Interdisciplinary Systems Leadership: A Case Study of the Global Food Systems Leadership Secondary Major Program.

Leadership learning through the lens of social class.

Who Eats, Where, What, and How? COVID-19, Food Security, and Canadian Foodscapes

Advancing leadership in medical radiation sciences: Incorporating systematic leadership education in pre-registration curricula

This article presents critical and previously neglected perspectives in many current debates around education and educational leadership. Based on an interdisciplinary literature review we analyse the mission and the role of educational organizations in their commitment to an improvement in society. We examine the role of principals and other organizational members in the development of the educational organization they represent and how their understanding of the different factors which influence the exercise of educational leadership may or may not lead to a more just society. Our analysis highlights how these numerous and multivariate factors affect goal attainment, organizational and group members—teachers, students, and others—leadership, and leadership identity. Democracy, equality, capitalism, and social justice are some of the topics discussed. Change and change agent roles and status are considered, particularly tensions between insider and outsider critical friends and change agents. The article concludes with a discussion that revisit the concept educational leadership and bring back its essence. This ideas should be taken into account to design new education policies in a more informed way.

Shaping future food system leaders

Inclusive diets within planetary boundaries

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the educational leadership capacity of mentors working with new teachers and to identify factors that support and hinder the development of this leadership capacity. Design/methodology/approach – The author conducted a qualitative case study of mentors with connections to the New Teacher Center in California. Data were collected through an online survey of mentors, focus group interviews with mentors, and interviews with programme leaders. Findings – Mentors in the study view themselves as educational leaders and were able to identify enablers and barriers to the development of their leadership capacity. Enablers include: their selection and experience as mentors, mentor preparation and ongoing professional support, and the support and encouragement of skilled programme leaders and of some principals and districts. The main barrier to mentors having a positive impact is the culture of the schools and districts in which they work. Research limitations/implications – Findings from this small-scale study of mentors with connections to the NTC cannot be transferred to other contexts, however, the factors supporting and hindering the development of educational leadership capacity may be of interest and relevance to other mentoring programmes. Originality/value – There is a lack of empirical research that considers the benefits of mentoring for the mentors and in particular the educational leadership capacity that mentors develop in their roles.

Mejora escolar, liderazgo y reforma sistémica: una retrospectiva (School improvement, leadership and systemic reform: a retrospective)

Can diets be healthy and sustainable? This was the question posed by Dr Hachem from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) at the NNEdPro Sixth International Summit on Nutrition and...

In higher education, as well as K–12 education, assessment has become a necessity to ensure quality, determine student learning, and share information with stakeholders. Similarly, institutions are focused on leadership development to prepare students to meet the challenges of a complex, global environment. Because leadership draws on multiple disciplines, it is not taught in the same way that chemistry or accounting are. Although some expect that leadership is learned by happenstance or a series of unrelated expectations, educators know leadership development takes a coordinated effort that includes individual and program assessment to improve programs and practices. In this issue, educators from a range of institutions, experiences, and backgrounds share their diverse theoretical backgrounds and experiences to illustrate tangible practices of assessing student leadership in both the college and high school settings. Student learning and program assessment are educational priorities in today's complex, resource-limited environment. Yet, not all leadership educators are assessment experts; conversely, not all assessment specialists have a strong foundation in leadership theories and models. Fortunately, faculty and staff can collaborate not only to create exceptional leadership programs, but they can also provide strong evidence of student growth and program quality. To ensure that happens, educators need to understand the systematic process of assessment, developing a structured plan that includes multiple assessment methods over time and experiences. Without a cohesive plan, staff will not have a roadmap to follow. Because leadership and assessment do not happen in a vacuum, leadership educators need to collaborate with other faculty, staff, and stakeholders. As a part of developing a strong, well-assessed leadership program, all stakeholders need to have consistent language. This is a prime opportunity for faculty and staff to partner. In addition, educators need to decide what will be assessed. Some leadership programs focus on individual student competencies and skill development. Others focus on how students compare in terms of development related to a model or theory. Some assessment models encourage student self-assessment, whereas others rely on educators to evaluate student performance. In recent years, more national instruments have been created to provide an aggregate view of development, as well as a way to benchmark against other institutions or through time. Although quantitative methods are fairly common in leadership assessment, as evidenced by national surveys, qualitative methods provide rich and deep data about the student leadership experiences. Students who are able to reflect, both during and after experiences, can integrate and synthesize learning. Leadership educators have the responsibility to make the experiences and their meaning explicit, because students do not always do that on their own. Institutions, departments, programs, educators, and students have a stake in student leadership development. Ideally, when those areas and people are aligned, students have the best learning environment. Assessment is valued and used to describe student success and improve the programs. This issue provides important information for educators who work closely with students and programs in developing their leadership capacity. In today's educational environment, educators and administrators focus on retention, learning, and preparation for the work world, while paying close attention to fiscal stewardship, accountability, and added value. Student leadership assessment needs to be a priority in education to move the profession forward, provide exceptional developmental programs, and prepare students for a successful future. Darby M. Roberts is the director of Student Life Studies at Texas A&M University and also teaches in the Student Affairs Administration and Higher Education master's program. She focuses on assessment of cocurricular student learning and experiences, program review, and the scholarship of student affairs assessment. She is the coeditor of Learning Is Not a Sprint and coauthor of Student Affairs Assessment: Theory to Practice. From 2013–2015, Darby was cochair of NASPA's Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Knowledge Community. She frequently presents and writes on various student affairs assessment topics. Krista J. Bailey is an associate director in the Offices of the Dean of Student Life at Texas A&M University and also teaches in the Student Affairs Administration and Higher Education master's program. She has worked with many different functional areas within student affairs, including student leadership programs. Krista frequently presents on a variety of topics including student learning.

