MANAGING A SCHOOL EFFECTIVELY
Changing role of the school principal
The techno century’s Leadership
- From Principals to CEO (Chief Education Officer)
The techno century’s principalship - From Principals to CEO (Chief Education Officer)
The role of the principal is multi-faceted. The techno century’s principalship in its epitomized role is about ensuring the relevance of aims, content, practices, and outcomes of formal education to digital generation. In accepting this coveted role, individual and organisational capability will be imperative, as will the development of individuals and communities to create and ‘walk’ the new paradigms. Modern school leadership also includes networking. School leaders will have to work together and share, rather than compete in their augmented roles. It will be essential that principals can not only advocate, but also implement, a win-win style of leadership, so that all give their absolute best. Principals must be involved in the design of curriculum and instruction. Principals must also take an active role in assessing the teaching that occurs in the school and, where needed, provide opportunity for teachers to improve their standards. Principals need to be able to lead in a less authoritarian style. They will need to develop within their schools a profound sense of social interest. Thus, if a principal is collegial, with a shared vision, yet still able to make the hard decisions, students and teachers will succeed and schools will become places of learning for all.
The techno century’s principalship –
From Principals to CEO (Chief Education Officer)
‘You can accomplish anything in life, provided that you do not mind who gets the credit.’ -Harry S. Truman
The role of school principal has always been very unambiguous to everybody- the principal and also to teachers, students and parents of the school. Writing in Creating the Future School, Beare concluded an uplifting chapter, about those who will head the school of the future, with these words: ‘This terrain is not for the immature, the shallow, the unworthy, the unformed, or the uninformed, and society needs to be very careful about what people it commissions for this task’.(Beare, 2001). The principal is appointed by management to lead the school and to be eventually liable for everything that takes place at the school. When things go well, the principal receives the plaudits and basks in the reflected glory of the achievements. When the school’s reputation is high, the principal is given the credit. The other side of that coin, of course, is that, when the school is doing badly, the principal is in the front line of criticism. It is expected by teachers, students and parents that school principals will be visible at all times at several places at once, that they will personally deal with every serious situation that arises as well as many that are much less serious, that they will know by name most of the students and their parents, attend all school sports matches, activities and functions, and that they will be the public faces of their schools with the rest of the world. Principals used to try to do all need to be done in school by themselves - and usually (with a few noble exceptions) failed, generally losing their sense of priorities along the way. Things have gotten tougher in today’s scenario. The techno century’s educational scenario possesses the following characteristics: • Students’ identities and providences are fluid;
• Schools are culturally heterogeneous;
• Education is proposed to be lifelong, formal and informal; • Education is gradually getting unimpeded by time and place; • Roles are imprecise and overlapping;
• Schools and teachers are embedded in multifaceted, interconnected networks; and, • Education is even more user-centric.
What type of leadership style will be the most suitable for this techno century? For techno century’s educational...
References: Fullan, Michael (2003). The Moral Imperative of School Leadership, Corwen Press.
Collins, Jim (2001). Good to Great, New York: Harper Collins.
Hargreaves, David H, (2003). Education Epidemic: Transforming secondary schools through innovation networks, Demos.
Beare, Hedley (2001), Creating the Future School. London: Falmer Press.
Barth, R., 2001. Learning by Heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Beare, H. (2001). Creating the Future School. London: Routledge, Falmer.
Cullen, J. (1999). ‘Socially Constructed Learning: A Commentary on the Concept of the Learning Organisation’ . In The Learning Organization 6, no. 1, pp. 45-52.
Duignan, P. and Marks, W. (2003). From Competencies to Capabilities; Developing Shared Leadership in Schools.
Duignan, P. and Spry, G. (2004). Developing a leadership framework and leadership capabilities for techno century Schools
Heifetz, R. A., and Laurie, D. L. (1997). ‘The work of leadership’. In H arvard Business Review, 75 (1), 124-134.
Lakomski, G. (1995). ‘Leading and Learning: From Transformational Leadership to Organisational Learning’. In Leading and Managing 1(3), 211-225.
Limerick, D., Cunnington, B., and Crowther, F. (1998). Managing the New Organisation: Collaboration and Sustainability in the Post-Corporate World (2nd ed.). Sydney: Business and Professional Publishing.
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning: Reconceiving roles for planning, plans, planners. Free Press: New York and Toronto.
Senge P. (1997). ‘Communities of Leaders and Learners’ . In Harvard Business Review, September-October.
Stephenson, J. (1992). ‘Capability and quality in higher education’, in Stephenson, J and Weil, S. (eds)
Quality in Learning: A capability approach in higher education, London: Kogan Page (Chapter 1).
Please join StudyMode to read the full document