Educational Leadership for School

Development as Shared and Distributed

Critical-Constructive Activity - Towards new Collaborations between Policymaking,

Governance, Practice and Research in Finland

Michael Uljens Professor

Unit of General Education and Educational Leadership

Åbo Akademi University. Vaasa, Finland

Mail: michael.uljens@abo.fi

http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/muljens/default.htm

Webinar on Distributed Leadership, 15.10.2013

The European Policy Network on School Leadership (EPNoSL)

1

15.10.2013 Åbo

Akademi

a) Critical-constructive educational

leadership theory (Fichte, Schleiermacher, Hegel, Mead, Dewey)

Society/culture

School

1. A relative freedom is guaranteed for the school, ultimately for student.

2. School prepares for the existing world – but in a problematizing fashion.

3. Democratic ideal – prepares for individual’s participation in societal change.

4. Educational intervention accepted – ”Man becomes man only among men”

5. The question of good life – an open question.

6. Human freedom assumed – provocation (intervention) to self-activity.

The problem of leadership theory ”distributed” over

two topics: a) How is the relation between school and society

defined?

b) How is the relation within school, i.e. Leadership-Teaching-Studying-Learning

process defined? LTSL Process.

15.10.2013

“Educational leadership” distributed over different levels/forms/vocations of

practice a) Teacher “leads students’ studying (learning)”

- First order educational leadership

b) Principal - “leads teachers’ teaching” – leads professional teachers

- Second order educational leadership

c) Superintendent “leading leaders’ leadership” – mediates between politics, administration and schools

- Third order educational leadership

d) National - politics, laws & budget & curriculum & organization/system e) Transnational – EU, also OECD, World Bank, WTO, UN, etc.

”Mediation as connecting” - creating a shared

understanding (vision):

Educational leadership as a multi-professional,

critical-interpretative, hermeneutic mediational practice

between epistemic fields (1-6) and values

Ethics

-Justice &

care

Politics

2.Culture

Educational leadership

and management

1.Pedagogics

5.Law 6.Economy 4.Organisation

3.Technology

Intention Act Reflection

Planning Action Evaluation

- Student

- Classroom

- School

- Municipality

- State

- Transnational

A. How do we cooperate, learn and lend horisontally?

B. What kind and degrees of freedom/influence exist between levels?

C. How do we cooperarte across levels and phases of work - diagonally?

Distributedness as pedagogical work as located

a) vertically, b) horisontally and c) ”diagonally”

over 1) interconnected professionalities as well as

complementary 2) societal and 3) organisational practices

School didaktik (Schuldidaktik) as point of departure Distributed leadership as working in culturally and historically developed

institutions and regulated by social technologies.

”School Didaktik” Leadership and teaching seen as an contentbased intentional,

interventional, interactional and institutional activity is framed by various forms of

planning, evaluation and development as a multi-professional and –institutional activity

system

Uljens, M. (1997). School didactics and Learning. Hove: Psychology Press.

Experiencing

Intention

& tradition

Activity

Reflection

B. Dialogue

C. Research

knowledge

and evaluation

data

Reflected experience

Subjective theories

Problemati-

zation and

approaching

To reflect other practices in relation to subjective experience

Problematizing Contributing

to theory and shared

experience

a. The Others experiential knowledge

b. Research, c. Evaluation data

A. Educational

leadership

practice

Distributedness as three types of “reflection on intentional action” (cf. D. Schön-tradition) How research based knowledge & policy based evaluation data may be related to professional self-

reflection and practical “school improvement & professional development” (Uljens, 1997):

Research and developmental work

Curriculum and government: centralised

Curriculum and ”governance”: decentralised

Eva

luation

an

d

assessm

en

t: local

Ev

alu

ati

on

an

d a

ss

es

sm

en

t:

inte

rna

l re

sp

on

sib

ilit

y Evalu

ation

and

assessm

en

t: e

xtern

al and

transn

ation

al 4. DISTRIBUTEDNESS AS: Reprofessionalisation: research-based & data informed school & professional development

3. Deprofessionalisation? outcomes- and evidencebased , effective schools

2. Teaching profession

and partly leadership

research based

(academisation)

1. Management by objectives and rules

Distributedness as historical development and future orientation: Educational Leadership Policy 1972-2012 in Finland

(Uljens & Nyman, 2013 and Uljens, et al. 2013)

(A)

(B)

-Social democratic

welfare state

- Social liberal

market state 19 89

GOVERNMENT

UNIVERSITY

POLITICS

DISTRIBUTEDNESS as new forms collaborations between

Universities, Schools, Administration and Policymaking

(USAP-cooperation)

Dilemma: How to balance between autonomy (relative independence) and collaboration, i.e. critical-constructive tasks?

