Abstract
We begin this edition of MiE with a plea to consider the underlying ideologies represented in educational policy-making. Les Bell and Howard Stevenson raise important considerations about the way in which ideology influences policy and in relation to the need to consider the purposes of education carefully in order to make good educational decisions. They discuss the particularity of the knowledge that is valued in curricula and the complexity and arbitrary nature of such decisions. Moreover, Les and Howard offer a framework that may enable us to analyse policy and help shape our understandings of what underlies education in a complex organizational environment.
For Sadiq Hussain and Thuwayba Albarwani, these ideological underpinnings should be orientated around the sustainability agenda. Looking at sustainable leadership in Oman higher education, they point out that the senior leaders talk actively about both change and about sustainability. The authors acknowledge some issues with varied interpretations of notions of sustainability but agree that there is a need globally to explore these ideas more carefully. Sadiq and Thuwayba also point to the links between higher education and wider policy in relation to sustainability and the increasing acceptance for senior managers that they have an important role to play in contributing to this area.
We then move on to issues involving identity. Stephen Rayner, Janet Lord, Elizabeth Parr and Rachel Sharkey make an initial exploration of the experience of undertaking doctoral study through the lens offered by Wenger around professional learning. As students themselves they have drawn on their own experiences, and also the experiences of others to consider the ways in which their identities re-shape through the doctoral process. This has led them to challenge notions of linear development. Stephen, Janet, Elizabeth and Rachel argue that whilst Wenger’s ideas have sparked some interesting debate they have not helped them theorize these experiences. They do, however, raise interesting questions around the area of supervision and guidance.
From an alternative perspective, John De Nobile, Teola London and Mariam El Baba tackle the thorny issue of behaviour management (which again could be argued to be a key factor around identity). Their study combines qualitative and quantitative approaches to look at approaches to behaviour management in Australian schools. John, Teola and Mariam argue that the more teachers are familiar with and work to implement whole school behaviour policies the less likely it is that their classrooms are disrupted. They also (and perhaps unsurprisingly) associate poor whole-school implementation of behaviour policies to be a factor in teacher stress and job dissatisfaction.
We follow the identity and behaviour debate with a consideration of how schools engage with a wider audience. Janet Goodall examines the extension of the Ofsted remit that looks at engagement of schools with parents. Janet examines both at the issue of parental support of pupil learning and at parent and school responsibilities to each other. She further grapples with the notion that much engagement happens outside school, where it is much harder to assess. To engage effectively with parents Janet argues that school leaders need to be aware of the need for shifts in school ethos and values in order to accommodate new ways of working together.
Following on the theme of the importance of school leaders and their role in setting an ethos based on clear values, Ian Abbot, David Middlewood and Sue Robinson discuss the most effective ways in which the Pupil Premium in outstanding schools can be utilized. Whilst there are cases that argue that extra funding makes little difference to pupil attainment, Ian, David and Sue argue that in this sample a coherent set of values that inform decision-making proved a key element in ensuring the best use of the Pupil Premium and that this enabled these schools to weather the myriad external demands.
Clearly the notion of ideology and values runs through these articles. What becomes clear is that without a set of clear values education will lack direction and purpose. It moreover raises questions about the extent to which the various phases of education have a sense of purpose that facilitates a healthy engagement in educational debate in ways that benefit all and help prevent organizations taking up every new initiative that comes their way regardless of educational efficacy. The editorial board would welcome further articles debating the purposes of education as this is an important and ongoing debate to be part of and party to.