Advertisement

School Leadership in Context: National Policies, International Influences

  • Ciaran Sugrue
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Educational Leadership book series (SIEL, volume 20)

Abstract

At a minimum, contemporary school leaders are required to be Janus-faced: acutely sensitive to the ecology of the school community, while simultaneously attuned to the external educational landscape. Such leadership requirements are more redolent of Daedalus than Icarus: it is necessary to occupy the swampy lowlands, indicate the future by being able to soar above, yet extremely mindful of the policy thermals that can cause instant instability. Leadership in such turbulent and unstable circumstances is more akin to paragliding than being the ‘company man’. It requires being intimate with local circumstance, yet capable also of ‘reading’ the national and international panorama—the macro, meso and micro policy environments of school leadership. This chapter sets out to indicate these three layers while seeking also to signal the manner in which these distinct spaces of practice are colonised—with particular reference to how the language, logic and attendant accountability technologies of NPM have been progressively insinuated into National policy rhetorics; a process of policy tessellation where one is over-shadowed and shaped by the other. This approach also becomes instrumental in indicating the significance of the potential of the Irish ‘case’ to inform and illuminate international discourses on leadership.

Keywords

School Leadership School Community Green Paper Professional Autonomy Special Duty 
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.

References

  1. Allen, K. (2000). The Celtic tiger the myth of social partnership in Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. J. (2007). Education plc understanding private sector participation in public sector education. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. (2008a). The legacy of ERA, privatization and the policy ratchet. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 36(2), 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball, S. (2008b). Performativity, privatisation, professionals and the state. In B. Cunningham (Ed.), Exploring professionalism (pp. 50–72). London: Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  5. Bennis, W. G., & Thomas, R. J. (2002). Geeks & Geezers how era, values, and defining moments shape leaders. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  6. Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder/London: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools a core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Coghlan, M., & Desurmont, A. (2007). School autonomy in Europe policies and measures. Brussels: Eurydice.Google Scholar
  9. Coolahan, J. (Ed.). (1994). Report on the national education convention. Dublin: The National Education Convention Secretariat.Google Scholar
  10. Coolahan, J., & O’Donnovan, P. F. (2009). A history of Ireland’s school inspectorate 1831–2008. Dublin: Four Courts Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cooper, M. (2009). Who really runs Ireland? The story of the elite who led Ireland from bust to boom … and back again. Dublin: Penguin Ireland.Google Scholar
  12. Department of Education and Science (DES). (1999). Report of the working group on the role of the primary principal. Dublin: Dublin Government Publications.Google Scholar
  13. DES. (1996). Whole School Inspection (WSI) consultative conference (13/03/’96) report. Dublin: DES.Google Scholar
  14. DES. (2002). Fifty school reports: What inspectors say. Dublin: DES.Google Scholar
  15. DES. (2003). Looking at our schools an aid to self-evaluation in primary schools. Dublin: Dublin Government Publications.Google Scholar
  16. DES. (2005). An evaluation of curriculum implementation in primary schools English, Mathematics and visual arts. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  17. DES. (2006a). Cooperative School Evaluation Project (CSEP) a study of the development of non-curricular school policies in a school development planning context. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  18. DES. (2006b). An evaluation of planning in thirty primary schools. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  19. DES. (2006c). A guide to whole school evaluation in primary schools. Dublin: Dublin Government Publications.Google Scholar
  20. DES. (2006d). Publication of school inspection reports guidelines. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  21. DES. (2006e). Professional code of practice on evaluation and reporting for the inspectorate. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  22. DES. (2006f). A guide to whole school evaluation in post-primary schools. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  23. DES. (2011). Literacy and numeracy for life and learning. The national strategy to improve literacy and numeracy among children and young people 2011–2020. Dublin: Department of Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  24. DES. (2014). Circular 0004/2014 to the managerial authorities of recognised primary and post-primary schools and the chief executive of each Education and Training Board (ETB).Google Scholar
  25. Durkheim, E. (2001). Professional ethics and civic morals. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Dworkin, G. (1988). The theory and practice of autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dyrdal Solbrekke, T., & Sugrue, C. (2011). Professional responsibility- back to the future. In T. Dyrdal Solbrekke & C. Sugrue (Eds.), Professional responsibility: New horizons of praxis (pp. 10–28). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Easterly, W. (2006/2007). The White man’s burden why the west’s efforts to aid the rest have done so much ill and so little good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Englund, T., & Solbrekke, T. D. (2011). Professional responsibility under pressure? In C. Sugrue & T. Dyrdal Solbrekke (Eds.), Professional responsibility: New horizons of praxis (pp. 59–73). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Esping-Andersen, G. (2000). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Esping-Andersen, G., with, Gallie, D., Hemerijk, A., & Myles, J. (2002). Why we need a new welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Gleeson, J. (2010). Curriculum in context partnership, power and praxis in Ireland. Bern: Peter Lang Ltd.Google Scholar
