Leadership and Management in Education - Literature review Example

Literature Review Section: Leadership, Management and Middle Management Introduction One of the most essential determinants of school performance in a rapidly evolving global education context is leadership. Research into leadership in the educational setting has demonstrated that leadership is one of the main factors in high performing schools and that effective leadership plays a pivotal role in securing high quality provision and high standards in schools. Researchers and practitioners have demonstrated the connectivity between leadership and key processes, activities and goals of schools such as teaching and learning as well as the critical importance of leadership in driving continuous and evolving change in the global education context. Over the last few decades, there has been a renewed drive to improve school leadership in both policy and practice in many countries based on the recognition of the centrality of leadership to school improvement and quality schools. An important aspect of this drive is the adoption of a broader approach to the concept of leadership. This broader approach entails recognition of leadership as a distributed phenomenon in schools and its emergence and importance at teacher and middle management levels (Spilanne 2005; Dimmock 2011). This approach is progressively incremental to the traditional conception of leadership in education as centered on senior management and principals. The recognition of leadership as a distributed phenomenon in schools in both policy and practice has been characterized by the emergence of a body of literature that focuses on the role of middle leaders or middle managers. This literature has identified the emergence of middle management, their evolving roles in education management and their increasing importance in the realization of education outcomes and school performance. Middle management has been described as a label to position teachers with a subject, department and or pastoral responsibility within an educational organization (Gunter 2001; 106). Middle management in schools occupies a position in the leadership hierarchy between senior management and teachers. Middle leaders or managers is a term commonly used to refer to teachers who perform formal leadership roles that have both managerial and pedagogical responsibilities within the school but are not part of the school’s senior management (Busher et al 2007, Southworth 2004). Middle leadership focuses on the formal leadership positions related to middle management and subject leadership, rather than on the broad capabilities of teachers to lead within the school organisation (Heng & Marsh 2009). This may encompass roles such as subject heads, academic level heads, curriculum coordinators or heads of department (Hammersely-Fletcher & Kirkham, 2007). This section of the literature review will seek to provide insight into middle management from educational leadership and management literature. The review will first explore leadership and management in education and attempt to situate middle management as an emerging field within the broader concept of distributed leadership. It will explore the various conceptions and definitions of middle management as depicted in the literature, explain what middle management is and who middle managers are, outline the distinction between middle managers and teachers and the roles middle managers are expected to play in schools. Leadership and Management There are several overlapping areas of leadership and management which blur the distinction between the functions and activities of leaders and managers in schools. From the literature on leadership in education, leadership has been defined as the process of influencing others actions to achieve desirable ends (Sharma 2005) or giving direction to the work of others, helping them to see what is desired in a particular setting and how these goals can be achieved (Bennett 1995). The connotations implied by the use of the word leader include vision, direction and inspiration (Early & Weindling 2004). Leadership is usually seen as involving the longer term and more strategic aspects of an organization (Earley & Weindling 2004; Burton & Brundrett 2005). Leaders develop and communicate norms, expectations and values to their colleagues and provide stability in a changing environment. They are expected to shape norms which underpin the day to day actions of people who work in the organization. Some of the specific activities expected or associated with leadership in education include; creating a vision for and defining the mission of the school, setting long term objectives for the school, budgetary control, encouraging and enabling staff to act as leaders in their own right, enhancing learning through the development of new concepts of pedagogy and working with parents and the wider community to create a sense of ownership and shared views (Burton & Brundrett 2005). On the other hand, managers can be defined as people who can use available resources to accomplish a task or reach a target (Fleming & Amesbury 2013; 2). In the broader sense, the use of the word manager suggests concepts of the maintenance and implementation of policies devised by others. While leadership is usually seen as involving the longer term and more strategic, management id perceived as more transactional in nature. Management in the education context refers to the routine maintenance of operations or the efficient and effective maintenance of current organizational arrangements. The term “management” is commonly used in Britain, the rest of Europe and Africa while “administration” is preferred in the United States, Canada and Australia (Sharma 2009). In the school setting, management or managerial activities include writing reports and other documents, chairing meetings, monitoring budgets, undertaking performance management reviews, observing teaching, timetabling or curriculum discussions and holding parent meetings (Burton & Brundrett 2005). Although leadership and managerial roles as defined in the literature are distinct and qualitatively different, they are fundamentally interconnected. For instance, the process of creating