The state and independent sectors need to work together - using your expertise to sponsor academies and new free schools, helping us to create more state schools that deliver standards we are seeing at Mossbourne Academy, the City Academy Hackney and the London Academy of Excellence - a project in which some here are involved. School leaders visiting these schools will return full of new ideas for improving the curriculum, teaching and organisation at their own institution.
drawing on the work of Crowther et al. (2009) and Crowther and associates (2011). The regional project resonated with the Principal’s existing way of working and allowed her to expand on this. The Principal and schoolleadership team (including a Deputy Principal and Head of Special Education) along with teacher leaders identified by the formal schoolleadership team were already acknowledged and a teacher-led School Management Team [SMT], consisting of teacher representatives, had been in operation for some years. In the case study school, the aforementioned modules and the support from the Project Officer enabled the Principal to build on the shared leadership already in existence. The approach taken was to develop coaching capacity within key staff members who would then work with others in a non-threatening manner reviewing pedagogical strategies that both included and challenged students to achieve. This added yet another layer of parallel leadership to the SMT which meets monthly with representatives from each year level on a rotating basis, so that every teacher is able to be part of the SMT meetings throughout the year. The SMT is responsible for the development and monitoring of the SchoolImprovement Agenda, and thus responsible for the successful translation of departmental schoolimprovement policies into practice. The distributed approach to leadership contributes to the success of these practices (Lewis & Andrews, 2009; Spillane et al., 2004) and once again reflects the research suggesting that the Principal should not, or could not, be solely responsible for the instructional leadership of a school (Leithwood et al., 2012).
Kepimpinan transformational pengetua, dan persekitaran sekolah adalah faktor penting yang dikatakan berupaya mempengaruhi keberkesanan dan kecemerlangan sekolah. Cabaran dan perubahan dalam sistem pendidikan membolehkan pengetua mengamalkan amalan kepimpinan yang kreatif dan inovatif dalam menjayakan organisasi mereka. Persekitaran akademik yang kondusif membantu mewujudkan konsep baru dan pemahaman yang mendalam berkaitan proses pengajaran dan pembelajaran yang menyediakan para guru dengan tahap kepakaran yang cukup, mematuhi standard serta mempunyai elemen asertif untuk berusaha bersungguh. Walau bagaimanapun, hubungan kolaboratif antara persekitaran sekolah dengan penambahbaikan sekolah sukar ditentukan, dan melibatkan pelbagai faktor dan situasi. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengenal pasti hubungan dan implikasi berkaitan gaya kepimpinan pengetua dan persekitaran sekolah terhadap penambahbaikan sekolah menengah di Nigeria. Kajian ini juga dijalankan untuk mengkaji perbezaan antara sekolah menengah perpaduan dan bukan perpaduan di Nigeria berkaitan dengan aspek kepimpinan, persekitaran sekolah dan penambahbaikan sekolah. Kajian telah menggunakan tiga set instrumen kajian iaitu Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), School-Level Environment Questionnaire (SLEQ) dan SchoolImprovement Questionnaire (SIQII). Seramai 550 guru daripada sekolah perpaduan dan sekolah bukan perpaduan telah dipilih sebagai responden. Statistik deskriptif dan statistik inferential telah digunakan dalam analisis data. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan terdapat hubungan yang signifikan antara aspek persekitaran sekolah dan penambahbaikan sekolah, dengan gaya kepimpinan transformational pengetua. Hasil kajian ini juga menunjukkan bahawa gaya kepimpinan pengetua di sekolah- sekolah perpaduan mempunyai pengaruh yang besar ke atas persekitaran sekolah yang juga telah mempengaruhi penambahbaikan sekolah dan pencapaian akademik pelajar. Kajian ini memperluaskan skop terhadap kajian-kajian terdahulu, dengan mendalami aspek hubungan antara gaya kepimpinan transformasional, persekitaran sekolah dan penambahbaikan sekolah di Nigeria. Kesimpulannya, kajian ini telah menghasilkan satu kerangka teoretikal sebagai sumbangan terhadap gaya kepimpinan transformasional dan persekitaran sekolah terhadap penambahbaikan sekolah. Hasil kajian ini menyokong penglibatan pemimpin transformasional yang berkesan di sekolah menengah di Nigeria untuk menggunakan aspek persekitaran yang bersesuaian dalam perancangan penambahbaikan sekolah.
