critical perspectives on changes in educational leadership practice

Front. Educ. China 2011, 6(3): 404–425 DOI 10.1007/s11516-011-0139-x

Received October 5, 2010

Ting WANG ( ) Faculty of Education, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia E-mail: [email protected]

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Ting WANG

Critical Perspectives on Changes in Educational Leadership Practice

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2011

Abstract This paper examines a group of Chinese educational leaders’ leadership practice changes after undertaking a leadership development course offered by an Australian university in China. It presents their self-reported changes in leadership practice profiles and features selected vignettes. The study was primarily qualitative and interpretative, based on the interview responses of 20 participants. The findings showed that exposure to different perspectives appeared to expand participants’ views and equip them with a wider range of leadership strategies. Despite some observable differences in practices reported by participants from the three sectors (school, educational system, and university), there seemed to be more similarities than variance. The respondents were cautious about radical changes in leadership practice, reiterating that local contexts and cultures must be considered when accommodating Western educational ideas. The study suggests that participants’ self-reported changes in leadership practices resulted from mediation of contextual and cultural conditions rather than the direct transfer of Western ideas and practices into the Chinese context. Keywords educational leadership, international education, leadership practice

Introduction

Internationalization is fast becoming one of the most important and increasingly complex forces in higher education. It is likely to continue to rise in prominence on the agenda of individual institutions and national and regional systems of tertiary education around the world. These developments include the mobility of

Critical Perspectives on Changes in Educational Leadership Practice 405

people, programs, and institutions, as well as an increasingly heightened sense of the interconnectedness of the higher education enterprise across the globe (Altbach, Reisberg, & Rumbley, 2009; Knight, 2006). Transnational, borderless or cross-border education activities have played an increasingly important role (Knight, 2005) and China is no exception (Gu, 2009; Huang, 2008).

Recent years have seen a growing awareness of the internationalization and globalization of educational policies in China and increasing attention given to cultural differences and diversity, as recognized by many Chinese scholars (e.g., Diao, 2000; Gu, 2006; Liu, 2002; Zhang, 1999). It is widely believed that increasing the provision of foreign educational programs in Chinese campuses will help to improve academic quality and standards, as well as facilitate the internationalization of Chinese higher education. The ultimate aim of the Chinese government is to develop and expand China’s capacity to meet its educational and skill needs through its own institutions in this era of globalization (Huang, 2008). A prominent Chinese scholar, Gu Mingyuan (2010) recognizes that China needs to prepare a large number of personnel with an international perspective, familiarity with international practice and ability to participate in international competitions. Other Chinese scholars highlight the need to “maintain educational sovereignty and cultural security.” For instance, Zhang Renbiao (2001) emphasized the importance of improving China’s “cultural immunity” in order to protect its culture from being “infected.” Chen Zhili (2002) maintains that sustaining and promoting Chinese traditions while absorbing what is advantageous in other civilizations is a worthy mission. Du and Liang (2005) argue that in the course of running joint programs, it is important to equip students with the ability to “resort to dialogue and integration when cultural collision does occur” (p. 55). Gu (2009) contends that the key to cultural security lies in enhancing individual and collective cultural awareness in the process of cultural contacts.

Set in an internationalizing higher education context, this paper presents some findings from an interpretative study which explored the perceived influence of an Australian transnational leadership development course upon 20 Chinese educational leaders’ conceptions and leadership practice over a one year period from 2002 to 2003 (Wang, 2008a). The key findings have been reported elsewhere; for instance, comparing participants’ conceptions of learning and leadership before and after the course indicated an expanded range of, and more complex conceptions (Wang, 2007; Wang & Collard, 2009a, 2009b). The analysis of their intercultural learning experiences provides the implications of intercultural dialogue and understanding for teachers in transnational education settings (Wang, 2008b). This paper focuses on the participants’ self-perceived leadership practice changes. How did they perceive their leadership practices changed after undertaking the course? Would their new understanding of learning

Ting WANG 406

and leadership have any impact on their leadership practices? Were there any differences among the three sectors (school, educational system and university)? Were these self-perceived changes the results of mediation or direct transfer of educational practices from the West? This paper seeks to answer these questions and provide insight into the participants’ critical perspectives on their leadership practice changes. It concludes with some thoughts on the implications of this research for leadership development programs in other countries.

