Ethical blind spots in leading for learning: an Australian study
| Published date | 09 August 2013 |
| Pages | 638-654 |
| Date | 09 August 2013 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2011-0075 |
| Author | Michael Bezzina |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Ethical blind spots in leading for
learning: an Australian study
Michael Bezzina
Centre for Creative and Authentic Leadership, Australian Catholic University,
Strathfield, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to explore the dynamics by which exposure to a mo ral rationale is given
expression in schools, and how this is perceived as impacting on teaching, leadership practice and
student outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 11 Australian sc hools were part of a project in which
they were supported in applying a conceptual framework involving moral purpose, learning
and leadership to self-selected improvement initiatives. Extensive focus group interviews with the
school project teams were analysed to identify recurrent themes, and to illustrate the dynamics of
engagement with moral purpose.
Findings – A significant insight that emerges from this study is that the movement towards
increased moral sensitivity enhanced commitment to shared purpose. This movement provided a
driver for ethically driven behavior. Part of the contribution of the intervention was to draw attention
to these elements of moral purpose, which, in tur n, increased teacher and leader sensitivity to their
operation, and resulted in changed teacher practice and enhanced learning outcomes fo r students.
Practical implications – The findings of this study highlight the potential of explicit attention to
moral purpose in school communities, and suggest some points of emphasis for school leaders who are
committed to improvement built on staff commitment.
Originality/value – While many authors signal as a matter of principle the importance of moral
purpose in schooling, and in the leadership of change, it is a comparatively under-researched area in
terms of its practical application. This study makes a contribution to addressing that gap.
Keywords Authentic learning, Moral purpose, Ethical leadership, Shared purpose, Lear ning, Ethics,
Australia
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
In recent years there has been increased interest in gaining a deeper understanding of the
role of leadership in cultivating and promoting the core work of the school – teaching and
learning (Leithwood and Reihl, 2003; Marzano et al., 2005; Robinson, 2007; Robinson
et al., 2009). While delivering an important message, current regimes of high-stakes
standardised testing, league tables and the use of data systems as census and control
mechanisms may be driving educators to neglect authentic learning. Constant demands
for change, increased politicisation of educational data and the commercialisation of
schooling and its outcomes can create technical frames of reference for leaders which can
cause them to ignore or take for granted other dimensions of their practice – including the
moral purpose of the core work of the school.
Moral purpose can be understood as the commitment to ends tha t express
underlying values and ethics. In the particular context of schools, the com mitment is
ultimately to the gradual transformation of the lear ner into a fuller, richer, deeper
human being. Moral purpose becomes powerful when it is shared. The National
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
Received 9 September 2011
Revised 18 October 2011
1 March 2012
15 March 2012
Accepted 23 March 2012
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 51 No. 5, 2013
pp. 638-654
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-09-2011-0075
The author wishes to acknowledge the financial support of the Catholic school systems of
Sydney, Broken Bay, Parramatta, Wollongong and Maitland Newcastle.
638
JEA
51,5
College of School Leadership (NCSL) (2006) describes shared moral pur pose as
“a compelling idea or aspirational purpose, a shared belief [that a team] can achieve
far more for their end users together than they can alone” (p. 3). The foundations for
such a shared sense of purpose lie in a shared commitment to explicit values (Andrews
and Lewis, 2004). This implies clarity of unde rstanding as well as the creation
of a context in which this understanding can become widely owned. For teachers, their
moral purpose lies in the answer they find to Greenfield’s (2004, p. 174) question:
“Leading and teaching to what ends and by what means?” or more concretely: “What
should I do, and how, if I am to make a genuine difference in the lives of my students?”
This research is located in Catholic schools, which draw on a long tradition of
espoused purpose that recognises the interdependence betwe en the moral and the
intellectual purposes of schooling. One key document (Cong regation for Catholic
Education, 1997, p. 8) expresses this in the following terms:
Thus the Catholic school should be able to offer young people the means to acquire the
knowledge they need in order to find a place in a society which is strongly characterized by
technical and scientific skill. But at the same time, it should be able, above all, to impart
a solid Christian formation.
Moral purpose is therefore fundamental to the educative enterprise in the school. It can
be argued that educators engage with this purpose when they infu se academic
learning with a dimension of personal meaning, and thereby enrich the whole learnin g
process (Starratt, 2004). The authentic lear ning which results is more than taking
new knowledge and skills for oneself, and broader than the quest for relevance. It is
about giving of one’s unique humanity to others and to the community. This is taken
to another level when all members of a professional learning community share such
aspirations and approaches (Andrews and Lewis, 2004). Learning which is not
authentic to the needs of the student’s life remains superficial, and supporting its
existence in schools can be judged to be unethical (Starratt, 2004).
The facilitation of authentic learning is at the heart of the moral pu rpose of schools
because it engages students in a deeper understanding of the nature and purpose
of their lives and opens up possibilities for contributing to the greater good of the
community and society (Hodgkinson, 1991). Authentic lear ning is personalised
learning, when the subject of the learnin g is connected to the lived experience and
cultural context of the learner, where the learning connects the learner to some asp ect
of his or her world. It can judged on three criteria (Newmann et al., 1996, p. 282):
construction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry and value beyond school. Authentic
learning assists the learner in their constr uction of self-understanding in relation
to that world. In the paradigm of Wiggins and McTighe (2005) this type of learning
moves beyond what is worth merely “being familiar with”, to “what is important to
know and do” and ideally emphasises “enduring understanding”. Authentic educational
leaders face the challenge of embedding this sense of moral purpose in the work of their
schools, and translating it into action. While stories of such leaders abound, this is an
area of schooling that has been under-researched (Starratt, 2004).
Discussions of teaching and learning in sc hools can often tend towards questions of
technique rather than underlying purpose – with attention given to the “what” and the
“how” rather than the “why”. This might be understood through an application of
Moberg’s (2006) notions of frames and blind spots. A frame is described as a personal
perspective on a situation “comprising well-lear ned sets of associations that focus
people’s attention on and label some aspects of a situation to the exclusion of others”.
639
Ethical blind
spots
To continue reading
Request your trial