The research completed to date captures a snapshot of the current IEW/CEC and principal relationship in state schools in the North Queensland region. The questionnaires reveal there is a significant reach of the IEW/CEC role across the school, yet at the same time, their role seems to be under estimated and underappreciated, not just by many principals but by IEWs/CECs themselves. There is also a perceived mismatch of agreement on co-work actions and where there is agreement, this tends to be in the area of school operations and routine. By further examining the IEW/CEC and principal relationship through the case studies, it is expected this work will make known, the ‘space in between’ the two roles, a place for overlap of leadership actions and ‘…where a mutual influence process” (Uhl-Bien, 2006, p. 667), may occur to maximise the power of two. This shift towards hybridity could give leverage to strengthen and transform the why, what and how of IEWs’/CECs’ and principals’ work together. It can offer practical implications to enhance their leadership impact on the learning outcomes of all students, especially those of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and their school-community interrelationships.
For the smooth functioning of a school, the school community needs to be supported by the schoolleadership and the leadership needs to work according to certain ethical principles (Anderson et al., 2012, p. 427; Engel, 2011, p. 8; Firestone, 2014, p. 103; Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2011, p. 27; Tang, Lu, & Hallinger, 2014, p. 669). In addition, the leadership in the schools has to provide support and the essential resources to the school community to enhance the effectiveness of the school (Pine, 2009, p. 99). However, it was found in this research that the support given to the school community, particularly to the teachers, was limited for two reasons. Firstly, the principals were busy with out-of-school engagements, and they were unlikely to be found at the schools. This meant that the necessary support that should have been given to teachers, such as instructional leadership support, was absent. Pont et al. (2008, p. 43) observed similar findings. Most importantly, studies indicate that principals should be pedagogical leaders who work towards the common goal of improvement (Arlestig & Tornsen, 2014, p. 857; Smith & Engel, 2013, p. 107; Spangler, Tikhomirov, Sotak, & Palrecha, 2014, p.080). But this research found that the leadership at school level is not strongly linked to schoolimprovement initiatives. This is contrary to the findings made by Marsh (2015, p. 72). Yet, it has to be taken into account that the principals often work under great stress (Bellamy, Fulmer, Murphy & Muth, 2007, p. 1).
Student leadership lies at the heart of improving schools and enabling young people to realise their true potential. For instance Ruddock (2001) and Fielding (2002) have both noted how student participation can be a means through which students can support the schoolimprovement process. Student leadership can help to build essential skills such as motivation and confidence. A Students as Researchers project can also be used as a catalyst for students and staff to work alongside each other, which can be instrumental in establishing a true learning community, where staff and students learn together. This will enable trust to grow between staff and students, which helps to build effective relationships.
institutionalization, and feedback. This focus on ideas originating from individuals with power makes it easier to relate the ideas to the outcomes of strategic renewal and the organizational- level relationship between exploration and exploitation. Reflecting back on a decade of citations, Crossan et al. (2011) stress the importance of conceptualizing learning as strategic in that it encompasses the entire enterprise and to use learning as a “rich theoretical construct to unpack learning processes” (p. 451). Having established the importance of learning as a dynamic multilevel phenomenon, they recommend research to further understand how the levels relate to each other, which makes explicit use of the 4I processes. “We believe there is the potential for much deeper insight into the 4I processes. Our original article just scratched the surface” (p. 450). Next, they identify the need for research taking an explicit focus on the integration of power, politics and emotion and the role of leadership in advancing a theory of how
Earlier studies identified four ways in which the needs assessments under- taken by low achieving schools are deficient. First, internal assessments are characterized by shallow compliance. The goal of the staff is to appease exter- nal authorities, not identify authentic needs (Burch, 2007; Mintrop & Mac- Lelland, 2002). Internal diagnosis identifies safe areas, ignoring contentious issues such as the quality of schoolleadership and the appropriateness of instructional practices (Vincent, Patterson, Buehler, & Gearity, 2006), that is, these schools focus on the wrong issues. Second, internal diagnoses suffer from lack of knowledge of school effectiveness factors and schoolimprovement strategies: deficits based on the belief that academic research has little practical value (Burkhardt & Schoenfeld, 2003; Coburn & Talbert, 2006; Kennedy, 1997). Underachieving schools focus on needs that may not be strongly associated with outcomes. Third, evidence about needs is overly reliant on locally devel- oped measures of student achievement and shallow analysis of standardized tools (Vincent et al., 2006), creating schoolimprovement goals founded on invalid assumptions. Fourth, underachieving schools may lack the resources to conduct rigorous needs assessment because non-academic demands consume so much staff time (Harris et al., 2006), and such schools may have no history of prior success, a key element in developing an improvement culture (Reezigt & Creemers, 2005).
The concept of capacity building has gained increasing prominence in the schoolimprovement literature. Drawing on Darling-Hammond (2010), Mitchell and Sackney (2016) contend that authentic teaching and learning requires an early and ongoing commitment to building professional capacity. Mitchell and Sackney (2016) found that in high capacity learning, schools’ educational leadership emerged organically throughout the school. They see a set of leadership activities intended to align high quality educational practice towards the goal of improved student learning as central to leadership work. In this understanding of capacity building, school leaders take a collaborative, learning orientated approach to regulating, coordinating, expanding and protecting professional practice. The principals have the role of enabling, guiding and focusing teachers back to a sense of shared purpose, which is linked to the alignment of practice.