Literature Review

An array of scholars has investigated Chinese culture and leadership traditions across the world (Gu, 2006; Kirkbride, Tang, & Westwood, 1991; Redding, 1990; Wong, 2001b). Some have specifically looked at educational leadership in the mainland of China in recent years (Bush & Qiang, 2000; Feng, 2002; Ribbins & Zhang, 2004, 2006). A number of scholars (e.g., Chen, 1995; Seagrave, 1995; Wong, 2001a) suggest that there are certain historical-social influences on the development of leadership practice in China, such as Taoism, Confucianism and the strategic thinking of Sunzi. Other scholars (Blunt & Jones, 1997; Child, 1994) concluded that Chinese cultural traditions have long been underpinned by four significant values which influence leadership perceptions and practices: the importance of face, collectivism, harmony, and respect for hierarchy. Bush and Qiang (2000) argue that contemporary Chinese culture is a mixture of traditional, socialist, enterprise, and patriarchal cultures, all of which have influenced Chinese leadership traditions and practices.

Empirical studies have been conducted to investigate Chinese leadership behaviors and perceptions. For instance, Ling, Chia, and Fang (2000) have explored the implicit conceptual framework of Chinese leadership and indicated four factors of leadership: personal morality, goal efficiency, interpersonal competence, and versatility. The Chinese participants considered virtue to be the most important feature of leadership, which shows that Confucian traditional ethics continue to have tremendous influence. Interpersonal competence was given the highest ratings, reflecting the enormous importance of this factor, which is consistent with Chinese collectivist values. Chen (2002) examined the leadership role of secondary school principals in China and indicated that the position of principals demonstrates inconsistency in empowerment. This results from a confrontation between the existing bureaucratic culture and the emerging democratic culture in Chinese schools, with the former favouring political and systemic interests, and the latter stressing the interests and desires of people working in and for schools. Ribbins and Zhang (2006) used societal cultural factors to explain the shaping of the lives and leadership paths of 40 secondary


school principals in a rural area of China. The impact of cultural values is captured in what Gordon (2002) refers to as

deep leadership structures. Deep structures are the non-tangible, less readily identifiable values that lurk unseen everywhere in peoples’ cognition and within organizations. This perspective was developed by Walker (2004) to explore the deep structures of Hong Kong schools. Deep leadership structures stem from and reside in the traditional cultures guiding behaviour in schools. Given the historical construction of deep structures, they are hardy and resistant to change or challenge. While they are capable of adjustment, if it does happen, it tends to be slow to take hold. Walker and Hallinger (2007) recognize that “cultures constantly shift and recreate themselves in reaction to changing socio-political-economic conditions. Nonetheless, elements of culture do have a tendency to endure because they are reinforced continually through social as well as institutional interactions” (p. 259). In some East Asian countries, “the cultural norms that characterise principals as well as stakeholders often conflict with concepts such as teacher leadership, student-centred learning, open feedback and discussion and distributed leadership” (Walker, Hallinger, & Qian, 2007, p. 664). A focus on such will challenge the leaders’ own deep leadership structures and existing cultural norms.

Leadership is acknowledged as a value-laden concept (Gronn, 2001; Sergiovanni, 2001). Walker (2005, October) argues that leadership is constructed within a social milieu comprised of multiple, overlapping and constantly shifting contextual factors. These include, but are not restricted to, cultural, political, historical and economic influences. Hallinger and Leithwood (1996) maintain that societal culture exerts a significant influence on educational administrators beyond that of the specific organisation’s culture. The current scene in education administration in East Asia is full of “cultural borrowing” and “cross-cultural cloning.” The vital importance of having “cultural comparability” and avoiding “cultural imperialism” is increasingly emphasized (Cheng, 1998; Walker & Dimmock, 2000a, 2000b; Walker & Hallinger, 2007). In a similar vein, Jones and Alexiadou (2001, September) discuss “travelling” and “embedded” policy, in which travelling policy refers to supra-national and transnational agency activity, as well as to common agendas. Embedded policy is to be found in “local” spaces where global policy agendas come up against existing priorities and practices. This perspective allows for recognition that, while policy choices may be narrowing, national and local assumptions and practices remain significant and mediate or translate global policy in distinctive ways (Ozga, 2005). Walker, Hallinger and Qian (2007) indicate that principal leadership in East Asia is mediated by important cultural norms of high power distance, a collectivist orientation and hierarchical compliance.

Ting WANG 408

Leadership is socially constructed within each context and therefore leadership development programs need to work with, not against the culture and context within which leaders work. It is increasingly clear that development programs need to be based on a localized curriculum, both in terms of knowledge and culturally-sensitive approaches to learning and leading. It is important for programs to note that learning “how to do a job” does not occur in a professional or organisational vacuum. The societal context in which roles are enacted impacts on the principal socialisation processes (Walker, et al., 2007, pp. 670–671). Importing substantive ideas from one cultural context to another can be beneficial but is fraught with risk and should be undertaken with sensitivity and care (Ribbins & Gronn, 2000). Commenting on a pedagogy for international education, Hill (2007) argues that intercultural understanding requires the observer to change position. His/her culture and life experiences will affect how others are viewed and this serves as an important point of reference. But real intercultural understanding occurs when the observer can shift outside his/her frame of reference and into that of the other, to become aware of “how cultures feel and operate from the standpoint of the insider” (Heyward, 2002, p. 16). It is therefore unwise to assume that theories of leadership espoused in Western cultures are universally applicable to Chinese culture. It is important to understand how national and indigenous cultures influence and modify the uptake of ideas imported from Western countries.

Many theorists have argued that, if teachers’ conceptions of learning and teaching are developed to more elaborated levels and complex perspectives, their teaching practices should improve accordingly (Gibbs, 1995; Gow & Kember, 1993; Ho, 2001; Ramsden, 1992; Trigwell, 1995). On the other hand, there are research findings which suggest that discrepancies between espoused ideas and actual practices are common (Argyris & Schon, 1974; Gow, Kember, & Sivan, 1992; Samuelowicz & Bain, 1992). It is therefore probable that newly developed ideas will exist as espoused conceptions, or that it will take some time before they are put into practice (Ho, 2001). Contemporary research only informs us of the static relationship between existing conceptions and leadership practices. It lacks findings relating to the dynamics of how changes in learning and leadership conceptions are transferred to changes in leadership practices and at what rate. Despite an increasing body of literature on Chinese educational leadership in recent years, there is limited systematic research into Chinese leaders’ perceptions and practices, particularly in an international education context. How do they mediate the influence of Western ideas when they bring traditional assumptions about leadership to an interaction with contemporary Western discourses? This interpretative study was informed by this gap in the literature and sought to address the issues identified.


The Program

The transnational program under study, a Master of Educational Leadership, has been offered by the University of Canberra in Hangzhou Normal University since 2002. The program has graduated over 300 students until 2010 and enrolled about 110 students in 2011. It is delivered in a co-teaching and bilingual flexible mode in three intensive teaching brackets of six core subjects over twelve months: “Leadership in learning organizations,” “Educational policy and planning,” “Educational effectiveness and evaluation,” “Educational futures,” “Professional development in educational organisations,” “Training development and knowledge transfer.” The partner university offers an additional four subjects requested by Chinese authorities. Australian academics undertake responsibility for the development and intensive delivery of the course and for marking/moderating assessment with the assistance of local co-teachers. Chinese academics are also utilized as translators of course materials, tutors in the classes, providers of support for students to complete assignments after the intensive phase.

Lectures are delivered in English and translated by bilingual team members. Course materials are primarily of Western origin and translated into Chinese, but some materials are drawn from Chinese sources or relevant cross-cultural studies. Teaching approaches are dialogue-based and linked to constructivist theories of learning. This program has considerable, positive impact on educational leadership development in Zhejiang Province, evidenced by increasing student demand and a double intake annually starting from 2009. The program director received a 2009 Australian Learning and Teaching Council Citation for exemplary transnational education using culturally sensitive, dialogue-based approaches to inspire education professionals taught in China to think critically about educational leadership.

Research Method

The study was primarily qualitative and interpretative, based on the interview responses from 20 participants. The purpose of interpretive research is of paramount importance in envisaging the social reality of the case setting, which is initially unknown until the investigator understands the way the participants interact in their world (Radnor, 2001). Interpretative phenomenological analysis recognizes that “access to experience is always dependent on what participants tell us about that experience, and that the researcher then needs to interpret that account from the participant in order to understand their experience” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p. 3).

Ting WANG 410

The research design of the study was a pre- and post- comparison case study inspired by the phenomenographic approach (Marton, 1981, 1986). Phenomenography is the empirical study of the limited number of qualitatively different ways in which we experience, conceptualize, understand, perceive, and apprehend various phenomena and aspects of the world around us. It has been used to help understand key aspects of variations in the experiences of groups of people (Marton & Booth, 1997). These differing experiences and understandings are characterized in terms of categories of description, logically related to each other, and forming hierarchies in relation to given criteria. Such an ordered set of categories of description is called the outcome space of the phenomenon and concepts in question. Although different kinds of data can be used, the dominant method for collecting data is the individual interview which is carried out in a dialogical manner. The categories of description corresponding to those differing understandings and the logical relations that can be established between them constitute the main results of a phenomenographic study (Marton, 1992, 1994; Trigwell, 2000).

The first cohort of fifty-two educators from Zhejiang Province, China, enrolled in 2002. Forty participants accepted interview invitations. Because the focus of this study was on variations in ways people experience a phenomenon, the study included a range of individual’s experiences, and the sample was selected to maximize the possible variation (Trigwell, 2000). The twenty selected represented as much variation as possible, ranging from varied disciplines, ages, genders, teaching, professional and sectoral experience. The profile of the participants was also similar to that of the cohort in terms of age, gender and education sectors. The participants comprised 15 males and five females. Eight school principals, six university administrators, and six system officials participated.

An in-depth and semi-structured interview technique was used to explore the 20 participants’ responses and two sets of interviews were conducted, in April 2002 and April 2003. The average time for each interview was approximately one hour. All documents distributed to participants were translated from English into Chinese and all interviews were administered in Chinese. Each interview was audio-taped and transcribed verbatim, with relevant sections of the transcripts fully translated from Chinese into English by the researcher, an accredited translator.

The 200 pages of transcripts were coded based on emergent themes and categories. Initial coding was typically descriptive and of low inference, whereas subsequent coding integrated data by using higher-order concepts (Punch, 1998). The transcripts were also summarized as a series of typical vignettes that focused on individuals’ conceptions of learning and leadership as well as self-reported leadership practice change. The responses were sorted into conceptual categories


on the basis of similarities and differences. The data analysis was conducted by moving between the full transcripts and the vignettes. The study sought a better understanding of participants’ conceptions and leadership practice by comparing their responses before and after the course.

