Abstract
In the realm of new localism and collaboration, local educational policymakers are called upon for responsible community leadership. Given the conceptual continuum between new localism and transformational leadership, this study examines the relationship between the leadership style of local educational policymakers and the involvement of local authorities in education. Data were obtained from 107 questionnaires submitted by mayors and directors of education affiliated with 100 local authorities in Israel. As predicted, there was a positive relationship between transformational leadership and the local authorities’ involvement in education, measured using four factors, but only for sound local authorities. We used five criteria to determine the soundness of the local authorities. In contrast, among less sound local authorities, there was an inverse relationship between transformational leadership and involvement in education. In general, in such communities, leaders seemed to prefer to leave educational issues to the central government. Thus, we present evidence for the boundaries of educational transformational leadership in the educational governance arena. Education-related policies are on the agenda of leaders even in weaker local authorities, but only to the extent that these policies can serve as an instrument to meet specific needs of the local community. All in all, there is no “one size fits all” for all aspects of new localism—i.e., central regulation towards local government, local policy, local leadership, and civic participation. Accordingly, policymakers, local leaders and residents must fit themselves to the blurred boundaries of new localism and collaborate towards better education. Implications of the findings are discussed.
Highlights
Koppich and Esch [1] asked “Who Shapes Teacher Policy?” They examined the shift of some educational decision-making authority from the states and the federal government to powerful extra-governmental actors—the business community and philanthropic foundations
We propose that in the era of local governance and new localism, municipal policymaking that features the investment of social capital in local education is as likely to bear fruit as investment in other types of infrastructure [35]
New localism is grounded in the idea that the smaller political framework of the local authority is better suited to the values that characterize the current approach to public policy, values that include transparency, equity, and civic initiative
Summary
Koppich and Esch [1] asked “Who Shapes Teacher Policy?” They examined the shift of some educational decision-making authority from the states and the federal government to powerful extra-governmental actors—the business community and philanthropic foundations. We take a different approach to this question by reexamining how responsibility for various aspects of public policy should be allocated between the central government and other organizations, including local authorities. This approach accords with similar trends in the areas of health and social welfare [2]. In contrast to the local government’s carrying out the mandates of the central government, one outcome of this twofold development has been the large-scale transfer of responsibility for public services to local authorities, mayors [4] The rationale for this change is that local leaders are best placed to understand the needs of their communities and to adjust services . We discovered that the adoption of a transformational leadership style promoted involvement in education in relatively sound local authorities, but deterred and reduced involvement in education in weaker ones
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
