Educational leaders in a globalising world: a new set of priorities?

Abstract

This paper argues that a globalising world is now the context within which educational leaders need to frame their work, and that there are a number of forces occurring at the global level which profoundly affect nation state education policies, and which then result in significant tensions in the work of educational leaders. It is therefore argued that an understanding of the global nature of policy issues, and of their impact upon educational work, needs to be incorporated into a reconception of roles and responsibilities. This paper suggests a number of meanings of 'globalisation', and looks at the tensions and paradoxes these create, as well as the changes to professional values they induce. It concludes by suggesting a number of requirements for educational leaders to take forward if educational professionals are to continue to have relevance in the twenty-first century.

Evaluating the impact of teacher professional development: an evidence-based framework

“…These factors acknowledge that change is contextual and influenced by a myriad of factors which can result in change impacting in different ways. Teaching and learning are contextual, and ensuring that PD processes take cognisance of individual professional identities, dispositions, roles and the setting in which teachers work is important to ensure improved outcomes for pupils (Prosser and Trigwell 1999;Hodkinson and Hodkinson, 2005;Bottery, 2006). In this way this framework represents a more complex and nuanced approach to understanding PD and its impact and may be more reflective of the complexity of the social world (Coldwell and Simkins, 2011).…”

“…Therefore the section, Organisation support was replaced with Systemic Factors to account for these significant additional features that may better represent the complex relationships between teachers, PD and outcomes. This is reflective of arguments posited by some who argue that PD is contextual and subjective (Prosser and Trigwell, 1999;Bottery, 2006) and it reflects an underlying ontological position that the reality of the social world is complex and constructed by the participants who engage within it. Understanding the subjective world of human experience may help enhance the impact of PD.…”

Same but different: head teachers′ perceptions of leadership in Kenya and Sweden

“…tional leadership included, has won considerable support since the mid-1960s (Crozier 1964;Harrison and Huntington 2000) but it has also been questioned (Bottery 2006; are consistent with the assumption that leadership is culturally endorsed. So does the comprehensive GLOBE study (House, Wright and Aditya 1997) with data from more than 60 countries in different geopolitical regions.…”

Rethinking international education through the concept of capabilities

“…Inquiries into the opportunities and achievements of international education graduates 45 Yang, 2003. 46 Bottery, 2006. 47 Teichler, 2004;Egron-Polak, 2012;Brandenburgh and de Wit, 2012;Nahas, 2012;Hudson, 2012;Knight, 2014;de Wit and Jooste, 2014;Altbach, 2014. that question whether their actions reflect their own values of how they want to live their lives, may contribute to nuanced understanding about international education, and allow it to be a tool for reflection and tolerance of differences.…”

“…45 If we attend to it as humanising processes, then we can prepare students to be critical and democratic to address local and global issues with confidence and voice, and shape sustainable development and international collaboration in a highly interdependent world. As Bottery (2006) argued, international education should involve developing human flourishment and forging of communities together for ethical development.…”