Leadership at a local level – Enhancing educational development

Abstract

This paper explores, mainly through a socio-cultural perspective, the role of mid-level leadership in higher education in relation to educational development. It is argued that supporting and engaging local-level leaders, such as academic programme directors, increases the potential for development of local teaching and learning cultures. The paper describes a programme in a research-intensive university, where leaders conduct scholarly projects focused on contextualised educational development and leadership. Projects are reported in writing and peer-reviewed within the programme. In this article 25 project reports are analysed through a framework focusing on the relational and contextual aspects of leadership. Four projects are specifically elaborated to illustrate important aspects of leadership that become visible through the analysis. These aspects relate to external and internal mandates to lead, i.e. the potential actions available to leaders when navigating the need to build and maintain legitimacy in the formal organisation as well as in the group/s that they as leaders try to influence.

Pedagogical Leadership Aspects of Latvian Vocational Education Institutions’ Leaders

“…In the modern awareness the leader of a vocational education institution has to comply with such a pedagogical leader as a facilitator, inspirator, broad-minded communicator, risk-taker; they have to comply with such pedagogical leadership characterizing qualities as insightfulness, integrity, enthusiasm, truthfulness and positive thinking (Butt, 2017). The recent studies (Fernandez Gonzalez & Seņkāne, 2015;Mårtensson & Roxå, 2016;Jäppinen & Ciussi, 2016;Çoğaltay & Karadağ, 2016;Smith, Kelly, & Allard, 2017) estimate that quality and effectiveness of education can be attributed to the educational leadership.…”

The 3M National Teaching Fellowship: A High Impact Community of Practice in Higher Education

“…Such leaders, termed "local-level leaders," serve as mediators between local programmatic and/or departmental needs and broader institutional mandates, while also acting as individuals that other teachers can talk to and take advice from in matters concerning teaching. Mårtensson and Roxå (2015) also consider the related concept of significant networks, which gives rise to the idea that educational leadership can be facilitated by the formation of communities of practice (Wenger, 1998). Such networks allow individuals with shared goals and values to come together to work towards a common cause-the fellowship, for example, shares an ethos to advance of teaching and learning in higher education.…”

“…Given that change can occur on a trajectory from small to large scale, Hannah and Lester's (2009) micro-meso-macro framework is particularly useful to examine the impact of educational programs as it considers the different levels at which impact can occur. Adapting this framework to impact analysis of teaching and learning initiatives, scholars such as Mårtensson and Roxå (2015) define micro as impact occurring at the individual level, meso at the departmental level, and macro at the institutional level. Simmons (2016) also adds a fourth level, mega, which refers to impact at the provincial and national levels.…”

“…The fellowship also provides an opportunity for fellows to serve as educational leaders both within and outside of their institutions. The fellows profiled in various program artefacts and interviewed in this study are examples of the type of local-level leaders described by Mårtensson and Roxå (2015). As a result of their award, fellows are often asked to inform important initiatives related to teaching and learning and to serve in senior leadership positions that promote teaching and learning at the institutional level.…”

From Perception to Practice

“…nstitutions have their own complex and unique culture around teaching which consists of embedded patterns, behaviours, shared values, beliefs, ideologies (Cox et al, 2011;Kustra et al, 2014), and micro-cultures that exist within and between departments and faculties, students and staff (Mårtensson & Roxå, 2016). Institutional culture is continuously evolving in response to new generations, subject areas and pedagogical innovations.…”