The laggardly rate at which technology has changed what happens in classrooms may not be surprising, however. Larry Cuban, a well-known scholar from Stanford University, studied the effects of electronic media (radio, television, and movies) on education earlier in the 20th century and found them to be inconsequential. He noted, “Claims predicting extraordinary changes in teacher practice and students’ learning, mixed with promotional tactics, dominated the literature in the initial wave of enthusiasm for each new technology” (Cuban, 1986, p. 4), but observation proved these tools were no better than teachers using other information technology at conveying information. Something appears different, however, about the computers and digital networks we have today compared to earlier media. For the most part, earlier electronic media did not become as widely used for official purposes in the way that digital technology has become the default for legal and governmental communication. Nor did it become so widely adopted for interaction, nor did it become widely used for people to create information in the way that digital technologies have. Previous generations of American citizens listened to the radio for entertainment as they completed paper copies of their income tax returns which were mailed to the Internal Revenue Service. Now, we listen to streaming media and carry on conversations over text messaging as we complete and file our tax returns via the Internet. In those areas where IT infrastructure has been installed it has come to dominate all aspects of economic, political, social, and cultural life.
Abstract Schoolleaders play a significant role in managing and leading the school, not only to excel in its entire academic program but equally important is its growth and sustainability. This research is intended to provide a source of realistic and useful ideas to owners and stakeholders about the importance of determining core competencies of schoolleaders to meet the qualifying standards in appointing or employing school officials in order to help and guide them in choosing the right and competent members of schoolleaders that suit well in managing Philippine Schools Overseas. The study is quantitative descriptive using survey design and the result of the study uncovered the essential core competencies of school top executives, namely: leading people and business coalition as core qualifications; and conciseness and composure as emulating attributes that determined the necessary core competencies for school managers. Successful schoolleaders that possess all the relevant core competencies identified in this study are able to drive transformation and school improvement. They effectively influence a variety of school outcomes, and this entails cultivating leadership in others so they can assume their parts in realizing the school vision and help organizations to articulate strategy and link behaviors to PSO’s vision and mission.
a. Formative approach: the evaluation of SchoolLeaders is about gathering diagnostic information from a variety of sources in order to provide feedback to the School Leader and others as part of a process aiming for school improvement. Therefore, evaluation of SchoolLeaders is about learning, about professional future, and about having the chance of improving one’s performance. This Guide focuses on the formative aspects of the evaluation process by fostering reflection mechanisms based on the School Leader´s practice and by defining improvement proposals for developing the quality of his/her functions. Therefore, the application of School Leader evaluation as an ongoing and continuing process in cycles longer than one academic year implies the possibility of intermediate feedback to SchoolLeaders in order the improve the weakness and enrich the strengths.
The Sweyne Park story is briefly told in Self-evaluation: A reflection and planning guide for schoolleaders. The task faced by Kate Spiller, assuming headship and requiring to amalgamate two schools on one site is an illustration of where self-evaluation has its origins and gains its momentum – from the ground up. The starting point was with teachers’ and pupils’ expectations as to what they saw as the potential of the new school, its latent strengths and challenges to be met. Pupils were key players in this exercise, their concerns centring largely on the internal and external environment of the school. Progressively, however, they began to express concerns which came closer to the core business of learning and teaching. A key question they were asked to address was ‘What makes a good lesson?’
on their teaching. The additional work included having to attend required “professional development trainings” on the new curriculum and in- structional materials, which were an integral component of the superintendent’s widely promoted Teaching and Learning Success for All Students district-wide instructional improvement initiative for the current school year. Parents in the community were also divided on the merits of the new curricula and instructional programs, with some parents siding with the veteran teachers while other parents were more generally supportive of the new programs. To complicate things further, some of the “supportive” parents were questioning whether the new programs were actually going far enough in meeting the multicultural learning needs of their children. These multiple, conflicting stakeholder beliefs and perspectives regarding the district’s new instructional improvement initiative and associated programs quickly mushroomed into an intense and highly volatile “multi-perspectivist logjam” affecting the entire school district community. The conflict spilled over into monthly school board meetings, with school board members (who were themselves divided on the issue), parents, and district adminis- trators engaging in heated debates over the merits of the superintendent’s district-wide instructional improve- ment initiative. The intense controversy regarding the new instructional improvement initiative that erupted in this rural school district community ended up dividing community stakeholders over the important issue of how to provide quality teaching and learning opportunities for all of the district’s increasingly diverse students. Moreover, this community-wide controversy put in jeopardy (at least for the foreseeable future) any real pros- pects for a successful implementation of the new district-wide program. The above rural school district commu- nity instance of multi-stakeholder conflict over how to go about meeting the challenges of providing effective instruction to an economically and culturally diverse student population is offered as one example of the kinds of multi-perspectivist stakeholder conflict that can emerge in school district communities today—community- wide conflict that can stymie the most well-intentioned instructional improvement efforts of school district lead- ers.
