and secondary
education in an international perspective. Sub-report 1 for evaluation of the national school leadership training programme. Oslo: Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education.]
Hämäläinen, K., Luukkonen, J., Karjalainen, A. & Lonkila, T. 1987. Koulun sisäisen kehittämisen kokeilu Kajaanin koululaitoksessa v. 1983–86. Oulun yliopiston kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta. Tutkimuksia 45/1987. [Experiment of internal school development in the Kajaani school system in 1983–1986. University of Oulu, Faculty of Education. Research Reports 45/1987.]
Hänninen, R. 2009. Hyvän elementit ammatillisen koulutuksen johtajuudessa ja rehtorin työssä. [The Ele-
ments of the Good in the Field of Vocational Education and in a Principals’ Work.] Jyväskylä Studies in
Education, Psychology and Social Research 352.
Jalonen, H. 2007. Tietojohtaminen julkishallinnon organisaatiossa. Teoksessa A. Lönnqvist, K. Blomqvist, M. Hannula, A. Kianto, H. Kärkkäinen, M. Maula & P. Ståhle (toim.). Tietojohtaminen tutkimusalueena. Pilotkustannus Oy, 96–112. [Knowledge management in a public sector organisation. In: A. Lönnqvist, K. Blomqvist, M. Hannula, A. Kianto, H. Kärkkäinen, M. Maula & P. Ståhle (eds.). Knowledge management as
a fi eld of research.]
Johansson, O., Moos, L., Nihlfors, E., Paulsen, J. & Risku, M. 2011. Nordic superintendents’ leadership roles: cross national comparisons. In: J. MacBeath & T. Townsend (ed.). International Handbook on Leadership for Learning. Dordrecht: Springer.
Johnson, P. 2006. RAKENTEISSA KIINNI? Perusopetuksen yhtenäistämisprosessi kunnan kouluorganisaa- tion muutoshaasteena. Chydenius-instituutin tutkimuksia 4/2006. [STUCK IN STRUCTURES? The integration
process of basic education as a change challenge for the municipal school organisation. Chydenius Institute
Research Reports 4/2006.]
Juusenaho, R. 2004. Peruskoulun rehtoreiden johtamisen eroja: sukupuolinen näkökulma. [Differences in
comprehensive school leadership and management. A gender-based approach.] Jyväskylä Studies in Educa-
tion, Psychology and Social Research 249.
Juuti, P. 2001. Johtamispuhe. Aavaranta-sarja no. 48. [Leadership Speech. Aavaranta Series No. 48.] Juva: PS- kustannus.
Järvinen, A. 1999. Opettajan ammatillinen kehitysprosessi ja sen tukeminen. Teoksessa A. Eteläpelto ja P. Tynjälä (toim.). Oppiminen ja asiantuntijuus. Työelämän ja koulutuksen näkökulmia. Helsinki: WSOY. [Teachers’ professional development process and supporting it. In: A. Eteläpelto & P. Tynjälä (eds.). Learning
and expertise. Viewpoints from working life and education.]
Kanervio, P. 2007. Crisis and Renewal in one Finnish Private School. Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psy- chology and Social Research 323.
Kanervio, P. & Risku, M. 2009. Tutkimus kuntien yleissivistävän koulutuksen opetustoimen johtamisen tilasta ja muutoksista Suomessa. Opetusministeriön julkaisuja 2009: 16. [A study on educational leadership
in general education in Finnish municipalities. Publications of the Ministry of Education 2009:16.]
Kangaslahti, J. 2007. Kunnan opetustoimen strategisen johtamisen käytäntöjä ja dilemmoja kartoittamassa. Turun yliopiston julkaisuja. Sarja C, Scripta lingua Fennica edita, osa 257.
[Mapping the Strategic Leadership Practices of a Municipal Educational Organization. Publications of Uni- versity of Turku, Annales Universitatis Turkuensis, Series C, Scripta lingua Fennica edita, Vol. 257.] Karikoski, A. 2009. Aika hyvä rehtoriksi – selviääkö koulun johtamisesta hengissä. Helsingin yliopiston käyttäytymistieteellisen tiedekunnan soveltavan kasvatustieteen laitos: Tutkimuksia 297. [Good enough as a
principal—how to survive leading a school. University of Helsinki, Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, Depart-
ment of Applied Sciences of Education: Research Reports 297.]
Kirveskari, T. 2003. Visiot oppilaitoksen johtamisessa – Tulevaisuuden tahtotilaa muodostamassa. [Visions
in the management of schools – Forming a strategic intent for the future.] Acta Universitatis Tamperensis
933.