a vision and mission would be pointless if this was not communicated to all parties. Managerial activities such as monitoring the budget and supervising teaching also feed back into and shape leadership activities such as budget setting or the development of new concepts of pedagogy (Burton & Brundrett 2005). Schools require both leadership and management to be effective. Research has shown that schools can only achieve high performance if all staff are working together and taking on appropriate leadership functions and activities at their level in the organization (Earley & Weindling 2004; Burton & Brundrett 2005). Middle Management Conceptually, middle management has been defined as the coordination of an organizational unit’s day to day activities within the activities of vertically related groups (Floyd & Woolridge 1992). Middle managers have for a long time been recognized as crucial to an organization’s success. While schools are not different from other organizations in this respect, it is only comparatively recently that the importance of middle management in schools has attracted the attention of policymakers and education researchers. Middle managers have been described as the ‘linking pins’ which coordinate top and operational-level activities in an organization. In the education and leadership context, they have been depicted as constituting a layer of management between the senior management team and those “at the chalk face” or teachers (Fleming 2013; 2). Middle managers have also been referred to using other synonymous terms such as “kingpins” or the “boiler room” with middle management being referred to as the “engine room” or the “hub” of the school (Earley & Weindling 2004). These analogous descriptions refer to the important role played by middle managers in straddling policy at the level of strategy or decision making and practice at the implementation level. Research has reinforced the notion that middle managers are the driving force behind an organization and the key to improvements in performance. Effective staff management requires staff at all levels to be involved in decision making and formulation (Busher & Harris 2013) In the school setting, middle managers are uniquely placed to have a major impact on the performance of the school through their roles in improving the quality of teaching and learning (Bennett 2005). Their proximity to classrooms and students as compared to senior management is as essential factor in enabling them to influence school performance. This is based on the rationale that educational leaders need to get as close as is possible to the core business of teaching and learning to increase the likelihood of them having a more positive impact on student’s outcomes (Busher & Harris 2013). Research into school performance has shown that management and leadership at departmental level could account for differences in school success among children who were comparable in terms of background and success at an earlier time (Earley & Weindling 2004). In schools, middle managers include but are not limited to roles such as subject leaders, department or faculty heads, pastoral heads, curriculum coordinators, Key Stage managers; special education needs coordinators or heads of ICT, literacy or numeracy (Earley & Weindling 2004). The structure and roles of middle management in primary schools varies according to the size of the school and its philosophy (Bubb & Hoare 2013). The importance of middle management is underscored by the description of the role of subject leader, a middle manager, by the Teacher Training Agency (TTA) in 1998. The TTA described the subject leader’s role as that of providing leadership and direction for the subject and ensuring that it is managed and organized to meet the aim and objectives of the subject. In addition, the TTA outlines that while headteachers and governors as senior management carry the overall responsibility for school improvement, a subject leader has the responsibility for securing high standards of teaching and learning in their subject as well as playing a major role in the development of school policy and practice (Earley & Weindling 2004). Roles of Middle Managers Middle management plays a vital role in planning for schools to realize their goals and objectives as organizations and in ensuring the smooth day to day running of the school’s business. While most of the work of middle managers is by necessity pedagogical, a vast majority of middle management roles involve managing people. Fleming & Amesbury (2013) identify four major components of middle management which outline the main roles middle managers are expected to play in the school; leadership, being a good practitioner, management and administration duties. Middle managers should provide leadership by having a clear vision of the importance of the area of responsibility and the ability to enthuse others with this vision. Middle managers should also be good practitioners by being clear about what constitutes good practice and through acquisition of specialist knowledge, being able to use it. With regards to their management role, middle leaders should be effective managers of people and resources by being able to plan motivate and encourage good practice, challenging bad practice, solving problems and seeing tasks through. As administrators, middle managers should also be able to put in place procedures to secure efficiency. Middle managers also have a role to play in policy formulation. Similar to other organizations, middle managers in schools are important not just in policy and strategy implementation but also in the formulation of new strategies. Floyd and Woolridge (1992) outline four strategic roles played by middle managers; championing innovative initiatives, facilitating adaptability to new behaviour, synthesizing information and implementing strategy. Middle manager’s involvement in strategy formulation makes them ideally placed to motivate and drive school policy implementation as the dischargers of institutions (Bennett 1995). Distinction between Middle Managers and Teachers While it has been argued that all teachers are managers in essence due to the complex and demanding managerial tasks they perform on a day to