Leadership and Management Development in Education (Education ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT133programmes remain (for example, Bjork and Murphy 2005; Brundrett 2001).Only 15 per cent of universities providing preparation programmes aremembers of the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA),suggesting that quality remains uneven.Certification or ad hoc learning?The growing international interest in leadership development has promptedsome countries to introduce formal leadership qualifications. These are sometimesmandatory for those seeking appointments as principals. The merit ofcertification is that recruitment bodies may have a degree of confidence thatthe candidate has achieved at least threshold competence as an aspiring schoolleader. As noted earlier, this is too important to be left to chance.France provides a clear example of the connection between training andselection. The Ministry of Education is solely responsible for the qualificationprocess, which is administered by the Centre Condorcet in Paris. Qualificationprogrammes are the responsibility of 28 academies throughout France, whichmust adhere to the prescribed legal guidelines. Following successful completionof this training, candidates are appointed as deputy school leaders for a twoyeartrial period, during which further training is required. Certification isclosely integrated with the appointments process and successful candidates areguaranteed an appointment (Huber and Meuret 2004).England will be moving closer to this approach in 2009 when the NPQHbecomes mandatory for first-time heads. The ‘new model’ design shows that itshould be seen as preparation for headship and not as a general professionaldevelopment programme (www.ncsl.org.uk/npqh). As NPQH will provide theonly route to headship, it can be seen as a state licensing process (Gunter, inpress). The NCSL also provides the Early Headship Provision, incorporating‘New Visions’. Unlike the French model, this induction provision is not mandatorybut the NCSL exhorts new heads to take the programme in strong terms;EHP ‘is intended to be an official and formal recognition of the achievement ofbecoming a headteacher … while participation is not compulsory, we believeNew Visions gives headteachers the invaluable opportunity to reflect on theirlearning’ (www.ncsl.org.uk/ehp). While this induction programme is not certificated,there is a clear intent to link the NPQH with selection and thesubsequent induction programme.As we noted earlier, new principals and assistant principals in Canada andmost of the USA require a master’s degree in educational administration beforethey can be considered for appointment. This requirement is well establishedbut has become tighter since the introduction of the ISLLC (see above),described by Brundrett (2001: 234) as ‘a centralising dictum’. The USA differs
134LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT IN EDUCATIONfrom England and France by retaining a central role for universities. This is alsoevident in Singapore where the LEP is delivered by the National Institute ofEducation in partnership with the Ministry of Education (Chong et al. 2003).The Scottish Qualification for Headship (SQH) is also provided by universities,which must meet the requirements of the Standard for Headship in Scotland(SHS) (Reeves et al. 2001).The South African ACE programme has been designed by a national body,the National Management and Leadership Committee (NMLC), which is ledby the Department of Education and includes representatives of the 12universities involved in delivering the pilot programme or expected toparticipate in subsequent phases of the programme. The evaluation findingswill influence whether this is to become a mandatory national certificate foraspiring principals.In most small island states, there are no such formal requirements, althoughpotential principals in the Seychelles are expected to obtain the MA qualificationoffered in conjunction with the University of Warwick (Barallon, in preparation;Bush 2005). Bezzina (2002: 11) states that, in Malta, ‘all prospectiveprincipals need to be in possession of a diploma in educational administrationand management or its equivalent’, a requirement introduced in 1994.Despite their evident diversity, all these systems require candidates to acquireappropriate certification before practising as principals. This contrasts withthose nations where there is a broad variety of development programmes availablethrough a range of providers. Such arrangements exist in Denmark, theNetherlands and New Zealand, where ‘it is not always easy for the potential participantto understand the quality of the programs that are available on themarket’ (Huber 2004c: 18). A more fundamental criticism is that certain countriesare apparently content to allow their schools to be led and managed bypeople who may or may not be qualified, may or may not have undertaken anyspecialised preparation, and may or may not be suitable for the onerous responsibilitiesimplicit in the principalship role. The continuing prevalence of such‘ad hoc’ approaches suggests that many countries still underestimate the significanceof leadership preparation for successful schooling. Certification is anessential component of any serious approach to leadership development,although this does not have to be ‘nationalised’ to be effective.School-based or on-campus provision?Traditional professional development programmes tend to be based on thecampus of the host organisation, often a university department of education.Participants travel to the campus for set-piece lectures or seminars, and for individualtutorials with university staff. In most countries, attendance is part-time
Page 2 and 3:
LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENTDEVELOPMEN
Page 4 and 5:
Leadership andManagement Developmen
Page 6 and 7:
ContentsNotes on the authorSeries E
Page 10 and 11:
Series Editor’s ForewordThis seri
Page 12 and 13:
PrefaceThe significance of effectiv
Page 14:
PREFACExiiiChapter 7 shifts the deb
Page 21 and 22:
6LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPM
Page 23 and 24:
8LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPM
Page 25 and 26:
10LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOP
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 40 and 41:
3The significance of leadership and
Page 42 and 43:
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEADERSHIP AND
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
4The curriculum for leadershipdevel
Page 50 and 51:
THE CURRICULUM FOR LEADERSHIP DEVEL
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 88 and 89:
6The National College for SchoolLea
Page 90 and 91:
THE NATIONAL COLLEGE FOR SCHOOL LEA
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99: THE NATIONAL COLLEGE FOR SCHOOL LEA
Page 100 and 101: THE NATIONAL COLLEGE FOR SCHOOL LEA
Page 102: THE NATIONAL COLLEGE FOR SCHOOL LEA
Page 105 and 106: 90LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOP
Page 115 and 116: 100LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DEVELO
Page 140 and 141: 9The future of leadershipdevelopmen
Page 142 and 143: THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMEN
Page 152: THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMEN
show all

Leadership and Management Development in Education (Education ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?