The current article examines interdisciplinary programs in higher education through the lenses of collective leadership, liminal spaces, and communitas. Interdisciplinary programs often exist in transitional, in‐between spaces within academic institutions, challenging traditional hierarchical and disciplinary structures. The current article explores how these liminal spaces can be leveraged to foster collective leadership and a sense of communitas, shared community, and identity among program members. Using Kansas State University as a case study, the article highlights the importance of sociomateriality in constructing leadership and practices such as coaching, mentoring, and advising that can support communitas and collective leadership in interdisciplinary contexts. The article suggests that relationship‐focused practices are key to navigating and transforming hierarchical pressures in academic environments, ultimately advocating for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to leadership in higher education.

This thesis has three main objectives: (1) to provide a critical political economy study of the complex interplay between rice, politics and power in East Asia; (2) to make a contribution to understanding the evolution of the regional and global food system through an historically-contextualised exploration of the political economy of rice in the East Asian region; and (3) to make a contribution towards an alternative analytical framework for the political economy of food insecurity in the region. This study focuses on the agricultural commodity of rice as a prism through which to examine and explore the complex and multidimensional nature of food insecurity in the region, with rice providing a lens through which to explore social relations and relations of power that underpin the political economy of food and agriculture. This study has identified a gap in literature in relation to a contemporary analysis of the political economy of rice, with a second gap appearing in relation to the evolution of the global food system from an East Asian perspective. This thesis aims to make a contribution towards addressing these gaps in literature. With these objectives in mind, this thesis responds to the following research questions and sub-questions: (1) What are the socio-political and economic characteristics of the commodity complex of rice in the East Asian region? What role does the political economy of rice play in regional food insecurity? (2) What does the political economy of rice in the East Asian region reveal about the characteristics of the contemporary global food system? To what extent do the socio-political and economic characteristics of the commodity complex of rice in the East Asian region contradict or reaffirm a ‘neoliberal corporate food regime’? (3) What does the political economy of rice in the East Asian region reveal about the Global Food Crisis of 2007–08? (4) What are the regional governance structures and institutions for the commodity complex of rice? How effective are these regional structures and institutions of governance, such as regional rice reserves, in addressing food insecurity? To investigate these questions, this thesis adopts an interdisciplinary theoretical framework. This approach draws on the strengths of a variety of social and political science disciplines, including critical approaches to international political economy (IPE), rural sociology and agrarian political economy. The objective of this collaborative interdisciplinary approach is to provide a more holistic exposition of the socio-political and economic dimensions of the commodity complex of rice and food insecurity in East Asia. The thesis argues four main points. Firstly, due to the cultural, socio-political, and economic importance of rice in East Asia, few governments in the region have allowed the domestic rice sector to be influenced wholly by global market supply and demand forces. Rather, governments in the region routinely intervene in rice markets in an attempt to reconcile the paradoxical objectives of providing low rice prices for consumers and remunerative incentives to support the lives and livelihoods of farmers. Secondly, state-centric approaches to food security after the Global Food Crisis of 2007–08 have spatially and temporally reproduced food insecurities, moving these insecurities around geographically within the region. Thirdly, much of the critical agri-food literature to date has focused on the neoliberal characteristics of the corporate food regime. However, this literature has often overlooked the nuances in varieties of capitalism in East Asia, largely ignoring the rise of state capitalism and the emergence of neomercantilism. Finally, the East Asian rice complex is characterised by state-led capitalism and neomercantilism. The concept of a global ‘neoliberal/corporate food regime’ does not properly account for the agri-food sector in the East Asian region, nor does it capture the unique historical and cultural context of the region. Many states in the East Asian region, including China and Thailand, employ neomercantilist strategies in the rice sector. The thesis makes four contributions to knowledge. Firstly, by adopting an interdisciplinary theoretical framework, this research makes a contribution to a broad range of agri-food literature in the fields of critical IPE, rural sociology and agrarian political economy. Secondly, it brings new conceptual knowledge and empirical information from case studies about China and Thailand into existing literature on the regional and global agri-food system, and the political economy of rice in East Asia. Thirdly, case studies about the Global Food Crisis of 2007–08 and the role of regional rice reserves in the East Asian region bring new conceptual knowledge and empirical information into existing literature on these topics. Finally, the thesis provides new analysis in relation to food regime literature, and makes a contribution to understanding the commodity complex of rice in the agri-food system of East Asia.

Upcycling to a circular food system

An optimal diet for planet and people

The food system represents a complex, interrelated, and interdependent network of individuals and organizations. Despite the unique characteristics of the food system domain, there has never been a comprehensive analysis of leadership capacity amongst food system professionals. The present study provides an empirical assessment of food system leadership capacity using many leadership instruments. The study included pilot (n = 125) and primary (n = 4185) data collection across 27 food system-related leadership development programs. The results validate the Issue Leadership scale, which comprises seven capacity areas: action, change, communication, critical thinking, strategic planning and visioning, interpersonal traits and characteristics, leadership process, and leadership skills. The Issue Leadership scale captures both perception of importance and current skill level. The study results indicate that food system professionals perceived communication and critical thinking, strategic planning and visioning as the most important leadership capacity areas. Furthermore, respondents indicated the highest level of self-perceived skill in critical thinking, strategic planning and visioning, and interpersonal traits and characteristics. Overall, respondents had higher perceived importance levels (m = 4.17) than skill (m = 3.44), indicating the need for additional leadership capacity development amongst food system professionals. Respondents also indicated similar levels of opinion leadership (m = 3.92), servant leadership (m = 3.82), transformational leadership (m = 3.78), and transactional leadership (m = 3.70), providing an additional empirical assessment of food system professional leadership capacity.