SCHOOL

10

Experience- and

policybased

developmental

work

Research- and

evidence-

based

developmental

work

Basic

research

on scientific

grounds

Development-

oriented and

interventional research

1 2 3 4 5

New arenas

National authorities - Superintendent - Principal - Teachers

State Uni-

versity

Distrbituedness as combining:

Research based knowledge & policy based evaluation data made use of in “school improvement & professional development” as an intertwined

(interrelated) process:

1. New school law 2012, New national curriculum 2012-2014, Local

curricula 2014-2016. Very open and dialogical process.

2. Partnerships are being built upon a tradition of recognition of, and trust in,

teachers’ and principals’ professionality.

3. Policy ”implementation” making use of ”School Development Plan” -

Themes: leadership, teaching , learning, professional culture.

4. Towards professional development of teachers and principals combined

with research-based and data-informed school development – instead of

traditional continuing education.

5. New, networking, forms of collaborations emerge between

superindtendents, principals/schools, administration, and research.

6. Negotiative /communicative evaluation between curriculum input and learning outcomes.

Position 4: Finland Reprofessionalisation/recontextualisation of leadership:

research- and policybased evidence in school development

7. Top-Down oriented policy approach strengthening – but towards development

8. A new national evaluation institute under construction (to be establ. 1.1. 2014).

National Institute of Educational Research continues.

9. Policy borrowing more than obvious – ongoing dialogue between countries.

10.Participation in international evaluations continues (Pirls, Timms, Talis Pisa)

11.Data-informed pedagogical development, not data- or evidence-driven

12.NO public ranking of schools (cf. non-hierarchical view of policy and education)

13.School improvement rationality, rather than a control, inspection and

evaluation oriented rationality.

12

The Research Program on

Educational Leadership at Åbo Akademi

Contextual: Cultural-historical awareness, institutional

Distributed: hierarchically, horisontally

(non-hierarchical understanding on societal forms of practice)

Critical-constructive: Non-affirmative position and recognition

based

Interventional: School development, management & leadership

Multi-professional: The many professionalities cooperating

Multi-disciplinary: theory of teaching and learning, didaktik, public

administration/management, organisational theory, curriculum theory,

evaluation, educational, political and social philosophy

Multi-methodological:

Hermenutic-phenomenological, quantitative and interventional

15.10.2013

References

Moos, L., Johansson, O. & Skedsmo, G. (2013). Successful Nordic school leadership. In L. Moos (ed.) (2013). Transnational Influences on Values and Practices in Nordic

Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? Dordrecht: Springer.

Uljens, M. (1997). School didactics and learning. Hove: Psychology Press.

Uljens, M. (2007). Education and societal change in the global age. In: R. Jakku-Sihvonen & H. Niemi (Eds.), Education as a societal contributor (pp. 23-51). New York: Peter Lang.

http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/muljens/pdf/Education.pdf

Uljens, M. & Korhonen, J. (2012). On the paradox of lower performing Swedish speaking

schools in Finland – An educational leadership perspective, Paper presented at NERA 2012, Copenhagen.

Uljens, M. & Nyman, C. (2013). Educational Leadership in Finland or Building a Nation with Bildung.In: Moos, L. (ed.) (2013). Transnational Influences on Values and

Practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? Dordrecht: Springer.

Uljens, M., Möller, J. Ärlestig, H. & Fredriksen, L. F. (2013). The professionalization of Nordic school leadership. In L. Moos (ed.) (2013). Transnational influences on values

and practices in Nordic educational leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 133-148). Dordrecht: Springer.

Also:

http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/muljens/pdf/MichaelUljens_and_RolfSundqvist_Reformative_leadership_Finland_ECER_2013_Istanbul.pdf

14