The professoriate in the field of educational administration

Abstract

PurposeBased on a qualitative content analysis of 57 curricula vitae of authors who published their work in the major journals of the educational administration (EA) field, this paper seeks to display the career of EA authors and to suggest some epistemological implications for the field.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis is based on both quantitative and qualitative modes of inquiry, according to which the curricula vitae is seen as a document that is susceptible to textual analysis.FindingsEA authors receive their academic degrees in a host of disciplines from many countries and universities, usually work in the compulsory educational system, and hold many academic roles in their university. They teach courses, conduct research and publish works on a host of topics, three of which are very widespread: leadership, managerial processes, and organisational aspects.Originality/valueThe analysis acquaints the reader with some of many aspects of the professoriate in diverse countries, and helps probe the uncertainty and fragmented nature of the field of EA. It ends with scholarly implications for the recruitment of new field members.

Something borrowed, something blue: reflections on theory borrowing in educational administration research

“…For example, in some contexts, researchers from core disciplines, with no background in educational studies, have been appointed to leadership positions in educational departments and journals, which has naturally influenced the topics, norms and goals of these organizations. Oplatka's (2010b) analysis of 57 curricula vitae of authors who published their work in the leading journals in the research field of educational administration revealed that only 29.8% of them held BA degrees in education studies or educational administration, 52.5% of them held MA degrees, and 59.5% of them completed PhD degrees in these domains. Thus, many of those who operate and hold leadership positions in academic journals and training programs have no academic background specifically in education or educational administration, and it is not surprising that in some cases they lack the inclination to explore and promote the uniqueness of the field in their research work.…”