Exploring Indigenous education leadership research in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand

Abstract

PurposeThis literature systematically reviews articles published in “core” international journals on the topic of Indigenous education leadership over the period from 2000 to 2018 in four English-speaking countries, covering Canada, America, Australia and New Zealand, in which all of them have long colonial history and Indigenous population. These reviews provide insights into the nature of this emergent literature and generate many implications that required for further research in Indigenous education leadership.Design/methodology/approachIn this study, a vote counting method was employed and a clearly delimited body of research on Indigenous education leadership was also identified. The vote counting method can enlarge the perspectives on the noticeable heterogeneity of Indigenous education leadership within the four English-speaking countries. This is the basic constitutive element for the development of a comparative literature in Indigenous education leadership. Moreover, this method can clearly calculate the annual number of articles about Indigenous education leadership, and the various methods used in the publications of Indigenous education leadership can be figured out as well, which helps to find out the different patterns of changes on Indigenous education leadership.FindingsThis study identifies the patterns of Indigenous educational leadership research across four English-speaking countries, which will contribute to the development of research in this regard.Originality/valueThis is one of the first studies about Indigenous educational leadership in the world. It will not only contribute to education practice but also leadership theory development.

The importance of the school principals' role in the digital transformation of the education sector

“…Also, their intent to integrate DT is not influenced by their school principal leadership qualities. Consistent to Fan and Liu (2020), it can be inferred that having a principal with leadership experience does not guarantee a school is more or less likely to have high DT integration. Studies suggest that educational policies should consider the connection between encouraging experience principals, who have gained extensive expertise through years of teaching to participate in training programs on DT (Ruloff and Petko, 2021).…”

“…Secondly is to specify the elements of the framework required for converting a traditional school into a digital school; to provide schools with additional recommendations for overcoming specific obstacles that hinder the attainment of digitalization goals. Digital leaders are required to possess a clearly articulated and transparent plan, together with a comprehensive understanding of the distinctive attributes and requirements of their educational institution (Fan and Liu, 2020). High-level goals correspond positively with digital change.…”

Policies of STEM Education from the Perspective of International Comparison

“…STEM education emerged in the United States, and its development can be roughly divided into three stages: STS-STEM-STEAM [1] . In 1986, the report "Undergraduate Science, Mathematics and Engineering Education" issued by the United States was a milestone in its development of STEM education.…”