Educational leadership in a neo-liberal era: How leadership coaching psychology impacts principal leadership and well-being. A mixed methods study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The role of the school principal has become more complex in recent years with a myriad of new responsibilities emerging, requiring a more business/performance leadership style (Sugrue, 2014; Oplatka, 2017). Education is somewhat “under siege”, often from external economically driven forces (Deasy and Mannix-McNamara, 2017, p. 59), which have placed a strain on the role of school leaders (Sebastian et al., 2017). Education leaders are now working more akin to business managers, than leaders of teaching and learning (Machin, 2014). Neoliberalism and the drive for efficiency and performance have continued to exert influence over education (Ball, 2003; Machin, 2014; Stynes, 2014; Deasy and Mannix-McNamara, 2017). Across the business world, there have been numerous studies highlighting the benefits of leadership coaching as a means to improve both the performance and efficiency of leaders and their staff (Grant et al., 2009). In recent years, leadership coaching has made its way into the educational leadership landscape (Ogilvy and Ellam-Dyson, 2012; Gross, 2018). The recognition by the Department of Education and Skills (DES) in Ireland of leadership coaching as a means to enhance performance and support school principals, resulted in the setting up of the Centre for School Leadership (CSL) in 2015, offering leadership coaching as a free support to school principals. Looking at other jurisdictions, such as Scotland, Singapore, New Zealand and Canada, the DES sought to evaluate the success of coaching in these areas. Thus, coaching has emerged as a means to up-skill Irish principal leaders in how to deal with the new challenges of leadership, with a “more in-depth talented leader” required for today’s role (CSL, 2015, p. 1). As a new concept in Irish education, leadership coaching is relatively unknown. While coaching as a profession is still under question (Bonaiuto et al., 2008; Passmore & Fillery Travis, 2011), more research is required to assess its impact. With no research to draw on in the Irish context, or certainly very little, this research fills a gap in knowledge of the potential of leadership coaching in the Irish context.The key research questions of this research were: How does leadership coaching psychology impact on the role of school principal and also to what extent does it impact on a principal’s well-being? A pragmatic worldview framed the research with a behavioural framework (Bandura, 1978) guiding the study. A mixed method approach was used, with a quantitative survey followed by semi structured interviews. The findings provide many insights on the role of leadership coaching in education and many suggestions for its future development. In summary, the findings of this study suggest that leadership coaching does impact the role of educational leader/principal, facilitating a journey of reflective practice for leaders and those they manage. This in turn leads to a distribution of practice enabling distributed leadership, therein building leadership capacity. Furthermore, the research concludes that this process leads to enhanced well-being for both the principal/coach and the teacher/coachee. However, time, workload and creating a culture of coaching in schools is still a challenge, with leadership coaching still a new and unknown leadership concept for some.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».