scholarly journals Board and superintendent perceptions of the Illinois professional standards for school leaders critical for superintendent success

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Rhea Rockwood
Author(s):  
Michelle D. Young

Standards are used in a variety of professional fields to identify core elements of practice within the field as well as to describe a desired level of performance. The first set of standards for the field of educational leadership in the United States was introduced in 1996 by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). Since then, they have become the de facto national standards for educational leaders. The ISLLC standards have been updated three times and were recently renamed Professional Standards for School Leaders (PSEL) under the authority of the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). Over this same period of time, multiple sets of sister standards (e.g., standards for leadership preparation) have emerged as have evaluation tools and practice resources. Soon after their release, a variety of concerns were raised about the standards and their potential impact on the practice of education leadership, particularly school level leadership. Some argued that the standards were too broad, while others argued that they were too specific. Similarly, concerns were raised about the focus of the standards and what was left out or only weakly included. These and other concerns continued to plague newer versions of the standards. Concerns notwithstanding, today, educational leadership standards are fully embedded in the lifeworld of the educational leadership profession. They have been adopted and adapted by states, districts, professional organizations, and accrediting bodies and used in a variety of ways, including: setting expectations for educational leadership preparation and practice, state certification, leadership recruitment, professional development and support, and evaluating leadership practice.


2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shujie Liu ◽  
Xianxuan Xu ◽  
Leslie Grant ◽  
James Strong ◽  
Zheng Fang

This article presents the results of an interpretive policy analysis of China’s Ministry of Education Standards (2013) for the professional practice of principals. In addition to revealing the evolution of the evaluation of principals in China and the processes by which this policy is formulated, a comparative analysis was conducted to compare it with the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Standards 2008 (ISLLC 2008). The analysis was conducted on the specific standards and indicators across the two documents. The results indicate the presence of both significant similarities and differences in performance expectations for principals: differences are explained by the cultural and national contexts within which school leaders work in both countries. In February 2013 the Ministry of Education in China issued for the first time the national Professional Standards for Compulsory Education School Principals, which provide the specific expectations of quality school leadership. The unprecedented interest in international benchmarking of student academic performance has led to the belief that there are common elements in education policy and school leadership practices. It is hoped that this research sheds new light onto the current thinking on the expectations and evaluation of principal leadership.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 142-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michalinos Zembylas

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute to recent work that interrogates the affective conditions in standardizing processes taking place in schools by asking: what are the relations between affect and biopower, when standardizing processes take place in schools, and how can we better understand the constitution of affective spaces and atmospheres that enable some transformative potentials while preventing others? Design/methodology/approach The main argument is that professional standards for teachers and school leaders create ambivalent (i.e. both positive and negative) affective spaces and atmospheres in schools that require one to look for the ways in which biopower works affectively through specific technologies. This ambivalence produces not only governable and self-managed teachers and school leaders who simply implement professional standards, but also affective spaces and atmospheres that might subvert the normalizing effects (and affects) of standards. Findings While attention has been directed to the involvement of affectivity in standardizing processes, what has been theorized less in the field of professional capital is the entanglement of affect and biopower in the spread of professional standards. Engaging with recent work surrounding the affective turn in the social sciences and humanities, the encounter between affect and biopower opens methodological, ethical and political possibilities to examine the affective impact of standards on the professional capital of teachers and school leaders. The analysis displaces emotions from their dominant positionality in discourses about professional standards, reinvigorating theoretical explorations of the affective spaces and atmospheres that co-constitute subjectivities, organizations, governance and social practices in standardizing processes. Originality/value The spatiotemporal and organizational arrangements of schools while undergoing standardizing processes constitute crucial constellations for ethical and political reproduction of affective relations. Thus, the destabilizing and inventive potentials of affects, spaces and atmospheres – to name a few conceptual resources – are extremely important in exposing the normalizing as well as resisting aspects of standardizing processes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-65
Author(s):  
Frederick Ashu ◽  
Richard Etongwe ◽  
Christopher Fuaty

Purpose: Effective leadership is about executing the organisation's vision (or redefining and improving it, in some cases), setting direction and the culture for that particular organization, developing people, engaging communities, and creating conditions for successful teaching and learning. But what does that leadership management and administration look like? The recently updated Cameroon Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (CPSEL) identify what an educational leader must develop the ability to Influence Others, Transparent to an Extent., Encourage Risk-Taking and Innovation, Value Ethics and Integrity, Balance Hard Truths with Optimism and do their job effectively in order to demonstrate and sustain effective leadership in today global society. Methodology: There are a number of essential understandings about the Standards that merit attention, since the Standards are based only on literature review and policy analysis evidence. The reality is that the Standards were never designed to be constructed using only literature and policy analysis findings. To be sure, a large portion of the Standards rest on the best available documental analysis of literature and policy documents governing educational leadership and administration. At the same time, the creation of the Standards was predicated on the conclusion that other empirical materials need to be employed in the building process of educational leadership; management and administration standards supporting educational leader’s development in Cameroon. Findings: The CPSEL maintain the same basic footprint of the original standards, emphasizing: Development and Implementation of a Shared Vision and  core values of sustainable leadership, Mission, vision and core values of sustainable leadership, Good Governance, Ethics and Professional knowledge and interpersonal skills, Equity and Cultural Responsiveness, Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment, Community Engagement, Recruitment and Selection, School Leaders, Teachers, Students and Community Development, Professional Learning Community for School Leaders and Teachers, Financial Management, Succession Planning, School Improvement for the Future. Elements and indicator examples for each of these standards are included to further define leadership. Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy (recommendation): The paper concludes with elements of all of the leadership standards are organised into inter-related categories with Professional Values and Personal Commitment at the heart of development. These standards emphasize equity, diversity, access, equal opportunity, and empowerment for students, educators, and all members of the educational community as they work together to ensure that all educational practitioners are ready for educational leadership career. CPSEL framework serves as a foundation for educational leader’s preparation, induction, professional learning, and evaluation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document