Australia’s largest schooling system, the NSW Department of Education, is in a period of unprece- dented change as the Department of Education initiates a range of reforms. One critical reform oc- curred in 2014 when the Department of Education and the New South Wales Teachers’ Federation agreed to link teachers’ salaries with accreditation. For the first time, all Department of Education principals, executives and teachers must complete an annual Performance and Development Plan. This article describes the work of a team of academics from the School of Education, Southern Cross University, and the Department of Education school leaders in northern NSW, exploring op- portunities to accomplish schoolimprovement through the “North Coast Initiative for School Im- provement” (NCISI). The impetus for this initiative is based on the work of Alberta academics and researchers, Dr. David Townsend and Dr. Pamela Adams. The approach is based upon small teams, comprising a member of a school district’s central office, a district principal and university aca- demics, who once a month visit the leadership team of a school in order to build instructional lea- dership. This process involves the use of a guiding question, generative dialogue and a collabora- tive inquiry methodology. Early findings indicate the NCISI’s approach is having positive impact leadership growth, through collaboration. Key elements of trust and professional identity have developed within teams. The very positive reaction of school communities to the project in its early stages is heartening and shows that there is a strong desire by school leaders to draw upon collaborative support in order to grow professionally. The project also demonstrates a strong level of commitment from a regional university to build productive relationships with schools.
25 case study data enabled a range of analysis strategies and the development of statistical models and deeper understanding of the role of leadership. The statistical models revealed strong leadership effects on school processes and internal conditions but only weak indirect effects on changes in student attainment outcomes. In addition, the qualitative case studies provided powerful evidence of the perceived importance of leadership in the accounts of schoolimprovement provided by different stakeholders. These different sources of evidence should not be necessarily seen as inconsistent. Leaders seek to set directions, develop staff and take actions that improve internal school conditions. These will have direct effects on the work of various stakeholders, particularly senior and middle leaders. They are also likely to influence teachers and teaching and learning practices.
their university’s mandate for engaging with “geographical communities … of interest for mutual benefit” (Southern Cross University, 2012, p. 8) and the zeitgeist of the NSW educational reform agenda. A collective of interested school leaders and academics began planning, and did so in consultation with David Townsend, an Australian iteration based on evidence of success in Alberta school jurisdictions (Chaseling et al., 2016). A particularly attractive element of the Alberta work for the Australian experience was the potential to focus on developing leadership capacity in local schools as a key driver of whole-schoolimprovement. This aligned well with the Departmental policy, Local Schools, Local Decisions. Introduced in 2011, the policy gave New South Wales public schools greater authority for local decision-making while the NSW Department of Education still determined policies and guidelines (NSW Department of Education and Communities, 2011). Furthermore, in addition to the empirical results emerging from Alberta, the academic staff recognised evidence in the global research literature for the positive role of schoolleadership in affecting significant and sustainable school change (Ärlestig, Day & Johansson, 2016; Day & Leithwood, 2007; Fullan, 2010, 2014; Gurr & Drysdale, 2016; Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, 2008; Hattie, 2009, 2015; Pollock & Hauseman, 2016; Robinson, Lloyd & Rowe, 2008).
and the media’ (Watson, 2009: 11). The significant changes in the roles of principals have been part of a broader policy shift towards the devolution of responsibility and accountability to schools, in an increasingly privatized and competitive schooling environment (Blackmore, 2004; Connell, 2010; Cranston et al., 2003). In Australia as elsewhere, developing leadership capacity in order to improve the quality, flexibility and competitiveness of schools has been the over-arching goal of recent strategic initiatives across the public system (Watterson and Caldwell, 2010) and has prompted inquiry into the adequacy of current processes in the areas of principal recruitment and selection, training and development (Clarke, 2006; Cranston, 2007; Gronn and Rawlings-Sanaei, 2003; Scott, 2003; Su, Gamage and Mininberg, 2003). In Australia, the National Professional Standard for Principals (AITSL, 2011) has been recently instituted with the aim of standardising and clarifying the role of the principal within a rapidly changing, competitive and challenging public schooling context.
Licensed under Creative Common Page 469 succession planning conference that organized by Abu Dhabi University in 2013, there was a great asserting on the leadership important. They illustrate the role of planning the replacement of leadership in different level and there are lack of applying the planning process. HR practitioners asserted that 15% of companies in Middle East don’t have clear plan for coming leadership. In addition, the plan rotate around the highly performed employees and ignore the talented employee with high capabilities which possible to develop them to be within the human capital for future. The conference focus in the idea of the importance of succession planning to guarantee the organization sustainability.
