Negotiating Incomplete Autonomy: Portraits from Three School Principals

Abstract

Purpose: This study builds on research scrutinizing school autonomy in policy and school governance by shifting the focus from a formal structural view of autonomy to examining how principals negotiate autonomy in their daily work. Drawing on multiple dimensions of autonomy and street-level bureaucracy, this study examined how principals, as both professionals and bureaucrats, work to expand and strategize their autonomy in practice. Research Methods/Approach: We used portraiture to document and interpret the experience and perspectives of three principals at urban, suburban, and rural PK-12 traditional public schools in the Midwest of US during the 2018–2019 school year. Findings: Principals faced a “bounded” or “partial” autonomy in which they had to constantly negotiate their individual autonomy (e.g., how they spent their time on any given day) with institutional autonomy (e.g., the demands of the role via external expectations). The findings show the ways participants utilized institutional autonomy to support individual autonomy and dealt with the boundaries of their autonomy. While these strategies gave them a bit more “control” over decision-making, they also often resulted in overwork and/or conflict with district priorities. Implications for Research and Practice: Detailed portraits offer key insights for rethinking school autonomy with multiple dimensions intersected in leadership practice. Findings yield knowledge regarding how to best support districts and school leaders in creating greater alignment between institutional and individual demands, thus increasing the likelihood that autonomy, as an improvement strategy, can be effective.

The paradox of leading amidst uncertainty: maintaining balance on an unstable beam

“…These scholars have shown how efforts to develop more democratic, expansive and equitable visions of schooling-whether by empowering historically excluded community members, disrupting institutionalized inequities, or moving towards more ambitious and culturally responsive teaching-typically involve generating uncertainty, at least in the short term. For example, meaningfully involving community members who have historically been left out of the decision-making process necessarily requires that leaders give up a certain amount of power and control, open themselves up to greater scrutiny and pushback from families and potentially resistant parts of the system and skillfully facilitate a decision-making process that now includes a greater multiplicity views and perspectives (Ishimaru, 2013;Khalifa et al, 2014;Kim and Weiner, 2022). Efforts to reduce racial disparities risk provoking a backlash from educators whose identities might be threatened, as well as by more privileged community members who risk losing advantages that have been actively hoarded or passively baked into the system (Lewis and Diamond, 2015;Diem and Welton, 2020;Irby, 2018;Irby et al, 2019;Turner, 2020).…”

Evaluation of Teacher Leadership in the Implementation of Independent Learning Curriculum in Secondary Education Units

“…But the fact is that the independent learning curriculum does not simultaneously follow this government policy, the Ministry of Education and Culture's Research and Technology policy which gives schools the right to implement the curriculum in stages (Ishak, 2021;Nurhayati, 2022;Pratikno et al, 2022). The independent learning curriculum is structured based on concepts, namely the theory of learning change, adjusting children's conditions in the field, preparing children's competencies, strengthening national characteristics, implementing rules, and strengthening autonomy (Amini & Ginting, 2020;Kim & Weiner, 2022). Implementation of the independent learning curriculum requires leadership in the hope that learning outcomes can be achieved.…”