Knuuttila, S. 2001. Paikan henki ja kulttuurin muuttuvat tulkinnat. Teoksessa Suomen Kuntaliitto. Kunnat virtaavassa maailmassa. [The spirit of the place and changing interpretations of culture. In: Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities. Municipalities in a world in fl ux.] Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy, 45–58. Kolam, K. & Ojala, I. 2001. Koulunjohtajat ja rehtorit Suomessa. Teoksessa Koulun johtaminen pohjois- maisessa vertailussa. Opetushallitus, Arviointi 8/2001. [School heads and principals in Finland. In: School
management in Nordic comparison. Finnish National Board of Education, Evaluation 8/2001.]
Koski, J. T. 1998. Infoähky ja muita kirjoituksia oppimisesta, organisaatiosta ja tietoyhteiskunnasta. [Infor-
mation overfl ow and other writings about learning, organisations and the information society.] Helsinki:
Gummerus.
Kotter, J. 1996. Leading Change. Harvard Business School. Boston.
Kunnari, E. 2008. Kohti ulkorajoja – Lukion toimintakulttuurikuvaus ohjauksen ja johtamisen näkökulmasta. Helsingin yliopiston käyttäytymistieteellisen tiedekunnan soveltavan kasvatustieteen laitos: Tutkimuksia 289. [Towards the outer boundaries. The description of the operational culture in the upper secondary
school from the view of steering and leading. University of Helsinki, Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, De-
partment of Applied Sciences of Education: Research Reports 289.]
Kurki, L. 1993. Pedagoginen johtajuus. Tampereen yliopiston Hämeenlinnan opettajankoulutuslaitos. Julkaisu no 28. [Pedagogical leadership. University of Tampere, Hämeenlinna Teacher Education Depart- ment. Publication No. 28.]
Kuukka, K. 2009. Rehtorin eettinen johtaminen monikulttuurisessa koulussa. ”Sen yhteisen hyvän löytämin- en”. [Head teacher’s ethical leadership in a multicultural school. “Finding the common good”.] Acta Univer- sitatis Tamperensis 1435.
Köppä, L. & Vuori, V. 2007. Opinnäytetyöt tietojohtamisen kentässä. Teoksessa Lönnqvist, A., Blomqvist, K., Hannula, M., Kianto, A., Kärkkäinen, H., Maula, M., Ståhle, P. (toim.). Tietojohtaminen tutkimusalueena. Pilot-kustannus Oy, 44-62. [Academic theses in the fi eld of knowledge management. In: Lönnqvist, A., Blomqvist, K., Hannula, M., Kianto, A., Kärkkäinen, H., Maula, M., Ståhle, P. (eds.). Knowledge manage-
Lahtero, T. 2011. Yhtenäiskoulun johtamiskulttuuri – symbolis-tulkinnallinen näkökulma. [Leadership
culture in unifi ed comprehensive school, symbolic-interpretative approach.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education,
Psychology and Social Research.
Lapiolahti, R. 2007. Koulutuksen arviointi kunnallisen koulutuksen järjestäjän tehtävänä – Paikallisen arvio- innin toteutumisedellytysten arviointia erään kuntaorganisaation näkökulmasta. [The evaluation of school-
ing as a task of the communal maintainer of schooling – what are the presuppositions of the execution of evaluation in one specifi c communal organization.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social
Research 308.
Lehkonen, H. 2009. Mikä tekee rehtorista selviytyjän? Perusopetuksen rehtoreiden käsityksiä työssä selviy- tymisestään. [What makes a principal a survivor? Basic education principals´ perceptions of surviving in
their work.] Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1454.
Levy, D. M. 2008. Information Overload. In: Himma, K. E. & Tavani, H. T. (eds.). The Handbook of Infor- mation and Communication Ethics. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 497–515.
Lönnqvist, A. 2007. Mistä tietojohtamisessa on kyse? Teoksessa A. Lönnqvist, K. Blomqvist, M. Hannula, A. Kianto, H. Kärkkäinen, M. Maula & P. Ståhle (toim.) Tietojohtaminen tutkimusalueena. Pilot-kustannus Oy, 11–18. [What knowledge management is all about? In: Lönnqvist, A., Blomqvist, K., Hannula, M., Kianto, A., Kärkkäinen, H., Maula, M., Ståhle, P. (eds.). Knowledge management as a fi eld of research.]
Lönnqvist, A., Blomqvist, K., Hannula, M., Kianto, A., Kärkkäinen, H., Maula, M., Ståhle, P. (toim.) 2007. Tietojohtaminen tutkimusalueena. [Knowledge management as a fi eld of research.] Pilot-kustannus Oy. Malen, B. 1995. The micro-politics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school politics. In: J. D. Scribner & D. H. Layton (eds.). The study of educational politics. Washington, DC: Falmer.