Yolanda S. George, AAAS, Deputy Director, Education and Human Resources Programs, has served as Di- rector of Development, Association of Science- Technology Centers (ASTC); Director, Professional Development Program, University of California, Berke- ley; and as a research biologist at Lawrence Liver- more Laboratory, Livermore, California. George con- ducts evaluations, project reviews, and workshops for both the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation, as well as proposal reviews for private foundations and public agencies, including Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Founda- tion, and the European Commission. Over the last 25 years she has raised over $80 million for a variety of SMT education initiatives for colleges and universi- ties, associations, and community- based groups. George has authored or co-authored over 50 papers, pamphlets, and hands-on science manuals. She re- ceived her BS and MS from Xavier University of Louisi- ana and Atlanta University in Georgia, respectively. Tom R. Kibler, Vice President for Systems at C-KA, has been a computer professional for over 30 years. He focuses on adapting reengineering and rapid applica- tion development/deployment to education and serves as a consultant on institutional change for universities with a focus on math and science educa-
– investing in coaching and mentoring support if appropriate Employers have a duty to consider employees’ work–life balance, and to take reasonable steps to facilitate it: this applies to heads as well as to junior staff. Moreover, younger leaders in particular may have demanding family responsibilities outside work. As a result, governing bodies should understand the practicality of different flexible working patterns such as home working, part-time working, flexible hours, job share and co-leadership. In addition, the phased retirement made possible by the new pension rules now makes a job share between outgoing and incoming heads more feasible. www.redesigningheadship.net for more creative ideas. There are several useful documents at
Unlike Australia, New Zealand has a consistent country-wide approach to school self-evaluation and external review. State schools are required to undertake a process of self-evaluation which feeds into the Schools Charter, described as a living document, since it is kept under constant review. The Ministry of Education, for its part, has a responsibility to support schools by providing tools and information to support teaching and learning in New Zealand schools. By examining copies of each school’s planning and reporting documentation, it can determine what kinds of support or advice may be most useful and necessary, and where further support may be needed. The Education Review Office’s (ERO) external evaluation role is complementary to the self- evaluation that schools carry out. Through an in-depth look inside the school every few years, ERO is able to provide assurance that the issues identified and prioritised by schools have been the right ones. Schools then are expected to use ERO findings in refining their goals and in identifying future planning.
Much has been written about gathering pupil voice to inform improvement, and many schools have developed strategies to ensure that this voice is heard in an authentic and democratic manner. There are of course numerous strategies that can be used, from school council members seeking the views of their peers on issues to using pupil evaluations to inform teaching and learning practices. However, if pupil voice is genuinely going to be used to inform the improvement agenda, whether this relates to academic achievement or other issues, then key to this process is that the voice is not just heard but acted upon.
The Leadership Self-Review Tool The Leadership Self-Review Tool (LSRT) was developed by the Institute for Education Leadership to help school boards assess the support they offer their schoolleaders. It is designed to enable boards to plan implementation of the LSRT in their own districts. It includes recommendations for effective use of the tool, a survey, and a gap analysis scoring sheet, as well as reviews of the research on leadership and student achievement and reports on the piloting of the LSRT in five school boards. Boards have the flexibility to determine how they will use the tool and can tailor aspects of the survey to their own context. You can learn more about the LSRT at: www.education- leadership-ontario.ca
The mission of the Education Research Alliance for New Orleans (Era- New Orleans) is to produce rigorous, objective, and useful research to support the long-term achievement of all students. Based at Tulane University, Era-New Orleans is partnership of a variety of prominent local education groups. Our Advisory Board includes (in alphabetical order): Educate Now!, the Louisiana Association of Educators, the Louisiana Association of Public Charter Schools, the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, the Louisiana Recovery School District, New Schools for New Orleans, New Orleans Parents’ Guide, the Orleans Parish School Board, the Orleans Public Education Network, and the Urban League of New Orleans. For more information, please visit the organization’s website:
how they change their work practice when communicating online. Even if schoolleaders already use e–mail to communicate with their colleagues, they do not automatically find it easy to adapt other asynchronous tools for communication and collaboration. When several research projects examine and report healthy on–going activities in discussion forums, additional research is necessary to examine when participants do not use the tools as they were expected. Rogers (2000, p. 384) asserts that “Not all communities are effective in carrying out their tasks; some communities work together effectively while others splinter and struggle to accomplish their goals”. There are several issues that organizers have to confront when building online professional communities (Schlager, Fusco & Schank, 2002). When the organizers of the project Schoolleaders online confronted technical problems in the beginning, a decision was made to continue this study in order to explore the negotiation of meaning of IT. Organization of collective discussions in online mode is about the creation of an agreement in which all participants create meaning together in their online activities. The participants have to understand the idea of making contribution in online discussions explicitly for others, rather then just communicate in peers through e–mail. They have to be able to value their own knowledge and ideas for other to comment. The issue for implementing any communication tool is the involvement of the participants own social practice (Schlager et al., 2002). Besides the work practice of schoolleaders, common topic for discussion and the participants’ capabilities to appropriate tools will be features that act as focal points when building online communities. These three themes will later be used for construction of an interview guide and even as a framework for presenting the result.
