Abstract
Welcome to the January edition of MiE. This edition opens with an important message from the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society (BELMAS) to urge you to get involved in this year’s conference. I would recommend attendance, as this is an enjoyable event which encourages friendly but vigorous discussion in a very pleasant environment. In addition, while on the theme of BELMAS, Helen Gunter has submitted a synopsis designed to gather together some of the themes and issues raised at a recent BELMAS sponsored event. Helen highlights the unconventional and challenging way in which the day brought people together to consider the ways in which we employ theory to understand the world around us. This is the start of discussions that will be continued in the pursuit of making our application of theory more explicit and more open to challenge within a supportive environment. This is particularly important in the current climate, where opportunities for open discussion are becoming harder to facilitate within education, and yet, in order to make informed and educated judgements, it is an ever more necessary tool in academic life.
To continue with notions of theory and unpacking these, Neil MacNeill and Rob Cavanagh argue that rather than the roles of principals becoming more distributed in terms of responsibility, heads have in fact increasingly picked up a much greater amount of the administrative burden in order to meet complex demands and school targets. Neil and Rob draw interestingly upon notions of flow in relations to modelling psycho-physiological responses and argue that ‘flow’ is both a moral and social phenomena. Issues around ‘moral good’ underlie this argument and provide an area for future exploration. Next James Bird and Chuang Wang present research from educational leaders in the United States to discuss the ways in which leadership styles may influence effectiveness. They argue that superintendants prefer not to align with particular leadership styles, arguing instead that they employ a variety of approaches but that the important issue is the authenticity with which the leader uses the styles and approaches adopted. James and Chuang also identify the great importance of flexibility and fluidity.
Mario Cutajar and Christopher Bezzina discuss the Maltese Islands and how schools are working together to form networks of collaboration. Mario argues that the appointment of an overarching principal in one case acted as a lever to pull the network together in a way that was beneficial. However teamwork also requires teachers with the time, energy and will to establish links with others in order for it to operate successfully. The networks theme continues with Kathy Stuart and colleagues who discuss the Canterbury earthquake in New Zealand in relation to school closures and principal’s decision-making. They argue that there are lessons to be gained from the activities undertaken during such times that are useful to all, not least the need for a community and social connection to the school. Moreover that it is important that principals recognise the socially situated aspects of disaster responses and the need to know the locality, local community and emergency management plans.
Khalid Arar and Ruth Abramovitz write about women as educational leaders in Israel and the problems of patriarchy and prejudice against women as principals of schools. Khalid and Ruth argue that both women and men believe that in terms of external relations, schools are better led by men. Women, however, do see other women in a more positive light in terms of their general skills set in relation to ‘principal-ship’. Finally we move on to Steve Lambert’s discussion of Further Education leadership. Explaining the backdrop of a climate where roles and leadership responsibilities are intensifying, Steve highlights the shift of leadership towards the managerial, and the change for the principal in becoming a chief executive. Steve draws on research with six principals to illustrate his arguments.
This issue of MiE not only asks us to question and consider the uses of theory and to consider the ways in which we apply them, it also points to the intense and complex world of principal leadership where individual leaders are called upon for clear decision-making in environments of heavy workload commitments and in some cases prejudice. If you have responses to these think-pieces then please feel free to engage through writing an article and adding your voice to the discussion.