“School banding”. Principals’ perspectives of teacher professional development in the school-based management context
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2017-0018 |
| Date | 04 September 2017 |
| Pages | 686-701 |
| Published date | 04 September 2017 |
| Author | Daphnee Hui Lin Lee,Chi Shing Chiu |
| Subject Matter | Education,Administration & policy in education,School administration/policy,Educational administration,Leadership in education |
“School banding”
Principals’perspectives of teacher
professional development in the
school-based management context
Daphnee Hui Lin Lee and Chi Shing Chiu
Department of Education Policy and Leadership,
The Education University of Hong Kong, New Territories, Hong Kong
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to explore how principals’leadership approaches to teacher
professional development arise from school banding and may impact upon teacher professional capital and
student achievement.
Design/methodology/approach –The case study is situated within the context of school-based
management, comprising reflective accounts of nine school principals selected by stratified sampling from a
sample of 56 Hong Kong schools to represent Bands One, Two, and Three schools. The reflective accounts
were triangulated with observations of teachers and analysis of school websites.
Findings –First, under school-based management, principals remain obliged to recognize the power of
state-defined examinations in determining the schools’future priorities. Second, the exercise of school
autonomy in response to this obligation varies, depending upon the competitive advantage schools have in
the school banding system. Ideally, effective school-based management is dependent upon the principal’s
capacity to facilitate good instructional practices. However, principals need to adjust their leadership
practices to school contextual demands. Third, adaptations to contexts result in the varied developments of
teacher capacities in schools, corresponding with the types of principal leadership adopted.
Originality/value –While statistical studies have identified attributes of exemplary principal leadership,
few studies have examined the qualitative reasons for the exemplification of these attributes, and the
influence of the school context in shaping these attributes. Departing from assumptions that leadership
attributes are intrinsic to individuals, this paper considers how principals contextualize leadership in teacher
professional development to the schools’student academic achievement.
Keywords East Asia/Hong Kong, Teacher professional development, Principal leadership,
School-based management, Student achievement/school banding
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In its ideal form, school-based management refers to the empowerment of principals with
autonomy over fiscalcontrol, curriculum, and professional development (Agasisti et al., 2013).
In reality, school-based management takes on a variety of interpretations. Inspired by the
decentralizededucation model of the USA, East Asian education systems arerecent adopters
of school-based management (Hawkins, 2000; Muta, 2000). State agencies were inspired by
economic rationales to decentralize schools for the enhancement of their labor forces. Under
the leadership of “developmental states,”autonomy is cautiously assigned with the aim of
stimulating economic growth, while ensuring centralized control is not curtailed (Lee, 2017).
Within this context, the majorityof East Asian school-based management is characterizedby
fiscal decentralization, which prevails over the extremely limited school influence over
curriculum matters, such as in China (Hawkins, 2000). In Japan, Muta (2000) reports school
influence over the curriculum is restricted to approximately 10 percent. Through the
comparison of decentralization efforts in Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea, Ho (2006)
concludes that Hong Kong schools enjoy significant school autonomy. Within this
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 55 No. 6, 2017
pp. 686-701
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-02-2017-0018
Received 13 February 2017
Revised 10 May 2017
Accepted 16 May 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
The authors would like to thank The Education University of Hong Kong for the research funding
under the following projects numbers: 05913(KT-2015_16-001), and RG54/2015-2016R.
686
JEA
55,6
centralized-decentralized East Asian educational context, sustainable school autonomy will
depend on the principal’s ability to contextualize school-based management reforms.
This abilityis crucial to effective schoolimprovement, as the agreementof both school leaders
and teachers is needed for reforms to impact student learning (Cheung and Wong, 2011).
One of the key domains through which this agreement can be forged is through principal
instructional leadership of teacher professional development. While schools have much less
influence over curriculum matters, principals are given more flexibility over teacher
professionaldevelopment. This paperaims to examine the variety of leadership approachesto
teacher professional development in this era of school-based management in the Hong Kong
education context .
School-based management in Hong Kong
As the locale where principals assert stronger autonomy relative to their peers in the
regional East Asian education systems, Hong Kong makes an excellent site for this study.
School-based management reform was a centralized initiative by the Education Bureau
(EDB) that commenced shortly after Hong Kong became a Special Administrative Region of
China. Under school-based management, principals are empowered to redefine teacher
professional development to suit their school’s needs for curriculum and instructional
change. Two decades after the implementation of school-based management, Hong Kong
principals stand for an organized network that has proven to be significantly more
empowered than their regional peers. However, the prevailing literature tends to focus on
fiscal, rather than curriculum autonomy. Lee et al. (2011) affirm that “cultural adaptations”
to global reforms have been “slow and incremental”(p. 827). The retention of educational
norms of assessing performance with examination-driven benchmarks remains firmly
established in East Asia, and Hon g Kong is no exception (Yuen et al., 2012).
This preoccupation with examinations has ensured the alignment of school leaders with
the EDB on curriculum, instruction, and assessment matters. Nevertheless, the potential for
schools to gain greater control over teaching and learning is made available with
school-based management, and teacher professional development is one of the more
promising instruments to be employed by principals to support school improvement.
If improved student achievement demonstrates effective school-based management, then a
school’s competitive advantage is determined by how principals exercise leadership in the
development of teachers’capacity to achieve this goal.
Instructional leadership, transformational leadership, and the growth of teacher leadership
Since the implementation of school-based management,principal leadership has broadened in
its influence over a variety of domains. As the focus of this paper is on teacher professional
development,the instructional and transformational aspectsof principal leadership standout.
While these leadership approachesare complementary, and overlapin practice, clarificationis
needed of their conceptual premises to effectively explore how leadership decisions about
teacher professional development arise from, and are consequential to, student achievement.
This paper adopts Robinson’s (2008) emphasis on the distinction between transformational
and instructional leadership attributes. The emphasis is informed by findings that
instructionalleadership has a greater influenceon student achievement than transformational
leadership. As student achievement is considered in this paper as the mediating factor of
principal leadership approaches, it is necessary to distinguish between instructional and
transformational leadership.
Instructional leadership refers to taking the personal responsibility to lead in curriculum
and instructional improvement ( Lancer, 2015). In relation to teacher professional
development, a further examination of the literature suggests that the participation of
teachers in the leadership domain is critical for successful instructional leadership.
687
Teacher
professional
development
To continue reading
Request your trial