Preparing School Leaders to Lead Organizational Learning and Capacity Building

  • Stephen L. Jacobson
  • Olof Johansson
  • Christopher Day
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Studies in Educational Leadership book series (SIEL, volume 12)

Abstract

This chapter examines the leadership development of principals /head teachers in England , Sweden and the United States with a particular focus on organizational learning and capacity building in leadership preparation programs. The authors note that leadership preparation varies across the three countries, with the longest history of formal training in the United States. At the same time, several similarities and trends in organizational learning preparation and professional development exist. Further, this chapter considers how these various elements of leadership preparation could be employed to better prepare aspiring and current principals to successfully lead organizational learning and capacity building in their schools. The chapter concludes with three recommendations regarding (1) candidate selection, (2) curricula design and (3) professional and social support that could enhance school leadership preparation and subsequent on-the-job performance.

Keywords

Organizational Learning School Leader Preparation Program Head Teacher Instructional Leadership 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Brundrett, M. (2001). The development of school leadership preparation programmes in England and the USA: A comparative analysis. Educational Management & Administration, 29(2), 229–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Copland, M. (2001). The myth of the superprincipal. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(7), 528–533.Google Scholar
  3. Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr. M., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development programs. Palo Alto: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.Google Scholar
  4. D. E. S. (1987). Circular No. 9/87: Local Education Authority Training Grants Scheme: Financial Year 1988/89. London. Department of Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  5. Doolittle, V., Jacobson, S., LeTendre, B., & McCarthy, M. (2003). Tracking leadership preparation to practice and back. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, April, Chicago.Google Scholar
  6. Jacobson, S. (2005). The recruitment and retention of school leaders: Understanding administrator supply and demand. In N. Bascia, A. Cumming, A. Datnow, K. Leithwood, & D. Livingstone (Eds.), International handbook of educational policy (pp. 457–470). London: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. James, C., & Whiting, D. (1998). Headship? No thanks. Management in Education, 12(2), 12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kimball, K., & Sirotnik, K. (2000). The urban school principalship: Take this job and…! Education and Urban Society, 32(4), 535–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leithwood, K., & Riehl, C. (2003). What do we already know about successful school leadership? Paper prepared for the AERA Division A Task Force on Developing Research in Educational Leadership.Google Scholar
  10. Louis, K., & Kruse, S. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  11. Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2000). Profound improvement: Building capacity for a learning community. Downington: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  12. Mulford, B. (2003). School leaders: Changing roles and impact on teacher and school effectiveness. Paper commissioned by the Education and Training Policy Division, OECD, for the activity Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers.Google Scholar
  13. NCSL. (2009). www.ncsl.org.uk. Accessed 18 September 2009.
  14. OECD. (2008). Improving school leadership: Policy and practice. Paris: OECDGoogle Scholar
  15. Olson, L. (2000, January 12) Quality Counts Report examines teacher quality. Education Week. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2000/01/12/17qc.h19.html.
  16. Poster, C. (1988). 3/83 And all that. In C. Poster & C. Day (Eds.), Partnership in education management. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. SIA. (1974). Skolans arbetsmiljö. Betänkande. Av utredningen om skolans inre arbete SIA, SOU 1974:53.Google Scholar
  18. Skolverket. (1993). Head teachers for Tomorrow. Stockholm: The Swedish National Agency for Education.Google Scholar
  19. Skolverket. (2002). School head—Democratic, challenging leader. Stockholm: The Swedish National Agency for Education.Google Scholar
  20. Skolverket. (2009). Goals of the National School Leadership Training Programme. Stockholm: The Swedish National Agency for Education.Google Scholar
  21. Supovitz, J. (2000). Manage less: Lead more. Principal Leadership, 1(3), 14–19.Google Scholar
  22. University Council for Educational Administration. (2008). Innovative university programs: Leadership Initiative for Tomorrow’s Schools (LIFTS)—University at Buffalo. UCEA Review, XLIX(2), 17–19.Google Scholar
  23. Williams, T. (2001). The unseen exodus: Meeting the challenges of replacing Ontario’s principals and vice-principals. O.P.C. Register, 3(3), 10–14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen L. Jacobson
    • 1
  • Olof Johansson
    • 2
  • Christopher Day
    • 3
  1. 1.University at BuffaloState University of New YorkBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Umeå UniversityUmeåSweden
  3. 3.School of EducationUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations