Assignment #1: Participative Leadership in Education
Introduction
Participative leadership is a style of leadership that assumes
"the
decision-making process of the group ought to be the central focus for
leaders" (Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 1999). Two schools of
thought as
to why participative leadership is important are one, it will enhance
organizational effectiveness and, two, it supports democratic
principles
(Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 1999). Although we will not argue
that
this is the best form of leadership, it certainly has value and, we
believe,
it has a place in Ontario schools. It is a fitting form of leadership
for
carrying out site-based management (SBM) and having community
involvement,
both of which are focuses in Ontario.
There are compelling reasons to promote SBM and community input
and
involvement in schools. Daresh and Playko (1997) have found that many
researchers have indicated that part of having effective leadership is
involving the parents, staff, students and community in setting goals,
collaboration, and/or decision-making. It is argued that implementing
SBM
makes better use of teachers' knowledge, participants in the decision
making
will have more ownership and commitment to the decisions made, there
will be
"consumer satisfaction" in regards to the community, better outcomes,
and
more efficiency and effectiveness (Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach,
1999).
In the past few years in Ontario, community input and involvement
have been
at the forefront of school initiatives which have strengthened the
advisory
role of school councils (Government of Ontario Press Releases, 2000).
Community involvement has many benefits for the students, such as
improved
attitude and improved achievement (Cunningham & Cordeiro, 2000;
Henderson,
1982), improved attendance, behaviour, and homework completion
(Cunningham &
Cordeiro, 2000), students are more likely to continue on to postsecondary
education (Henderson, 1982), and there is an improved school climate
(Tangri
& Moles, 1987).
In this paper we will be summarizing and commenting mainly on two
articles
and touching on a third. The articles were chosen for their relevance
to
the topic of participative leadership and for their scholarly content.
Two
of the articles came from the Journal of Educational Administration,
which
is refereed. As well, all of the articles were well referenced.
Articles
The first article on the topic of participative leadership was
from the
Journal of Educational Administration entitled Ideal Decision-making
Styles
Indicated by Deputy Principals. The article focuses on the findings
that
workers have a greater preference to participate in some areas of the
decision-making process than others. It appears that workers'
inclination
to participate depends on that individual's ability and interest.
Workers
desire more participation in areas, which directly affect them rather
in the
more general areas.
Some researchers supported subordinates in decision-making
processes and
suggested that future school principals will have to work with staff,
as
well as other interested parties, in identifying needs and establishing
high
expectations if schools are to be effective. A group of government and
non-government education authority personnel suggested that one of the
major
characteristics of future school principals in the year 2000 would be
their
willingness to share the leadership role. One quote stated that the
old
style of one-man leadership doesn't work in this day and age and that
the
task of the principal is to unleash and channel the talent, which
exists in
the faculty. It was argued that it is also necessary that the general
community support the idea of workers' participation if it is going to
be
successful.
In this research 136 deputy principals employed by the Catholic
Education
Office of Western Australia were presented with 28 specific situations
covering the range of decisions to be made within schools. They ranked
each
situation by choosing from 5 selections on whether the decision should
be
made: solely principal's decision, principal gives advance warning
without
consultation, staff are consulted but principal makes decision,
decision is
made jointly by staff and principal, or decision made solely by staff.
Seven general decision areas were examined: school policy,
student
discipline, economic variables, teaching load, general policy, parental
involvement, and time allocation. It was found that there was a
variety of
decision-making procedures desired by respondents, depending on the
perceived importance of the decision to the person's job and the level
of
the skill an employee has to participate in the decision to be made.
It was
found that most employees wanted to contribute in all of the areas to
varying extents, except the economic ones, which had one-third of
respondents feeling that the principal should make the decision alone.
Although each decision area had several components which were
individually
rated, as general decision areas ranked from the most involvement in
decision making desired, to least involvement in decision making
desired,
the order was: Discipline, General Policy, Time Allocation, School
Policy,
Parental involvement, Teaching load, and then Economic.
The conclusion of the paper was that there is a need for school
management
to recognize that differences exist concerning the preferred decisionmaking
styles because of subordinates' perception about the impact of the
decisions
to their work life. People are more likely to accept and implement
decisions in which they have participated, particularly where these
decisions relate directly to the individual's own job. Without
acceptance
of staff decisions by management, problems can develop which could
seriously
reduce levels of performance. Employee's participation in certain work
issues is needed for individuals to gain experience and skills and have
an
interest to participate in the more difficult areas which follow.
This article brings up many valid points. Although the research
was based
in Australia I feel that the results would be similarly reflected in
Ontario. However, I think the study should also have considered
collecting
survey results from teachers, as the survey only reflected deputy
principals' views. These views may not have been representative of the
whole staff, particularly teachers.
It would have also been
interesting to
see if the principals shared similar views on which areas he thought
that
there should be involvement in decision making and which areas he or
she
should have more say. I think it is also important to note that the
conducted study in this article does not add supporting evidence that
involving staff in decision-making which relates to them and which they
have
related skills will have benefits for the staff, school and/or the
students.
It does, however, indicate that there are certain areas that staff
want to
have decision-making input into. This is important in showing that any
benefits that schools have through the implementation of more sitebased
management may have a correlation with the areas of decision-making
power
the staff has, not just a general input of staff into all matters.
In contemplating the organizational effectiveness of the
Participative
style of Leadership, the article Synthesis of Research on School-Based
Management (David, 1989), is a useful guide in defining school-based
management, while The Principalship in an Era of Transformation (Murphy
and
Hallinger, 1992), further analyzes Participative Leadership by
providing an
analysis of the principal's role in this theory of management. David's
article (1989), clearly defines this model of leadership as "empowering
school staff to improve education practice through fundamental change
(1989,
p.48), within the domains of budget, staffing, and curriculum.
However,
Murphy and Hallinger (1992), provide a deeper insight into
Participative
Leadership by providing a thorough analysis of the principal's role in
creating and sustaining this empowerment among the staff of an
educational
organization. This analysis is key in stimulating several questions for
reflection concerning the strengths and weaknesses of this management
style.
Murphy and Hallinger (1992), state that in achieving this school-wide
autonomy, the principal's responsibility will expand to include
internal
demands such as maintaining a "sound base of knowledge in curriculum
and
instruction", which involves staff development programmes, and
continual
training in the technology of education: "We contend that the
development
of principals' leadership capacities must be built on a foundation of
the
domain-specific knowledge that is critical to educational leadership in
schools, i.e. the teacher-learning process" (1992, p.85). The article
continues to explain that Participative Leadership also entails
external,
environmental leadership involving "building community support for the
educational programme of the school, justifying the school's decisions,
obtaining needed fiscal and human resources (including both staff and
students!)". This external responsibility of providing accountability
to the
community, is a new demand for principals, as traditional principals
were
not directly obligated to answer to these outside pressures. Murphy and
Hallinger (1992), proclaim that this increased accountability to the
community will "in future governing agencies and external
constituencies be
more demanding, numerous and knowledgeable" (1992, p.84).
Using David's (1989) definition of Participative Leadership in the form
of
school-based management, I found Murphy and Hallinger's perspective on
the
principal's role in this style of management, to be very thoughtprovoking.
It propelled me to consider the internal and external elements involved
in
attaining staff empowerment in an educational setting. Furthermore, it
made
clear to me that this style of leadership will not succeed without the
enthusiastic participation of all staff members, and that, as David
(1989)
points out, is very difficult to achieve.
Murphy and Hallinger (1992) also made me consider the power and
influence
of the governing bodies creating the educational policies to be
enforced
within each school organization. Although involving an entire faculty
and
community in educational decision-making is ideal in the participative
model
of leadership, the article points out that not all staff may be willing
to
set aside the time for this added responsibility. As an educator
teaching in
an elementary setting, I know that many of my colleagues would not
react
favourably at the suggestion of increased participation in decisionmaking
as they already feel loaded down just keeping up with the required
curriculum standards. Moreover, as stated, "establishing and nurturing
relationships with the larger environment will require more of the
principal's time " (Murphy and Hallinger, 1992), our current provincial
government including mandated policies and curriculum might pose as an
obstacle to principals striving to employ Participative Leadership
within
their respective organization. These are two elements which provide
grounds
for discussion concerning this leadership style.
Conclusion
Having reviewed and examined the works of Savory, Soutar & Dyson
(1992),
and using David's explanation of school-based management (David, 1989),
to
analyze Murphy and Hallinger's views (1992), on the principal's role in
attaining participative leadership, it can be said that participative
leadership is an ideal model on which to lead the stakeholders involved
in
an educational environment. Its benefits are widespread, as it serves
to
effectively empower all individuals working within a particular
organization; however, the operation of this leadership style places
increased internal and environmental challenges on each administrative
team
wishing to implement it into each respective educational organization.
Bibliography
Cunningham, W. G., & Cordeiro, P. A. (2000). Educational
Administration: A
problem based
approach. Boston; Toronto: Allyn & Bacon.
Daresh, J.C. Playko, M.A. (1997). Beginning the Principalship: A
Practical
Guide for New School
Leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
David, J.L., (1989) Synthesis of research on School-Based Management,
Educational Leadership, 46(8), 46-52.
Government of Ontario Press Releases. (2000). Ecker announces plan to
strengthen school councils.
Retrieved August 10, 2001, from
http://www.newswire.ca/government/ontario/english/
releases/June2000/30/c0269.html.
Henderson, A. T. (1988).Parents are a school's best friends. Phi Delta
Kappan, 70 (2), 148-53. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No.
EJ377529)
Leithwood, K.; Jantzi, D.; & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing
Leadership for
Changing Times.
Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Murphy, J. & Hallinger, P. (1992) The Principalship in an era of
transformation, Journal of Educational
Administration, 30(3), 77-88.
Savory, L.K., Soutar, G.N. & Dyson, J.D. (1992). Ideal decisionmaking
styles indicated by deputy
principals. Journal of Educational
Administration, 30 (2), 18-25.
Tangri, S. & Moles, O. (1987). Parents and the community. In V.
Richardson
- Koeler (Ed.), Educator's
handbook: A research perspective (pp. 1 82).
New York: Longman Press.
Internet Sites on the Topic of Participative Leadership
http://128.83.86.121/resourcecenter/0409/flanagan.pdf
Participative leadership presentation at an annual meeting, by Scott
Flannagan, Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid at Edgewood College.
http://cpe.njit.edu/dlnotes/HRM/HRM301/HRM301-20.pdf
A short presentation on leadership, touching briefly on participative
leadership.
http://accounting.rutgers.edu/raw/aaa/2001annual/sessions/ab323.pdf
"The Effect of Product and Process Complexity on Participative
Leadership
Style by B. Douglas Clinton and Hossein Nouri. An August 15, 2001
Forum
Paper
http://nsba.org/sbot/toolkit/LeadTeams.html
"Leadership Teams" - Presents information that promotes participative
leadership and has links to various aspects of leadership.
http://www.leadersdirect.com/decstyle.html
"Decision Making Styles" - Writes that participative leadership is not
possible because leadership involves one person persuading others to do
something they would not otherwise do. Also has links to other
leadership
topics.
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com