day basis in schools, middle managers are distinct from classroom teachers. Some of the managerial tasks usually performed by teachers in schools include; lesson planning, delivery and assessment, managing pupil’s learning and behaviour in the classroom and managing their own time and resources in teaching curriculum subjects and preparing learning materials and equipment (Fleming & Amesbury 2013; 2). However, middle managers are seen as those individuals who have additional responsibilities to those of the classroom teacher. The roles of middle managers necessitate an integration of pedagogical and managerial or administrative tasks within the school. The roles of middle managers are likely to consist of a combination of managerial, administrative and pedagogical activities such as planning, organizing, resourcing, control and oversight, monitoring and evaluation, empowerment as well as leading. Teachers who become middle managers are expected to be both subject and curriculum experts and leaders in their fields as well as administrative leaders in linking their teachers with whole school goals policies (Dimmock 2011). The Emergence of Middle Management The emergence of middle management can be traced back to the imperatives of change in the global education system. The shift from the term leadership to management is symbolic of changes in the way in which schools are organized globally. Historically, leadership of educational institutions was usually vested in one person- the headteacher (Burton & Brundrett 2005). As an illustration, prior to the Education Act of 1998, Headteachers of primary schools in the UK were the key figures in schools as they played the all-important role of both coordinating and managing the school. Their roles and responsibilities included financial control, alongside governors, over comparatively small sums of money used to purchase teaching materials. However, during the period when education institutions in the UK and globally were gradually transitioning to autonomous units from being regulated by local education authorities, it became increasingly evident that the demands of leadership and management were too much to be vested in one person (Sexton 2003). The Education Reform Act 1998 substantially increased the managerial and administrative burden on school leadership. The Act required all schools to have devolved budget responsibility through a Local Management of Schools (LMS). The Act also required schools to introduce a national curriculum alongside statements of practice for various subject areas. Subsequent acts would impose additional burdens on headteachers including performance information, inspection and vocational training. The prevalent approach to leadership at the time implied that these additional managerial tasks would be absorbed primarily by the headteachers (Sexton). However, earlier empirical studies on the implementation of LMS revealed greater pressure placed on headteachers to absorb the additional managerial and administrative burdens, especially in small schools. The effectiveness of the coping mechanisms deployed by headteachers subsequently determined the success or failure of the school (Laughlin et al 1994). This was an indication that the growing number of activities and initiatives occurring in schools at any one time necessitated devolution of leadership responsibilities (Burton & Brundrett 2005). The emergence of middle management can also be attributed to the additional dimensions of issues and initiatives which require management and leadership but span across strict subject boundaries such as literacy, gifted and talented children, physical education and staff development. Critical emerging areas such as coordinating physical education in primary schools needed middle managers with the relevant specialized knowledge and experience as well as a degree of autonomy to manage effectively (Raymond 2005). Most importantly, middle management emerged to fill a crucial role in curriculum change in schools. Curriculum change is a process which requires innovation and ultimately depends on individual teachers working in individual classrooms. Furthermore, change is not a sequence but a sequence and series of parallel activities occurring simultaneously in a variety of settings and circumstances. While it is leaders or senior management who shape the way in which activities related to change are put into practice in schools, it is not feasible for them to hope to follow through on all the different activities involved once these decisions move into action (Benett 1995). Leaders need assistants who can transmit the vision through the school as an organization, articulate it in practical terms and work closely with their colleagues to develop the vision into reality. Middle management was borne out of the need to create normative linkages which allowed teachers involved in change to share and develop common expectations about the ideals behind innovation and the appropriate behaviour towards their achievement (Bennett 1995). The emergence of middle management can therefore be attributed to the imperatives of organizational change in education systems and the adoption of a distributed view of leadership in education policy and practice. As compared to the traditional conception of leadership as the preserve of senior management, leadership is not perceived as a permeable process distributed throughout the school or as an empowering process enabling others to exercise leadership (Burton & Brundrett 2005). Effective Middle Management The literature on middle management identifies several attributes of effective middle managers. As identified by Fleming and Amesbury (2013), effective middle managers should: have a clear vision of the importance of the area of responsibility and the ability to enthuse others with this vision; be good practitioners through acquisition of specialist knowledge and being able to use it; be effective managers of people and resources; be able to put in place procedures to secure efficiency. One of the foremost attributes of effective or successful middle management from the literature is balance. The main challenge facing middle managers is establishing a balance between their leadership and