The School Administrator

The Evolution of Instructional Leadership

“…Instructional leadership emerged in the USA during the 1950s as a ' practice-based prescription' rather than a theory-driven construct (Bridges 1967;Erickson 1967;Lipham 1981). During the middle years of the 20th century, practical wisdom shared by principals, school superintendents, teachers and parents in the United States conveyed the 'truism' that 'good schools have good principals' (e.g., Grobman and Hynes 1956;Gross and Herriott 1965;Lipham 1964Lipham , 1981Miller 1960;Tyack and Hansot 1982;Uhls 1962).…”

“…Consequently, during the 1960s and 1970s this practical wisdom was unable to offer reliable guidance for policymakers, educators of leaders, or school leaders (Bridges 1967(Bridges , 1982Erickson 1967Erickson , 1979. Nonetheless, perusal of the professional and scholarly literatures of this era suggests that support for the importance of principal leadership continued unabated in the USA Bridges 1982;Erickson 1979;Gross and Herriot 1965;Gross and Trask 1976).…”

Developing the PIMRS Instrument

“…First, as suggested earlier, the author's conceptualization of instructional leadership had been heavily influenced by research conducted on instructionally effective schools (e.g., Bossert et al 1982;Bridge et al 1979;Brookover et al , 1982Brookover and Lezotte 1977;Edmonds 1979Edmonds , 1982Purkey and Smith 1983). This perspective on instructional leadership was further filtered through contemporary analyses of principal roles (e.g., Barth 1980;Barth and Deal 1982;Bridges 1967Bridges , 1977Bridges , 1982Casey 1980;Cohen and Miller 1980;Cotton and Savard 1980a, b;Crowson et al 1981;Erickson 1967Erickson , 1979Getzels et al 1968;Glasman and Binianimov 1981;Hemphill et al 1965;Lipham 1981Lipham , 1964March 1978;Martin and Willower 1981;Peterson 1977Peterson /1978Willis 1980). Finally, the author also referred to the broader literature on organizational leadership of the period (e.g., Meyer and Rowan 1977;Weick 1976Weick , 1982.…”

Exploring features of highly productive research contexts in Asia: a comparison of knowledge production in educational leadership in Israel and Hong Kong

“…C. Cheng, 2010;Hallinger, 2011Hallinger, , 2013Matthews & Hu, 2007;Menahem, 2008). For example, reviews of research in educational administration conducted in the USA during the 1970s and 1980s concluded that scholars in departments of educational administration were consistently failing to conduct research capable of impacting either theory or practice (Boyan, 1968(Boyan, , 1981Bridges, 1982;Campbell, 1979;Erickson, 1967;Griffiths, 1979;Haller, 1979). This implied a need for improving modal approaches to research training, modifying institutional support structures, and nurturing norms of productive research cultures (Boyan, 1968(Boyan, , 1981Bridges, 1982;Campbell, 1979;Carter, 1968;Donmoyer et al, 1995;Griffiths, 1979Griffiths, , 1988Kiley, 1973;Moore, 1974;Ogawa et al, 2000).…”

“…Relevant barriers included an overly diffuse set of topical foci (e.g., Bridges, 1982;Campbell, 1979;Carter, 1968;Eidel & Kitchel, 1968;Erickson, 1967;Leithwood, Begley, & Cousins, 1990;Ogawa et al, 2000), a persisting reliance on "weak tools" for conducting research (Boyan, 1968(Boyan, , 1981Bridges, 1982;Erickson, 1967;Haller, 1979), and a lack of sustained programmatic efforts (Barbaresi, 1973;Boyan, 1968;Bridges, 1982;Campbell, 1979;Erickson, 1979;Leithwood, Begley, & Cousins, 1990;Murphy et al, 1983). Critics further asserted that most departments of educational administration charged with training future researchers were located in "marginally equipped institutions" (Boyan, 1968, p. 33) that lacked the capacity to provide high quality research training and supervision (Bridges, 1982;Campbell, 1979;Haller, 1979).…”