  33. Gross Stein, J. (2001). The cult of efficiency. Toronto: Anansi Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hardin, R. (2008). Trust. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  35. Ireland, Government of. (1992). Education for a changing world green paper on education. Dublin: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  36. Ireland, Government of. (1995). Charting our education future white paper on education. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  37. Ireland, Government of. (1998). Education (No. 2) Bill.Google Scholar
  38. Ireland, Government of. (1999). Primary school curriculum introduction. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  39. James, O. (2007). Affluenza. London: Vermillion.Google Scholar
  40. Johnson, T. J. (1972). Professions and power. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.Google Scholar
  41. Karlsen, G. E. (2000). Decentralised centralism: Framework for a better understanding of governance in the field of education. Journal of Educational Policy, 15(5), 525–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kohn, M. (2008). Trust self-interest and the common good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Lee, J. J. (1989). IRELAND 1912–1985 politics and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Levin, B., & Fullan, M. (2008). Learning about system renewal. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(2), 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  46. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  47. MacBeath, J. (1999). Schools must speak for themselves: The case of school self-evaluation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. MacBeath, J., & McGlynn, A. (2002). Self-evaluation what’s in it for schools? London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Mackenzie, C., & Stoljar, N. (Eds.). (2000). Relational autonomy feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. May, L. (1996). The socially responsive self. Social theory and professional ethics. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  51. O’ Donovan, P. F. (1992). The national school inspectorate and its administrative context, in Ireland 1870–1962. Unpublished PhD, University College Dublin, Dublin.Google Scholar
  52. O’ Toole, F. (2009). Ship of fools how stupidity and corruption sank the Celtic tiger. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  53. OECD. (1991). Reviews of national education policies for education: Ireland. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  54. OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do – Student performance in reading, mathematics and science. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  55. Ofsted. (1998). School evaluation matters/Ofsted, Office for Standards in Education. London: Ofsted.Google Scholar
  56. Owen, R. (1991). A new view of society and other writings. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  57. Perkins, R., Shiel, G., Merriman, B., Cosgrave, J., & Moran, G. (2013). Learning for life: The achievements of 15-year-olds in mathematics, reading literacy and science in PISA 2012. Dublin: Educational Research Centre.Google Scholar
  58. Pont, B., Nusche, D., & Moorman, H. (2008). Improving school leadership: Volume 1: Policy and practice. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  59. Power, M. (1999). The audity society rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York/London: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  61. Putnam, R., Feldstein, L. M., & Cohen, D. (2004). Better together restoring the American community. New York/London/Toronto/Sydney: Simon and Schuster Paperbacks.Google Scholar
  62. Reich, R. (2008). Supercapitalism the battle for democracy in an age of big business. London: Icon Books.Google Scholar
  63. Rich, A. (2005). Think tanks, public policy and the politics of expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Rudd, P., & Davies, D. (2000). Evaluating school self-evaluation. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, from www.leeds.ac.uk/educo/documents/00001641.htm
  65. Sachs, J. (2008). Common wealth economics for a crowded planet. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  66. Schneewind, J. B. (1998/2005). The invention of autonomy a history of modern moral philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. New York: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  68. Sergiovanni, T. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership: Creating culture, community, and personal meaning in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey Bass & Co.Google Scholar
  69. Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbead leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  70. Spring, J. (2007). A new paradigm for global school systems education for a long and happy life. Mahwah/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  71. Stake, B. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  72. Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox. The art of political decision making (Rev. ed.). New York/London: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  73. Sugrue, C. (1999). Primary principals’ perspectives on whole-school evaluation. Irish Journal of Education, xxx, 39–76.Google Scholar
  74. Sugrue, C. (2006). A critical appraisal of the impact of international agencies on educational reforms and teachers’ lives and work: The case of Ireland? European Educational Research Journal, 5(3 & 4), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sugrue, C. (2008). The plate tectonics of educational change in Ireland: Consequences for research quality, policy and practice? In C. Sugrue (Ed.), The future of educational change: International perspectives (pp. 35–47). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Sugrue, C. (2011). Autonomy and accountability. In H. O’ Sullivan & J. West-Burnham (Eds.), Leading and managing schools (pp. 59–74). London/Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Verhoest, K., Peters, B. G., Bouckaert, G., & Verschuere, B. (2004). The study of organisational autonomy: A conceptual review. Public Administration and Development, 24, 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ciaran Sugrue
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity College DublinBelfield, DublinIreland

Personalised recommendations