management roles. In practice, being an effective middle manager involves leading, managing and serving. Successful middle managers have been identified as those who are aware of the need to combine leadership, management and administration in the right proportions. In practice, this implies providing vision and direction while at the same time ensuring the implementation and monitoring of predetermined policies and procedures. Closely related to balance is flexibility. Good middle managers are not trapped in rigid strait-jackets but are flexible and adaptable in the application of their management and leadership skills. Flexibility enables middle managers to be effective in anticipating and responding effectively to change (Fleming & Amesbury 2013). Knowledge has also been identified as another attribute of effective middle management. Effective middle managers are sensitive to the need to develop their respective leadership, management and administration skills. Successful middle managers often develop specialist knowledge relating to their roles which enables them to discharge their duties effectively. As an illustration, a teacher who has never had experience in physical education would be ill equipped to assume the responsibilities of a physical education coordinator (Raymond 2005). They must be clear about the management and communication structures in operation in their school and be familiar with all school policies (Fleming & Amesbury 2013; Burton & Brundrett 2005). They should also identify their roles in terms of tasks, responsibilities and be able to build and sustain both internal and external relationships. This is important since in the course of their work, they would come into contact with many outside agencies and are expected to liaise with a variety of officials. In the UK, this typically includes; Ofsted inspectors, education welfare officers, educational psychologists, members of the police force and SATs assessment personnel (Fleming & Amesbury 2013). Middle managers should also be effective communicators to be able to manage both internal and external relationships. As mentioned, middle managers are expected to come into contact with many outside agencies and a variety of officials. In addition, a substantial part of a middle manager’s role includes explain the rationale of the school’s plans and policies to the class teachers which is instrumental in securing their understanding and agreement (Dimmock 2011). This is only possible with good interpersonal communication skills. Honesty and good judgment are also other identified attributes of effective middle managers in the literature. Successful middle managers are honest about their individual weaknesses and often compensate for them by drawing on the strengths of others in the team. The art of middle management also concerns judgement, being able to assess a situation and make the right decision as well as a knack of combining management strategies in just the right proportions to achieve desired outcomes (Fleming & Amesbury 2013). Next sections: Middle Management in Primary schools: features and challenges (1500 words) Nature of Leadership and Management in English and Saudi Arabian education systems (1500 words) Comparison of middle management roles in British and Saudi education system (3000) References Bennett, N. 1995, Managing Professional Teachers: Middle Management in Primary and Secondary Schools, London: SAGE. Bubb, S. & Hoare, P. 2013, Educational Management: Major Themes in Education, New York: Routledge. Burton, N. & Brundrett, M. 2005, Leading the Curriculum in the Primary School, London: SAGE. Busher, H & Harris, A. 2013, ‘Leadership of school subject areas: tensions and dimensions in managing in the middle,’ in Tomlinson, H. (Ed) Educational Management: Major Themes in Education. New York: Routledge. Busher, H.L, Hammersley-Fletcher & Turner, C. 2007, ‘Making sense of middle leadership: Community, power and practice,’ School Leadership and Management, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp 405–422. Busher, H.L., Hammersley-Fletcher & Turner, C. 2007, ‘Making sense of middle leadership: Community, power and practice,’ School Leadership and Management, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp 405–422. Cladingbowl, M. 2013 “The key role of middle leaders-an Ofsted perspective”, Teaching Leaders Quarterly, November, pp 5-7. Retrieved on March 3, 2014 from Dimmock, C. 2011, Leadership, Capacity Building and School Improvement: Concepts, Themes and Impact, New York: Routledge. Earley, P. & Weindling, D. 2004, Understanding School Leadership, London: Sage. Fleming, P. & Amesbury, M. 2013, The Art of Middle Management: A Guide to Effective Subject, Year and Team Leadership, New York: Routledge. Floyd, S.W., & Wooldridge, B. 1992, ‘Middle management involvement in strategy and its association with strategic type: A research note,’ Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 153-167. Gunter, H. 2001, Leaders and Leadership in Education, London: Paul Chapman. Hammersley-Fletcher, L & Kirkham, G 2007, ‘Middle leadership in primary school communities of practice: distribution or deception’, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 27, No.5, pp 423-435. Heng, M.A. & Marsh, C.J. 2009, ‘Understanding middle leaders: a closer look at middle leadership in primary schools in Singapore’, Educational Studies, Vol. 35, No.5, pp. 525-536. Laughlin, R., Broadbent, J., Shearn, D. & Willig-Atherton, H. 1994. ‘Absorbing LMS: The Coping Mechanism of a Small Group", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.59 – 85. Raymond, C. 2005, Coordinating Physical Education Across the Primary School, New York: Routledge. Sexton, D. 2003, ‘How Headteachers cope with LMS,' Journal of Finance and Management in Public Services, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp.49-61. Sharma, S.L. 2009, Educational Management: A Unified Approach of Education, New Delhi: Global India Publications. Southworth, G. 2004, Primary School Leadership in Context: Leading Small, Medium, and Large Sized Schools, London: Routledge . Spillane, J.P. 2005, ‘Distributed leadership’, Educational Forum, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 143–50. Read More