Abstract
Although I would argue that the logic of academic work—argument and refutation—is not orthodoxy in educational administration scholarship (a matter I return to in the following chapter), there is a particular by-product of this mutation of logic. With a preference for parallel monologues, educational administration research frequently reproduces analytical dualisms in its knowledge claims. Building arguments on simplistic representations of the social world, with minimal if any attention to alternatives, leads to binary thinking which does little to advance knowledge. In this chapter, I pick up on common (even if implicit) analytical dualism mobilized in educational administration research (structure/agency, universalism/particularism, and individualism/holism) and demonstrate how the key terms of the relational program (auctor, organizing activity, and spatio-temporal conditions) overcome them. Significantly, I stress that these terms overcome the dualisms rather than simply replace them with a novel vocabulary.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bates, R. J. (1983). Educational administration and the management of knowledge. Melbourne: Deakin University Press.
Bates, R. J. (2010). History of educational leadership and management. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGraw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 724–730). Oxford: Elsevier.
Caldwell, B. J., & Spinks, J. M. (1988). The self managing school. Lewes, England: The Falmer Press.
Day, C., & Gurr, D. M. (Eds.). (2014). Leading schools successfully: Stories from the field. London: Routledge.
Dinham, S. (2005). Principal leadership for outstanding educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(4), 338–356.
Dinham, S. (2007). The secondary head of department and the achievement of exceptional student outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(1), 62–79.
Dirlik, A. (2007). Global modernity: Modernity in the age of global capitalism. Colorado, CO: Paradigm.
Drysdale, L., & Gurr, D. (2017). Reflections on successful school leadership from the International Successful School Principalship Project. In G. Lakomski, S. Eacott, & C. W. Evers (Eds.), Questioning leadership: New directions for educational organisations (pp. 164–177). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Durkheim, E. (1982[1895]). The rules of sociological method (W. D. Halls, Trans.). New York, NY: Free Press. [Originally published as Les régles de la méthode sociologique (Paris: F. Alcan)].
Eacott, S. (2015). Educational leadership relationally: A theory and methodology for educational leadership, management and administration. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Eacott, S. (2017). A social epistemology for educational administration and leadership. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 49(3), 196–214.
Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.
Evers, C. W., & Lakomski, G. (2013). Methodological individualism, educational administration and leadership. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 45(2), 159–173.
Foster, W. (1986). Paradigms and promises. Amherset, NY: Prometheus Books.
Gillies, D. (2013). Michel Foucault and educational leadership. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Greenfield, T. B. (1973). Organizations as social inventions: Rethinking assumptions about change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 9(5), 551–574.
Gulick, L., & Urwick, L. (Eds.). (1937). Papers on the science of administration. New York, NY: Institute of Public Administration.
Gurr, D. M. (2014). Successful school leadership across contexts and cultures. Leading & Managing, 20(2), 75–88.
Niesche, R. (2011). Foucault and educational leadership: Disciplining the principal. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Oplatka, I. (2016). Educational administration and the relational approach: Can we suffice contextual-based knowledge production? Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations, 25(2), 41–52.
Simon, H. A. (1945). Administrative behavior (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Slater, C. L., & Nelson, S. W. (Eds.). (2013). Understanding the principalship: An international guide to principal preparation. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Thomson, P. (2017). Educational leadership and Pierre Bourdieu. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Weber, M. (1978[1922]). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Trans.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [Originally published as Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. GrundriĂź der verstehenden Soziologie. Tubingen, Germany: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck)].
Wilkinson, J., & Eacott, S. (2013). Outsiders within? Deconstructing the educational administration scholar. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 16(2), 191–204.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eacott, S. (2018). Overcoming Analytical Dualism. In: Beyond Leadership. Educational Leadership Theory. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6568-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6568-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6567-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6568-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)