As a way forward, we suggest that more collaborative leadership styles that encourage participation in decision-making from school principals, may be more helpful for schoolimprovement. This practice may set an example for principals to extend the culture of collaboration to their teachers with ease. Leithwood (2010) suggested that a district-wide focus on student achievement is one of the key characteristics of effective districts. Rorrer et al.’s (2008:323) characterisation of districts as institutional actors foregrounds collaboration, where districts work as a collective with schools to achieve the set agenda. Strong collaboration that drives coherent reforms and learning programmes would require development and empowering of principals as local leaders so that they become influential decision makers. We argue that a certain degree of autonomy, with support and monitoring, is needed, to enable meaningful involvement in influential decision-making. Leithwood et al. (2004b:12) argues that empowering others to make significant decisions enables “greater voice to community stakeholders” and that successful district leadership practices in emerging economies rely on “cap- acities and motivations” of these local leaders, all of which are essential for driving change, schoolimprovement, and broader educational reform initiatives.
Because clan identity and ethnic identity are essential to kin structure, further field work in Uganda is needed to determine to what extent they are addressed in the clinical setting and whether providing gamete donors from varying ethnic and clan groups is a prioritized service provided by IVF clinics, or whether gametes are expected to be donated by extended family members to keep the familial ties in- tact. In her research study on ARTs in Mali and Togo, Viola Hörbst made several observations about how Malian men and women responded to the suggested use of donor gametes. She determined that there was a preference by men to either foster or adopt a child born from their sibling, or when possible, at- tempt other “traditional” methods such as an infertile husband having one of his fertile brothers sleep with his wife in order for conception to occur; this they would prefer to using the donor sperm of com- plete strangers (Hörbst 2012: 171). Among the Malians she found that Islam played a role in men’s re- jection of donor gametes because the use of donor gametes was seen an analogous to adultery and they also felt that the donor gametes presented the possibility of future problem of incestuous relations be- tween related offspring (Hörbst 2012: 177).
3 brain is best able to learn new information. If a critical period passes without adequate interaction and opportunity for language development, it will become more challenging to accomplish the milestones as the child develops (NIDCD, 2010). Receptive language experience occurs first before children begin to learn to speak, and then in conjunction with expressive language as the child begins to verbalize (ASHA, 2013). In the first year, infants advance from recognizing and reacting to voices to babbling and imitating. By their first birthday, infants should have a vocabulary of one to two words. At this time, receptive (hearing) language is key and expressive language is just beginning to develop. By the age of two, toddlers should be able to combine two words into statements or questions. At the age of three, children should have a broad vocabulary, be able to be understood, use a variety of sounds, and be able to produce two or three word phrases. By the age of five, children should be able to not only understand most of what is being said at home and in school, but they should also be able to communicate easily with detailed sentences and adult grammar (NIDCD, 2010).
Schoolleadership: The principal is at the centre of schoolleadership but he/she is not alone. In PLCs, power is shared or distributed among the other stakeholders in a school. These members, depending on the context, in- clude the Parent Teacher Association (PTA), school governing board, vice principal, student leaders, head of department and other team leaders. All these leaders are responsible for the implementation of school improve- ment and the change process in the school. Professional learning community: While Harris  defines profes- sional learning community as a “group of connected and engaged professionals who are responsible for driving change and improvement within, between and across schools that will directly benefit learners”, Nkengbeza  believes that a professional learning community is an inclusive education institution that shares responsibility and decision-making, and continuously and collectively questions the status quo, seeks for better school im- provement strategies or tools and is guided by shared values and vision. Conflict and post-conflict environment: While a conflict environment is the actual environment where conflict takes place, a post-conflict environment is the immediate period that proceeds the conflict period. This era continues until the age of normalcy is re- stored. It should be noted that there is no clear cut between these two periods .
Despite the fact that all of the present-day members of the Culpepper family are exposed to the late twentieth century’s tidal wave of access to mass media and mass-produced products, the family’s departure from tradition is strongest in the character of Nancy Culpepper. Having left the South entirely, Nancy no longer interacts daily with the ebbing presence of folk society in her family and rural subregion. As she attends graduate school in Massachusetts during the late 1960s, her daily activities bear little relation to the folk practices of her grandmother. While in graduate school, Nancy meets Jack Cleveland, a middle-class Northerner and fellow student. The two fall in love and form a relationship. When Nancy and Jack stop for a visit to the Culpepper farm on a road trip to Denver, the natural nervousness a daughter would feel during her parents’ first meeting of her significant other is enhanced by the discrepancy between her family’s participation in, and Jack’s ignorance of, two specific elements of folk culture.