A total cost analysis for technology will come as a surprise for many organizations. First, most school districts do not provide support at the desktop level. Teachers either spend their own time managing computers, students provide volunteer support, or computers go unused. Second, most classrooms still don’t have a significant number of computers in them. The downtime and user self help costs for a computer lab are barely noticeable. However, without a management solution, districts will experience a dramatic rise in support costs when devices are deployed throughout the school. A thin-client environment helps an organization rein in costs and keep them under control. To further control costs, an ASP offers a predetermined expense for maintenance, support, upgrades, and new software costs through subscription fees.
in Kock, 2009; Cascio & Shurygailo, 2003), where is enables to work at any place and any time (Huang et. Al, 2010). These trends gave new dimension in leadership and organizational management (Purvanova & Bono, 2009; Avolio & Kahai, 2002;2003, Avolio et al., 2001; DeSanctis & Poole, 1994). Leadership task is no longer limited to a direct relationship between the leaders and employee of the organization. Now, leaders can exercise their leadership in virtual function (Purvanova & Bono, 2009) using mobile technology gadgets. As rapidly developmental in information and communication technology, leadership functions also grew by modernity and it always important part for organization (Schultz, 2010). Technology had changed the traditional approach of leadership to virtual concept. Virtual leadership or e-leadership is a concept that integrated mobile technology in leadership style, and it was different from traditional or conventional styles (Lee, 2010). E-leadership was define as a leader using computer mediating for task-oriented, decision-making and problem solving group (Hinds & Kiesler, 2002). As the development of mobile technology rises, most of leader prefer in using mobile technology devices to coordinate their members in an organization. This may increase productivity by reducing operational cost (Huang et. al, 2010;Townsend et al, 2001). Although some research on virtual team leadership styles exists, relatively little research on how leadership affects virtual team interaction and performance (Hambley et al. in Kock, 2009). Leader of modern organization faces more frequently due to the dynamics of the workplace and situation. The new challenges are workers are physically dispersed away from the leader and fellow (Schultz, 2010). In the Malaysian context, schoolleaders are very busy commonly. They rarely able to attend school session for a variety of meetings and another commitments outside school (Ibrahim, 2012; Bity Salwana et. al, 2008; Maimunah, 2005). As a result, they are not be able to pay attention to school organization, especially in part of curriculum and instruction (Mohd Suhaimi & Zaidatol Akmaliah, 2007; Azlin, 2006). To overcome this problem, the scholars had proposed the using of mobile technology in leadership practices. In this situation, leaders need to change their role toward e-leaders in organization.
The Disparities Solutions Center would like to extend our sincerest gratitude to The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation for their generous support for the development and design of Improving Quality and Achieving Equity: A Guide for Hospital Leaders, and in particular Pamela Dickson, MBA, formerly our Project Officer, now Deputy Director of the Health Care Group, for her guidance and advice. We would like to extend our special thanks to all of the hospital leaders who agreed to be interviewed for this project, as well as the hospitals who allowed us to conduct a more extended site visit to develop the case studies presented here. We would also like to thank our Sounding Board for this project, which provided input and feedback from conception to design, as well as the reviewers who graciously agreed to share their perspectives and expertise to make this a practical, effective tool for real-world hospital leaders. We are deeply appreciative of Ann McAlearney, ScD, MS, Assistant Professor, Division of Health Services Management and Policy, Ohio State University School of Public Health, and Sunita Mutha, MD, FACP, Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine, Center for the Health Professions, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, who shared key resources and perspectives.
