Educating school leaders: engaging in diverse orientations to leadership practice

Abstract

As school leadership has increased in complexity, policy makers, educationalists, and researchers have realized that principalship requires preparation. However, several researchers have called for a better understanding of how school leadership education affects the learning and activities of principals. This empirical study explores how novice principals in Sweden understand and engage in principal training and investigates their formation of identity in the interaction between school leader education and professional practice. Observations, individual interviews, and focus group interviews revealed three learner identities and a corresponding typology. In addition, this study found that professional identity enables or restricts the way practice is experienced because principals engage in diverse leadership practices. These findings are discussed in relation to former research on learner identities, leadership learning, and novice principals. This study concludes that it is crucial not only to emphasize a program design but also focus on the participants in leadership education, especially their orientations and understandings of education and practice.

School Leader Education as a Driving Force for Professional Development in Terms of Orientation, Reflection, Exploration, and Interplay

“…Liljenberg and Wrethander (2020) show that participants in the SNPTP find the program's long-term focus on internship-related examining tasks challenging, but they gradually take on and learn from the tasks. Jerdborg (2022aJerdborg ( , 2021 found out that participants in the SNPTP adopt one of three separate learning identities in the educational context, each affecting both how they perceive the program and how they approach their practice. Skott and Törnsén (2018) as well as Ärlestig (2012) shared that participants' previous experiences seem to affect their learning in the program.…”

“…Accordingly, school leaders who have participated in high quality training programs, are argued to become better prepared, more consistent in how they exercise their leadership and get better at leading school development (e.g., Darling-Hammond et al, 2010). However, school leaders are found to experience, understand, and make use of the program content pertaining to such trainings rather differently in their professional practice (Darling-Hammond et al, 2010;Huber, 2013;Jerdborg, 2022a;McCulla and Degenhardt, 2016). This entails exploring the very issues for dissimilar participants as individuals.…”

The Intersection of Preparation and Practice: School Leadership Learning Through Simulation

“…However, principals are also tasked with student management, human resources, communication, planning, scheduling, coaching, and a broad range of other responsibilities that take time away from reflective practice. Drake (2020) and Jerdborg (2020) have suggested that educational leaders committed to growing in their practice collectively engage in critical and theoretical reflection within their current context and to extend their prior understandings. Yet, research has revealed that school leaders spend the least amount of their time on professional growth (Camburn et al, 2010;May et al, 2012).…”

“…While professional development may evoke visions of traditional learning frameworks through workshops, conferences, or courses, Drake's (2020) and Jerdborg's (2020) research highlight a critical point for school leaders as they move forward in their careers-seeking opportunities to connect critical and theoretical reflection within their current situations to extend schemata (i.e., their mental blueprints to guide future thinking and behavior). The NASSP-LPI national survey data (Levin et al, 2020) indicates that principals are leaving the field due to a lack of responsive professional development, establishing that current practices are not sufficient.…”

“…The in-basket exercise emerged in the business community in the 1950s, developed from the work of Fredericksen and Hemphill (Meyer, 1970). The basket contained scenarios with “everyday problems both expected and unexpected, requiring decisions and action” (Storey & Cox, 2015).…”