The west wind vs the east wind: instructional leadership model in China
| Published date | 10 April 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2016-0083 |
| Date | 10 April 2017 |
| Pages | 186-206 |
| Author | Haiyan Qian,Allan Walker,Xiaojun Li |
| Subject Matter | Education,Administration & policy in education,School administration/policy,Educational administration,Leadership in education |
The west wind vs the east wind:
instructional leadership
model in China
Haiyan Qian
Education Policy and Leadership, The Education University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Allan Walker
Faculty of Education and Human Development,
The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and
Xiaojun Li
Faculty of Education, Guangdong University of Education, Guangzhou, China
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to develop a preliminary model of instructional leadership in the
Chinese educational context andexplore the ways in which Chineseschool principals locate theirinstructional-
leadership practices in response to traditional expectations andthe requirements of recent reforms.
Design/methodology/approach –In-depth interviews were conducted with 22 selected primary school
principals in Shenzhen and Guangzhou. A qualitative analysis was conducted to categorize the major
leadership practices enacted by these principals.
Findings –An initial model of instructional leadership in China with six major dimensions is constructed.
The paper also illustrates and elaborates on three dimensions with the greatest context-specific meanings for
Chinese principals.
Originality/value –The paper explores the ways in which Chinese principals enact their instructional
leadership in a context in which “the west wind meets the east wind”; that is, when they are required to
accommodate both imported reform initiatives and traditional expectations. The paper contributes to the
sparse existing research on principals’instructional leadership in non-western cultural and social contexts.
Keywords China, Instructional leadership, Primary school principals
Paper type Research paper
As reflected in the development of international student assessment systems such as the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in Mathematics and
Science Study, policy makers increasingly share the sentiment that nations whose students
excel today will become winners tomorrow (Forestier and Crossley, 2015). Governments
around the world are thus attempting to initiate and sustain changes that go beyond
transient, superficial success stories to deeply influence classroom practices (Mertkan, 2010).
Enhancing principals’instructional leadership to improve teaching and learning has become
a widely adopted policy measure (Goldring et al., 2009; Leithwood et al., 2010; Walker and
Hallinger, 2015).
The concept of instructional leadership recognizes and emphasizes the role of school
principals in supporting school learning activities and developing teacher capacity
(Hallinger and Heck, 1996a, b; Leithwood et al., 2004; Robinson et al., 2008). Evidence has
accumulated over the last few decades that principals’instructional leadership can help
improve teaching and learning (Hallinger and Leithwood, 1996; Hallinger and Murphy,
1985; Robinson et al., 2008). However, most of the empirical evidence in this field has thus
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 55 No. 2, 2017
pp. 186-206
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-08-2016-0083
Received 9 August 2016
Revised 14 January 2017
Accepted 15 January 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 wish to acknowledge the funding support of the Research Grant Council (RGC) of
Hong Kong through the General Research Fund (No. GRF841512).
186
JEA
55,2
far been derived from western settings. With a few exceptions (e.g. Gu, 2011; Qian and
Walker, 2011a), there are insufficient empirical studies of principals’instructional leadership
in non-western cultural and social contexts.
In a landmark study, Leithwood et al. (2010) asserted that cultural and social contexts
shape the ways in which school leaders enact their leadership practices. In other words,
leadership concepts and behaviour that appear similar can be interpreted and enacted
differently in different socio-cultural and institutional contexts. It is therefore dangerous to
assume that there is only one international model of instructional leadership. Compared
with their western counterparts, principals from non-western societies such as China may
have quite different interpretations of and methods of enacting instructional leadership.
Education in China has received increasing attention since the success of Shanghai’s
PISA (Tucker, 2011). Chinese principals are widely regarded as instructional leaders.
For example, in a recently published World Bank report entitled “How Shanghai does it”
(Liang et al., 2016), one of the insights drawn from Shanghai’s success was the importance of
using exacting criteria to recruit and appraise school principals. Shanghai has established a
principal-review scheme with six major performance domains, one of which covers teaching
and instruction. Principals in Shanghai tend to prioritize instructional improvement in their
everyday leadership practice. For example, principals are required to observe between
30 and 50 classes per term and provide teachers with in-depth feedback on their classroom
performance (Liang et al., 2016).
However, the nature of effective instruction and how it can be achieved in schools have
been widely debated in the Chinese context. The understanding of effective instruction
seems to be constantly evolving in line with policy shifts and the tension between new
reform initiatives and more traditional educational beliefs. For example, throughout China’s
millennium-long history, testing has consistently and profoundly shaped the content,
function, mission and values of Chinese education (Harris et al., 2009). However, over the last
three decades, educational reforms have been introduced to effect a shift from “exam-
oriented education”(yingshi jiaoyu)to“quality-oriented education”(suzhi jiaoyu), as
highlighted in the reform slogan (Tan and Chua, 2015). The reforms essentially advocate a
movement away from knowledge reproduction and didacticism to knowledge construction
through a learner-centred approach (Zhao and Qiu, 2012). The concepts and catchphrases
associated with these reforms, which emphasize curriculum development and inquiry-based
learning, are new to education in China, with most borrowed from western contexts.
Educators in China often use the proverb “the west wind has overpowered the east wind”to
describe this phenomenon (Tan and Chua, 2015). The metaphors of the east wind and the
west wind were first used by Chairman Mao in the 1950s to refer to the struggle between
socialist and capitalist ideologies. They have since been generalized to describe any
influence of western society on ideas inherited from Chinese tradition.
In terms of educational reform, the west wind has never had overwhelming success in
China. It is easier to change a system’s structures than its culture (Zhao and Qiu, 2012).
In schools in China, while the goal of achieving high-quality education is vociferously
affirmed, test-oriented education “gets the real attention”(Zhao, 2007, p. 73). In other words,
education in China is in transition, and schools, principals and the educational system at
large feel the effects of both the east wind and the west wind, which are often in discord.
Rao and Chan (2009) believe that Chinese learners and teachers have to “intertwine”
traditional approaches with imported progressive approaches, such as memorization and
understanding, collaboration and competition, and didacticism and constructivism.
Chinese school principals face a similar challenge in the need to both distinguish between
and integrate traditional values and newly advocated initiatives. As instructional leaders,
they work to implement contextually sensitive instructional improvement strategies that
adhere to expectations of reform without alienating the various stakeholders who continue
187
Instructional
leadership
model in China
To continue reading
Request your trial