Educational leadership preparation and practice typically concentrate on managerial exigencies at the neglect of definitive functions of the institution of schooling. Educational leadership, however, is truly “educational” when its processes focus on fostering student learning of a worthwhile curriculum and when these processes are themselves educative. This article aims to inform current efforts to reform educational leadership preparation by drawing from historic sources and sources outside the conventional educational administration literature and by highlighting the neglect of the curriculum imperative in such recent efforts. Recent attention to the educational dimension of school leadership by the educational leadership community should be pursued further through collaboration among academic specializations and advocacy by professional organizations in the field of education.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AikinW. M. (1942). The story of the 8-year study.New York: Harper & Row.
2.
BerryB., & GinsbergR. (1990). Effective schools, teachers, and principals: Today's evidence, tomorrow's prospects. In MitchellB., & CunninghamL. L. (Eds.), Educational leadership and changing contexts of families, communities, and schools (pp. 155–183). 89th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BlaseJ., & BlaseJ. R. (1994). Empowering teachers: What successful principals do.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
4.
BonserF. G. (1920). Implications for elementary education from experiments in democratizing industry. Teachers College Record, 21(1), 108–116.
5.
BowersD. G. (1977). Systems of organization.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
6.
BoyerE. L. (1983). High school.New York: Harper & Row.
7.
BrewerD. J. (1993). Principals and student outcomes: Evidence from U.S. high schools. Economics of Education Review, 12(4), 281–292.
8.
BurnsJ. M. (1978). Leadership.New York: Harper & Row.
9.
CallahanR. E., & ButtonH. W. (1964). Historical change of the role of the man in the organization: 1865–1950. In GriffithsD. E. (Ed.), Behavioral science and educational administration (pp. 73–92). 63rd yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
DeweyJ. (1966/1916). Democracy and education.New York: Free Press.
11.
DeweyJ. (1986/1933). Why have progressive schools? In BoydstonJ. A. (Ed.), John Dewey: The latter works, 1925–1953 (Vol. 9, pp. 147–157). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
12.
DeweyJ. (1990/1900). The school and society/The child and the curriculum.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
DeweyJ. (1991/1935). Toward administrative statesmanship. In BoydstonJ. A. (Ed.), John Dewey: The latter works, 1925–1953 (Vol. 11, pp. 345–347). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
14.
DeweyJ. (1991/1937). Democracy and educational administration. In BoydstonJ. A. (Ed.), John Dewey: The latter works, 1925–1953 (Vol. 11, pp. 217–225). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
15.
EbertsR. W., & StoneJ. A. (1988). Student achievement in public schools: Do principals make a difference?Economics of Education Review, 7(3), 291–299.
16.
GibboneyR. A. (1987, April 15). Education of administrators: “An American tragedy.”Education Week, 28.
17.
GilesH. H., McCutchenS. P., & ZechielA. N. (1942). Exploring the curriculum.New York: Harper.
18.
GoldringE. B., & SullivanA. V. (1996). Beyond the boundaries: Principals, parents, and communities shaping the school. In LeithwoodK., ChapmanJ., CorsonD., HallingerP., & HartA. (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 195–222). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
19.
GoodladJ. I. (Ed.) (1987). The ecology of school renewal. 86th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
GuthrieJ. W., and SandersT. (2001, January 7). Who will lead the public schools?New York Times Education Life, 46–47.
21.
HallingerP., & HeckR. H. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness: 1980–1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157–191.
22.
HopkinsL. T. (1941). Interaction: The democratic process.Boston: D. C. Heath.
23.
HoyW. K. (1994). Foundations of educational administration: Traditional and emerging perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(2), 178–198.
24.
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium. (1996). Standards for school leaders.Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
25.
MarksH. M., & LouisK. S. (1997). Does teacher empowerment affect the classroom? The implications of teacher empowerment for instructional practice and student academic performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 245–275.
26.
McCarthyM. (1999). The evolution of educational leadership preparation programs. In MurphyJ., & LouisK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 119–139). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27.
MitchellB., & CunninghamL. L. (Eds.) (1990). Educational leadership and changing contexts of families, communities, and schools. 89th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
MulkeenT. A., Cambron-McCabeN. H., & AndersonB. J. (Eds.) (1994). Democratic leadership: The changing context of administrative preparation.Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
29.
MurphyJ. (1990). Preparing school administrators for the twenty-first century: The reform agenda. In MitchellB., & CunninghamL. L. (Eds.), Educational leadership and changing contexts of families, communities, and schools (pp. 232–251). 89th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
MurphyJ. (Ed.) (1993). Preparing tomorrow's school leaders: Alternative designs.University Park, PA: UCEA.
31.
MurphyJ. (Ed.) (2002). The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century. 101st yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2002). Instructions to implement standards for advanced programs in educational leadership.Arlington, VA: Author.
33.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (1995). NCATE program standards: Advanced programs in educational leadership for principals, superintendents, curriculum directors, and supervisors.Washington, DC: Author.
34.
OlsonL. (2000, January 12). Policy focus converges on leadership. Education Week, 1, 16, 17.
35.
PajakE. (1993). Change and continuity in supervision leadership. In CaweltiG. (Ed.), Challenges and achievements in American education (pp. 158–186). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
36.
SnyderJ., BolinF., & ZumwaltK. (1992). Curriculum implementation. In JacksonP. W. (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402–435). New York: Macmillan.
37.
TannerL. (Ed.) (1988). Critical issues in curriculum. 87th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38.
TannerL. (1997). Dewey's laboratory school: Lessons for today.New York: Teachers College Press.
39.
TylerR. W. (1939, July 17). Training administrative officers for democratic leadership. Paper presented at the eighth annual Conference of Administrative Officers of Public and Private Schools. Ralph W. Tyler Papers, box 23, folder 11, Department of Special Collections, University of Chicago.
40.
TylerR. W., SchubertW., & SchubertL. L. (1986). A dialogue with Ralph Tyler. Journal of Thought, 21(1), 91–118.
41.
van der GriftW., & HoutveenA. A. M. (1999). Educational leadership and pupil achievement in primary education. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(4), 373–389.
42.
WillsG. (1994). Certain trumpets.New York: Simon & Schuster.
43.
WragaW. G. (1999). The educational and political implications of curriculum alignment and standards-based reform. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15(1), 4–25.