In this study, teachers' suggestions for what characteristics a school principal should have in order to leave a mark are included. According to the results; all of the participants feel that a school principal should support the teacher and the student to leave a mark. It is suggested that the principal should think about teachers, give teachers the autonomy to take the initiative, trust and support their studies. It is revealed that there is a relationship between the support for the teacher learning and the culture of the school (Jurasaite-Harbison & Rex, 2010). For this study, it can be said that the leadership role of the principal might reinforce teacher learning in the context of school culture. In terms of supporting the student, suggestions are made that the principal should support the success of the student and direct the student to various activities. Previous studies showed that there is an effect of leadership on student success (Cetin & Kinik, 2015; O'Donnell & White, 2005). To create a positive school culture; the principal as an indelible leader supports students and sees them as change agents (Fullan, 2016)
If further education is to contribute to change and development in schools beyond individual learning, the school must be organized as a learning community. This means that the school has a vision that is familiar to all and that there is an agreed understanding of development activities that may move school practices in the direction of this vision. This in turn requires that leaders provide arenas and room for communication where visions and targets can be formulated and understood through common dialogue. Schoolleaders need such competence in leading learning in an organization. Just like a leader of a class in school, the leader of a school should endeav- our to create a good learning environment for teachers, which means that there must be a good atmosphere and trust between teachers and leaders, and that there is room to fail. And in the same way as for pupils’ learning, the teachers should also be given suitable challenges. The school leader should be a “warm demander” (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006: p. 11) who both supports and challenges teachers in their learning. As the leader supports and challenges the teachers, the teachers should also act in the same manner with each other. This also means that teachers should have knowledge about and understanding of how change and development can be promoted in school. For schools to function as learning practice communities, both leaders and the education of teachers must help to equip the participants for promoting learning in school. If teachers taking further education feel they are part of a learning practice community at their own school, where visions and strategies frame their activi- ties, the content of the further education may become a natural part of the learning content of this community.
“This practical field guide can serve the needs of a full spectrum of readers—from the experienced higher education planner to the newcomer who is just learning about the discipline. By carefully com- pleting all the exercises, answering all the questions, and employing the many checklists for each phase of the planning process, a planning team is very likely to emerge with a final product that will truly strengthen the organization.”
cipals are urged to create democratic organizations and profes- sional learning communities. These demanding educational set- tings require bold, socially responsible leadership by both prin- cipals and teachers, continually expanding the roles and respon- sibilities each must fulfil. Goldring (2002) concentrates on stu- dent achievement in explaining effective educational leadership in the 21st century. He asserts that a leader will require strate- gies that make it possible for all children to succeed academi- cally. Day et al. (2001) put a stress on the capacity of leaders to make a difference. They assert that interpretation of and respon- ses to the constraints, demands and choices that they face help leaders to make a difference. Leaders capture their past, present and future pressures, challenges, and concerns and aspirations with which they are daily faced and which are reflect the mul- ti-faceted demands of the role. Slater (2008) thinks that build- ing leadership capacity or eliciting effort in others requires ef- fort, unique insight, and explicit skills on the part of leaders. Leaders may learn to use communication skills and strategies as a pathway to building leadership capacity. As principals and other leaders share the lead and the load, the success of their performance will be determined by their ability to inspire a cul- ture of empowerment. Leaders’ success then will be measured not by the number of followers they have, but rather by the number of individuals that they have inspired to become leaders themselves. According to Witziers et al. (2003) principals should not only perform tasks related to coordination and evaluation of the educational system but also in relation to further developing the educational system via transformation of the school culture. One of the main tasks of school principals is to help create a working environment in which teachers collaborate and identify with the school’s mission and goals. Murphy and Walberg (2002) points out to trust and dialogue. To them, new leaders dedicated to school improvement should gain knowledge not only about best practices but also about how to foster dialogue and trust within schools and between schools and the commu- nities they serve. Moreover, school staff should be given the knowledge about new leadership concepts and scientific evi- dence that they need to accept innovative leaders. Grogan and Andrews (2002) point out to critical characteristics of a prepa- ration of aspiring educational leaders programme such as colla- borative instructional leadership, practice based knowledge, op- portunities for novices and experts, selection of aspiring prin- cipals, assessment of development, contribution to standards, ethical and moral obligations, long term internship and learning opportunities in diverse settings and address to successors.