Mattelart, A. 2003. Informaatioyhteiskunnan historia. Tampere: Osuuskunta Vastapaino.
[Finnish translation of the French original: Histoire de la société de l’information (English translation: His-
tory of the Information Society).]
Meier, R. L. 1962. A Communication Theory of Urban Growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Moilanen, R. 2001. A Learning Organization: Machine or Human. Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Eco- nomics. No. 14.
Murphy, K. & Gross, R. 1969. All you need is love. Love is all you need. New York Times, p. SM36. Mustonen, K. 2003. Mihin rehtoria tarvitaan. Oulun yliopisto, Kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta, Kajaanin opet- tajankoulutusyksikkö. [Why do we need a principal? University of Oulu, Faculty of Education, Kajaani Department of Teacher Education.]
Mäkelä, A. 2007. Mitä rehtorit todella tekevät. Etnografi nen tapaustutkimus johtamisesta ja rehtorin te- htävistä peruskoulussa. [What principals really do. An ethnographic case study on leadership and on a
principal’s tasks in comprehensive school.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research
316.
Nikander, L. 2003. Hyvää mieltä ja yhteistyötä. Johtajien ja esimiesten käsityksiä johtajuudesta ammattiko- rkeakoulussa. Hämeen ammattikorkeakoulun ja Tampereen yliopiston Ammattikasvatuksen tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskuksen julkaisuja 3. [High spirits and Cooperation. Conceptions of leaders and administrators
of leadership in a polytechnic. Publications of HAMK University of Applied Sciences and University of Tam-
pere Research Centre for Vocational Education, No. 3.]
Nivala, V. 1999. Päiväkodin johtajuus. [Leadership in day care.] Acta Universitas Lapponiensis 25. Nykänen, S. 2010. Ohjauksen palvelujärjestelyjen toimijoiden käsitykset johtamisesta ohjausverkostossa. Matkalla verkostojohtamiseen? Koulutuksen tutkimuslaitos: Tutkimuksia 25. [Leadership and management
in guidance and counselling networks: conceptions of actors. Moving towards leadership and management in networks? Institute for Educational Research: Research Reports 25.]
Opetushallitus 2004. Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. [Finnish Na- tional Board of Education 2004. National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.]
Opetushallitus 2011. Koulutus ja tutkinnot. Haettu osoitteesta http://www.oph.fi /koulutus_ja_tutkinnot. [Finnish National Board of Education 2011. Education and qualifi cations. Retrieved from: http://www.oph. fi /koulutus_ja_tutkinnot (information available in English at: http://www.oph.fi /english/education).]
Pennanen, A. 2003. Peruskoulun johtaminen, modernista kohti transmodernista johtamista. [Leading Com-
prehensive School, from Modern towards Transmodern Leadership.] Acta Universitatis Ouluensis Escientiae
Rerum Socialium 82.
Pesonen, J. 2009. Peruskoulun johtaminen – aikansa ilmiö. Joensuun yliopiston kasvatustieteellisiä julkai- suja 132. [Comprehensive school leadership – phenomenon of its time. University of Joensuu Publications in Education No. 132.]
Pirhonen, E-R. & Janhunen, P. 1995. Kuntien sivistystoimen hallinto 1995. Helsinki: Suomen Kuntaliitto. [The administration of the provision of education in municipalities in 1995. Helsinki: Association of Finn- ish Local and Regional Authorities.]
Porras, J. & Silvers, R. 1991. Organization Development and Transformation. Annual Review of Psychology. No. 41.
Pont, B., Nusche, D. & Moorman, H. 2009. Improving School Leadership: Policy & Practice. OECD. Pulkkinen, S. 2011. Valmentajataustan merkitys rehtorin työssä. [The Signifi cance of a Coaching Back-
ground in a Principal’s Work.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 407.
Raasumaa, V. 2010. Perusopetuksen rehtori opettajien osaamisen johtajana. [Knowledge management func-
tions of a principal in basic education.] Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research
383.
Rinne, R., Kivirauma, J. & Simola, H. 2002. Shoots of revisionist education policy or just slow readjustment? The Finnish case of educational reconstruction. Journal of Education Policy, 17 (6), 643–658.
Risku, M., Björk, L.G. & Browne-Ferrigno, T. 2012. School–parent Relations in Finland. Journal of School Public Relations, 33, 48–72.
Risku, M. & Kanervio, P. 2011. Doctoral and regular research on principals in Finland 2000–2010. In: O.