Forysta sem samstarfsverkefni: áhersla skólastjóra á valddreifingu og samstarf

Abstract

Í nútímakenningum um skólastjórnun er kastljósinu jafnan beint að sýn skólastjóra á hlutverk sitt og tengsl við samstarfsfólk. Þá er átt við að skólastjórar og kennarar starfi saman að því að þróa skólastarf og kennsluhætti. Markmiðið með slíkum starfsháttum er að stuðla að auknum gæðum í skólastarfi. Í þessari grein er athyglinni beint að þeim afbrigðum samstarfsforystu sem fengið hafa mikið rými í fræðilegri umræðu á 21. öldinni, þ.e. dreifðri forystu (e. distributed leadership) og kennaraforystu (e. teacher leadership). Gögnum var safnað með spurningakönnun sem send var til allra skólastjóra vorið 2017 og var svarhlutfallið 69%. Í niðurstöðum er dregin upp mynd af aðstæðum í skólunum og greint frá hversu miklum tíma skólastjórar telja sig verja til samstarfs við millistjórnendur, kennara og annað starfsfólk, hversu mikla áherslu þeir leggja á þátttöku millistjórnenda og kennara í ákvörðunum og virkja þá til forystu um þróun kennsluhátta. Í umræðunum um niðurstöðurnar er bent á mikilvægi þess að skólastjórar horfi gagnrýnið á hvert markmiðið með virkjun millistjórnenda og kennara er, þ.e. hvort það sé einkum til að létta vinnuálagi af skólastjórum eða til að dreifa forystu um þróun náms og kennslu. Þá þarf að greina hvort launamál, vinnuálag eða aðrir starfstengdir þættir valdi því að meirihluta skólastjóra veitist erfitt að virkja kennara til kennslufræðilegrar forystu í þágu skólastarfsins alls.

Current theories on school leadership focus on principals’ vision of their role and their relations with school personnel. More specifically, school leadership is now viewed as a collaborative effort between principals and teachers in providing leadership in the area of teaching and learning (Harris, 2008; Kaplan & Owings, 2015; Louis, Leithwood, Wahlstrom & Anderson, 2010; Robinson, 2011; Sergiovanni, 2009). The main objective of this emphasis on collaboration is to contribute to improved educational quality in schools (Hoy & Miskel, 2008; Sergiovanni, 2009; Woolfolk-Hoy & Hoy, 2009). This paper reports on a study of the leadership emphasis compulsory school principals in Iceland place on collaboration with middle leaders and teachers. The focus is on two forms of collaborative leadership, prominent in the 21st century, distributed leadership and teacher leadership.

The study was conducted in 2017. Data was gathered with an electronic questionnaire sent to all Icelandic compulsory school principals, 162 individuals, in the spring of 2017. The number of respondents was 111, making the response rate 69%. The questionnaire was designed and administered by means of the Qualtrics software system and data analysis was conducted using the SPSS and EXCEL programs. The principals were asked to estimate, on a five point Likert scale, the time they devote to working with middle leaders, teachers, and other school staff. They were also asked to estimate their emphasis on involving middle leaders in decision-making on significant issues in their schools. Furthermore, they were asked to estimate their emphasis on middle leaders and teachers providing leadership concerning the development of teaching and learning.

The following background information was used for analysing the data: background variables concerning the principals’ age, gender, education, experience as principal, experience as assistant principal; background variables concerning circumstances within the schools, such as their size (number of students), location (urban, rural), dominant teaching arrangements (classroom teaching, team teaching, combination of classroom and team teaching), number of students with severe learning difficulties, number of support staff. The analysis was based on the assumption that these variables would signify a difference in the working environment of the principals.

The findings show that principals claim to devote considerable time to collaborating with teachers (79%), middle leaders (59%) and other staff (48%). Moreover, the findings show that the principals claim they strongly emphasise the involvement of teachers (96%) and middle leaders (74%) in decision-making concerning significant issues in their schools. However, 25% of the principals considered this question concerning involvement of middle leaders in decision-making irrelevant because no formal middle leader position existed in their schools. The findings also show that the principals emphasise involvement of teachers (94%) and middle leaders (66%) in providing leadership in the area of teaching and learning. Again, a quarter (26%) of the principals considered the question concerning the leadership of middle leaders irrelevant because no formal leaders existed in their schools. Lastly, about two thirds (64%) of the principals claim it requires much effort to involve teachers in taking responsibilities in school activities outside their classrooms. The analysis of the data showed no significant differences relating to any of the questions concerning time for collaboration, involvement in decision-making, providing leadership or effort concerning involvement, based on the background variables listed above.

While the principals want middle leaders to lead the development of teaching and learning, it seems as if their tasks are more in the area of operational components to the detriment of pedagogical and instructional issues. Principals, therefore, need to ask themselves critical questions as to what is the objective of the role of middle leaders; that is, whether it is to decrease their own work load or to facilitate the development of teaching and learning. It is also important to analyse whether it is workload, salaries or other work-related issues that discourage teachers from contributing to the overall leadership of the schools.