领导力是神话吗?一个“新浪潮”的关键领导为重点的研究议程重塑教育领导的景观

IF 2.7 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Linda Evans
{"title":"领导力是神话吗?一个“新浪潮”的关键领导为重点的研究议程重塑教育领导的景观","authors":"Linda Evans","doi":"10.1177/17411432211066274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intentionally provocative, this article identifies weaknesses in mainstream educational leadership scholarship, and draws upon ‘new wave’ critical leadership studies to propose a new, potentially paradigm-shifting, direction for the field. The central argument is that educational leadership researchers, in focusing predominantly on how institutional heads and other formal ‘leaders’ may best ‘do’ leadership, are addressing the wrong questions and setting off from the wrong departure point. The unit of analysis should shift, it is argued, from leadership to influence, within a new research agenda that replaces surface-level, causality-assumptive ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ questions that have shaped mainstream educational leadership research for over thirty years, with more fundamental ‘who? and ‘what?’ questions, aimed at identifying who is in fact doing the influencing. An aspect of such inquiry is leadership scepticism and agnosticism, which confronts the question: Does leadership exist, or is it a myth that we have reified? A highly original feature of the proposed new research agenda is the adoption of the author's theoretical notion of a singular unit of micro-level influence as an ‘epistemic object’ – a concept derived from STEMM research, denoting a vague and undefined potential focus of inquiry that may (or may not) turn out to be significant.","PeriodicalId":47885,"journal":{"name":"Educational Management Administration & Leadership","volume":"39 1","pages":"413 - 435"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is leadership a myth? A ‘new wave’ critical leadership-focused research agenda for recontouring the landscape of educational leadership\",\"authors\":\"Linda Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17411432211066274\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Intentionally provocative, this article identifies weaknesses in mainstream educational leadership scholarship, and draws upon ‘new wave’ critical leadership studies to propose a new, potentially paradigm-shifting, direction for the field. The central argument is that educational leadership researchers, in focusing predominantly on how institutional heads and other formal ‘leaders’ may best ‘do’ leadership, are addressing the wrong questions and setting off from the wrong departure point. The unit of analysis should shift, it is argued, from leadership to influence, within a new research agenda that replaces surface-level, causality-assumptive ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ questions that have shaped mainstream educational leadership research for over thirty years, with more fundamental ‘who? and ‘what?’ questions, aimed at identifying who is in fact doing the influencing. An aspect of such inquiry is leadership scepticism and agnosticism, which confronts the question: Does leadership exist, or is it a myth that we have reified? A highly original feature of the proposed new research agenda is the adoption of the author's theoretical notion of a singular unit of micro-level influence as an ‘epistemic object’ – a concept derived from STEMM research, denoting a vague and undefined potential focus of inquiry that may (or may not) turn out to be significant.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Management Administration & Leadership\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"413 - 435\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Management Administration & Leadership\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211066274\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Management Administration & Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211066274","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

这篇文章故意挑衅性地指出了主流教育领导力研究的弱点,并借鉴了“新浪潮”批判性领导力研究,为该领域提出了一个新的、潜在的范式转换方向。核心论点是,教育领导力研究人员主要关注机构负责人和其他正式“领导者”如何最好地“做”领导力,他们正在解决错误的问题,并从错误的出发点出发。有人认为,在新的研究议程中,分析单元应该从领导力转向影响力,以取代表面层面的、因果假设的“如何?”和“为什么?”的问题,这些问题已经影响了30多年来主流的教育领导力研究,而更基本的问题是“谁?”和“什么?的问题,旨在确定实际上是谁在施加影响。这种调查的一个方面是领导力怀疑主义和不可知论,它面临的问题是:领导力是存在的,还是我们已经具体化的神话?提出的新研究议程的一个高度原创的特点是采用了作者的理论概念,即微观层面影响的单一单位作为“认知对象”——这是一个源自STEMM研究的概念,表示一个模糊和未定义的潜在调查焦点,可能(也可能不)变得重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is leadership a myth? A ‘new wave’ critical leadership-focused research agenda for recontouring the landscape of educational leadership
Intentionally provocative, this article identifies weaknesses in mainstream educational leadership scholarship, and draws upon ‘new wave’ critical leadership studies to propose a new, potentially paradigm-shifting, direction for the field. The central argument is that educational leadership researchers, in focusing predominantly on how institutional heads and other formal ‘leaders’ may best ‘do’ leadership, are addressing the wrong questions and setting off from the wrong departure point. The unit of analysis should shift, it is argued, from leadership to influence, within a new research agenda that replaces surface-level, causality-assumptive ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ questions that have shaped mainstream educational leadership research for over thirty years, with more fundamental ‘who? and ‘what?’ questions, aimed at identifying who is in fact doing the influencing. An aspect of such inquiry is leadership scepticism and agnosticism, which confronts the question: Does leadership exist, or is it a myth that we have reified? A highly original feature of the proposed new research agenda is the adoption of the author's theoretical notion of a singular unit of micro-level influence as an ‘epistemic object’ – a concept derived from STEMM research, denoting a vague and undefined potential focus of inquiry that may (or may not) turn out to be significant.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Management Administration & Leadership
Educational Management Administration & Leadership EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
19.40%
发文量
63
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信