Institute for Education Policy Research
BERA
Leading and Managing Schools and Colleges
SIG & BELMAS
25th May 2006
The Leading and Managing Schools and Colleges SIG organised a day conference co-funded by BERA, BELMAS (British Educational Leadership and Administration Society) and SCRELM (Standing Conference for Research on Educational Leadership and Management). The day, hosted by the SIG convenor Dr. Linda Hammersley-Fletcher at Staffordshire University took place on May 25th, 2006 with 40 delegates attending. The delegates represented a mixture of academics, teachers, local government and national educational bodies although titles and workplaces were not included on name badges with the explicit intent that people would need to find out about one another's experiences and interests. This mixed grouping provided a successful and productive range of experiences and expertise.
After a welcome by Linda Hammersley-Fletcher the day commenced with a key note presentation from Professor Mike Bottery (University of Hull - Chair of SCRELM) who had just returned from conducting research in Hong Kong. He presented a very interesting comparison between Hong Kong and English primary schools based on the themes of the day. Mike outlined not only the challenges of conducting cross-cultural research (albeit with a bilingual translator) but also recognised potential indicators of the impact of a global flattening of culture, the softening of difference through what appeared to be common state interventions in education policy and practice but also the heightened parental interest in a situation of falling rolls. Thus morality, power and leadership were considered both in terms of conducting the research and in terms of the findings from schools. What became obvious very quickly was the wealth of data that Mike had collected. Rather than the usual format of responding immediately to a speaker, groups went away to discuss the issues raised and bring questions back. This provoked some lively discussion and questions (these discussions proved an enjoyable part of the days proceedings). Issues were brought back to Mike who responded to them with aplomb. As chair of the session, Dr. Mark Brundrett commented upon Mike's ability to draw on his research without reference to notes and to recall the fine detail as well as the overarching principles as a mark of the educated mind of a researcher and a scholar.
Following lunch Professor Peter Earley (Institute of Education) introduced three short presentations the first of which by Adrian Gough (Deputy, School Improvement Division, Staffordshire Local Authority). Adrian's analysis of the re-development of the workforce presented a picture of a changing culture and concepts of leadership being tested. Some quantitative data from recent research found that of a sample of 850 headteachers, 85% saw value in extended schools and more than 80% were willing to support other schools. A number of tensions were recognised and were required to be realised in the future to move from: competition to collaboration; from a focus on standards to one on inclusion and inclusivity; from a quality control approach to quality assurance.
This was followed by Alan Sieber a Cheshire Headteacher now working as a consultant. Alan's secondary head's perspective on the change (or non-change in some cases) of headteachers' leadership styles took a steady walk through some of his own experiences and insights from his life and his research among recently-appointed headteachers. Among other facets, he recognised the complementarity of competences necessary for leadership; as Handy (1986) indicated, the job is too big for one person. He saw as beyond doubt that it was essential to commit to the whole person and to include within that the best that the individual can achieve in both results and personal development. In a modest way, he outlined the elements of social justice and of the moral courage and modelling of moral practice needed to change the community. The sign of success, he suggested, is "when our young people leave school determined that they will make a difference to the lives of others."
The next presenters, teaching assistants (TAs), had been invited to attend but, owing to identified reasons (such as: loss of earnings; not allowed by school managers, "not clever enough" for such an event), none attended; so much for a moral stance. A group of eleven female TAs on a foundation degree course at the host university had been asked about power and its location and relationship to leadership in the schools in which they worked. They had identified through their insights a range of powerful people in the school, including themselves. Even the moral direction of the schools had no clear leadership. The abuse of power did emerge but only since questions influence responses and concepts of power, leadership and morality of all members of the school community are not solely dependent upon the school experience. The deliberately hierarchical arrangement of these presentations also contained a message pertinent to the themes that was not lost on delegates perhaps made more poignant by the lack of teaching assistant representatives.
The final part of the day was a research gathering led by Dr. Chris James (University of Bath and Chair of BELMAS). All delegates were encouraged to attend this part of the day and feel that they were a useful part of on-going discussions about research potential. Chris leading those present towards the future of research arising from the day's engagement and debate, identified at least one question, "Do we need heads anyway?" The day had led the delegates to the conclusion that there were no clearly identifiable views as to the meaning of the terms which had been debated all day in the light of current research. This raised questions such as: Is there a need to examine more scrupulously the language we use in our research and writing? How many interpretations are there of decentralisation, delegation, distribution of leadership? Is there a clear recognition of the impact of the marketplace on leadership and leadership approaches? What and where are the power centres in a school and how are they exhibited and experienced? Is headship sustainable in a leadership culture? What do mean by "culture"? Can we afford to be moral? What is the place of executive headship? Through whose eyes and ears is leadership seen and heard and whose voices hold sway? A clear tension between competition and collaboration at the macro-, meso- and micro-level was deemed to be at the crux of future research of which there was clearly a need to enable the research community to assist in comprehending the phenomena that are morality, power and leadership.
Many thanks go to BERA, BELMAS and SCRELM for funding and taking part in this enjoyable event. Also thanks to Glynn Kirkham for the use of his notes from which I have plundered sections to help produce this report. Whilst taking a specifically school related perspective on this occasion Linda Hammersley-Fletcher is hoping that future events will build upon this successful day, extending this remit into other educational arenas. Potential host universities and organisers are being sought to continue this work over future years, those interested should contact Linda in the first instance at l.j.fletcher@staffs.ac.uk.
