School Leadership and Management in England: The Paradox of Simultaneous Centralisation and

Year 2016, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 1 - 23, 15.07.2016

Tony Bush

https://doi.org/10.30828/real/2016.1.1

Cited By: 15

Abstract

School Leadership and Management in England: The Paradox of Simultaneous Centralisation and Decentralisation

Abstract

Effective leadership and management are increasingly recognised as vital components of successful schooling. This paper examines how they are practiced in England, where there is a high degree of centralization, notably in respect of finance and staffing, but within a tightly constrained curriculum and inspection framework. The paper discusses leadership structures and processes in English schools, explains how principals are prepared for their leadership roles, and examines the evidence on the impact of leadership on school and student outcomes. It concludes that leadership will continue to play a significant part in school improvement.

Keywords

School leadership, England, Decentralisation, Leadership preparation, Leadership impact

References

• Avolio, B.J. (2005). Leadership Development in Balance: Made/Born, London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Barnett, B. and O’Mahony, G. (2008). Mentoring and coaching programs for the professional development of school leaders, in Lumby, J., Crow, G.And Pashiardis, P. (Eds.). Preparation and Development of School Leaders, New York, Routledge.
• Bolam, R. (1999). Educational administration, leadership and management: towards a research agenda’ in Bush et al (eds). Educational Management: Redefining Theory, Policy and Practice, London, Paul Chapman.
• Bolam, R. (2004). Reflections on the NCSL from a historical perspective, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 32 (3): 251-267.
• Bottery, M. (1998). Professionals and Policy, London, Cassell.
• Bush, T. (2004). The National College for School Leadership: Purpose, power and prospects, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 32 (3): 243-249.
• Bush, T. (2008). Leadership and Management Development in Education, London, Sage.
• Bush, T. (2010). Leadership development, in Bush, T., Bell, L. and Middlewood, D. (Eds.). The Principles of Educational Leadership and Management, London, Sage.
• Bush, T. (2011). Theories of Educational Leadership and Management: Fourth Edition, London, Sage.
• Bush, T. (2011a). Succession planning in England: New leaders and new forms of leadership, School Leadership and Management, 31 (3): 181-198
• Bush, T. and Coleman, M. (1995). Professional Development for Heads: The Role of Mentoring’, Journal of Educational Administration, 33 (5), 60-73.
• Bush, T. and Glover, D. (2012). Distributed leadership in action: Leading high performing leadership teams in English schools, School Leadership and Management, 32 (1): 21-36.
• Bush, T. and Glover, D. (2012a). Leadership development and learner outcomes: Evidence from South Africa, Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 27 (2): 3-15.
• Bush, T. and Jackson, D. (2002). Preparation for school leadership: International perspectives, Educational Management and Administration, 30(4): 417-429.
• Bush, T., Coleman, M. and Glover, D. (1993). Managing Autonomous Schools: The Grant-Maintained Experience, London, Paul Chapman.
• Bush, T., Glover, D. and Harris, A. (2007). Review of School Leadership Development, Nottingham, NCSL.
• Caldwell, B. (2008). Reconceptualising the self-managing school, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 36 (2): 235-252.
• Caldwell, B. and Spinks, J. (1992). Leading the Self-Managing School, London, Falmer Press.
• Crow, G. (2004). The National College for School Leadership: A North American perspective on opportunities and challenges, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 32 (3): 289-307.
• Fitzgerald, T. and Gunter, H. (2006).Teacher leadership? A new form of managerialism, New Zealand Journal of Educational Leadership, 21 (2): 44-57.
• Glatter, R. (2012). Persistent preoccupations: The rise and rise of school autonomy and accountability in England, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 40 (5): 559-575.
• Hallinger, P. (2003). Reshaping the Landscape of School Leadership Development: A Global Perspective, Lisse, Swets and Zeitlinger.
• Harris, A. (2013). Distributed leadership: Implications for leaders and leadership and future possibilities, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 41 (5): 000-000.
• Hartley, D. (2010). Paradigms: How far does research in distributed leadership ‘stretch’? Educational Management, Administration and Leadership,38 (3): 271-285.
• Heck, R. (2003). Examining the impact of professional preparation on beginning school administrators, in Hallinger, P. (Ed.), Reshaping the Landscape of School Leadership Development: A Global Perspective, Lisse, Swets and Zeitlinger.
• Higham, R. and Earley, P. (2013). School autonomy and government control: School leaders’ views on a changing policy landscape in England, Educational Management, Administration, Leadership, 41 (6): 701-717.
• Hobson, A. and Sharp, C. (2005). Head to head: a systematic review of the research evidence on mentoring new head teachers, School Leadership and Management, 25 (1): 25-42
• Leithwood, K. and Levin, B. (2004). Assessing School Leader and Leadership Programme Effects on Pupil Learning: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges, London, Department for Education and Skills.
• Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2006). Seven Strong Claims about Successful School Leadership, London, Department for Education and Skills.
• Levacic, R. (1995). Local Management of Schools: Analysis and Practice, Buckingham, Open University Press.
• Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2004).Effectiveness of Schooling and Educational Resource Management, Paris, OECD.
• Office for Standards in Education (2012). The Framework for School Inspection, London, Ofsted.
• Pocklington, K. and Weindling, D. (1996). Promoting reflection on headship through the mentoring mirror, Educational Management and Administration, 24 (2): 175-191
• Robinson, V. (2007). School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why, Winmalee, New South Wales, Australian Council of Leaders
• Robinson, V., Lloyd, C. and Rowe, K. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types, Educational Administration Quarterly, 44 (5): 635-674
• Robinson, V., Hohepa, M. and Lloyd, C. (2009). School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why, Auckland, New Zealand Ministry of Education
• Simkins, T. (2012). Understanding school leadership and management development in England: Retrospect and prospect, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 40 (5): 000-000.
• Simkins, T., Coldwell, M., Caillau, I., Finlayson , H., Morgan. A. (2006) Coaching as an in school leadership development strategy: experiences from Leading from the Middle, Journal of In-Service Education, 32 (3): 321-340
• School Management Task Force (1990). Developing School Management: The Way Forward, London, HMSO.
• Thomas, H. and Martin, J. (1996).Managing Resources for School Improvement, London, Routledge.
• Watson, L. (2003). Selecting and Developing Heads of Schools: 23 European Perspectives, Sheffield, European Forum on Educational Administration.