Professionalism and Accountability

Abstract

School principals and headteachers are increasingly working within a high stakes accountability framework. In many countries, these senior leaders are judged on student outcomes as measured by public examination and test results. In England, and elsewhere, conformity with government policy is policed through a national inspection regime, which grades leadership as well as classroom practice. The consequences of an ‘unsatisfactory’ grade are profound and may lead to the school being labelled as ‘failing’, with the possibility of closure. In this climate, it is unsurprising that most leaders adhere closely to national prescriptions and work hard to enhance published learning outcomes. In England, this may lead to leaders being focused mainly on ‘borderline’ students, such as those on the C/D boundary in GCSE examinations. A related practice is ‘teaching to the test’, where learning is closely aligned to test outcomes, rather than wider knowledge and understanding. Where leaders operate in this way, they might be regarded as sacrificing their professionalism on the altar of accountability. The first article, by Neil Cranston, examines this issue. He begins by arguing that ‘the constraints of accountability on school leaders need to be framed by a new liberating professionalism’, framed around notions of professional responsibility. He reinforces the accepted mantra that leadership is vital to school success and student learning and comments that the rhetoric of self-management has not led to school leaders driving educational priorities. He outlines four principles for school leadership and concludes that professionally responsible leaders need to understand their fundamental values, and position themselves as proactive leadership professionals, not reactive managers. Leadership practice is inevitably influenced by principals’ socialisation experiences. This is the focus of the second article, by Ed Bengtson, Sally Zepede and Oksana Parylo. They examine organisational socialisation, linked to principal succession, in the state of Georgia in the USA. Drawing on 29 interviews with principals, superintendents and other central office leaders in four systems, the authors note that collective leadership training is common, what they describe as ‘serial socialisation’. They point to the importance of succession, and retention, of principals and conclude that socialisation ‘can no longer be left to chance’. In the third article, Matti Kuittenen, Anu Puusa and Oksana Parylo examine the concept of organisational identity, linked to strategic change. Drawing on interviews with senior lecturers and managers at a Finnish university, they note similarities and differences in interpretations of identity. Notions were similar within groups but rather different between managers and lecturers. Managers were perceived to be future-oriented but lecturers claimed that this was at the expense of current activities. They also note the ‘fragmentation of identity’ because of separate sub-group Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(2) 127–128 a The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1741143212469505 emal.sagepub.com