Findings

Table 1 indicates the self-reported leadership practice changes across three sectors and percentages. Table 1 Self-Reported Changes (and Percentages of Change) in Leadership Practice across Three Sectors

Extent School principals University administrators Education officials

Large 3 (37.5%) 1 (16.7%) 1 (16.7%)

Moderate 3 (37.5%) 4 (66.6%) 3 (50%)

Small/none 2 (25%) 1 (16.7%) 2 (33.3%)

Total 8 (100%) 6 (100%) 6 (100%)

The variations in the extent of change (large, moderate or small/none) were

based on respondents’ self-reports. Content analysis of the examples cited by the respondents was also utilized to justify the variations. Self-reported practices which focused on organizational, structural or cultural changes were reported as henda (large) changes by respondents. Those focusing on modifying or developing previous practices were regarded as moderate, or yixie (some) changes by respondents. Those who reported small/none did not cite any example of practice change or admitted they made henxiao (little) change in their work places.

It can be seen that three of the eight (37.5%) school principals, one of the six (16.7%) education officials and one of the six (16.7%) university administrators reported large change. School principals appeared to be more receptive to new perspectives and likely to make larger changes in practice than their counterparts in other sectors. Four (66.6%) university administrators reported moderate change, while three (50%) education officials and three (37.5%) principals claimed moderate change. Two (33.3%) education officials, two (25%) principals and one (16.7%) university administrator reported small change. In this study, officials were more likely to be cautious in practice than principals and university administrators.

Self-reported changes in respondents’ leadership practice over the course of one year are presented in Table 2.

Ting WANG 412

Table 2 Extent and Themes of Self-Reported Change in Leadership Practice

Respondents Extent Themes of examples or cases cited by respondents

School principals

George Large Promote teacher leadership and student leadership

Hilary Large Promote participative leadership

Kevin Large Adopt a percolation model in policy implementation

Jeremy Moderate Encourage team and collaborative learning

Michael Moderate Encourage the use of case study and action learning research

Nathan Moderate Improve performance management

Isabella Small Pay attention to soliciting suggestions from teachers

Luke Small Pay more attention to communication with teachers and students

University administrators

Oliver Large Promote empowerment and delegation of power

Paula Moderate Encourage team learning among staff

Steven Moderate Motivate followers and facilitate their development

Tony Moderate Encourage active involvement of followers

William Moderate Show concern for staff’s feeling and growth

Richard Small Ask for suggestions from colleagues

Education officials

Bruce Large Promote shared vision and create mission statements

Adam Moderate Pay attention to a practical orientation in policy planning

Cindy Moderate Raise a sense of strategic planning

Felix Moderate Establish multiple channels of information flow

Diana Small Have little change in leadership practice due to the nature of job

Eric Small Report no substantial change in leadership practice

The themes of leadership practice cases reported by respondents varied, with

slightly different emphasis in each sector. School principals reported greater change in practice than their counterparts from the other sectors. They also tended to emphasize relational and operational issues, like participative leadership, team learning, or policy implementation. Education officials tended to focus on big picture issues, such as macro level thinking, strategic policy planning, and organizational structure. University administrators seemed to emphasize relational issues like empowering, motivating, and involving staff. Pseudonyms were used in this study to preserve participants’ confidentiality. The selected vignettes offer deeper understanding of their comments.


Self-Perceived Leadership Practice Changes of School Principals

Five of the eight principals tended to place an emphasis on relational and operational issues. Three principals who reported large change all focused on promoting active participation and extensive consultation. For instance, Nathan described the way he improved performance management in his school and explained how a traditional scientific management model was integrated by way of motivation and a humanistic approach. He did not want to produce radical change in his school but aimed at improving practice by “drawing on new perspectives and insights gained from the course.” Three other principals indicated moderate change. Jeremy described how he promoted team and collaborative learning among staff through seeking feedback and suggestions, and conducting collaborative projects. Isabella and Luke reported little change but indicated that they had begun to pay more attention to soliciting suggestions from staff or students. Isabella indicated that “since the dilemmas or conflicts in my workplace derived from the local context, suitable solutions should be sought in this local context not from Western countries.”

Vignette 1 George: Large Change

School principal George illustrated the way he promoted participative leadership and student involvement in decision-making. He commented that, in the past, school leaders may have made important policies about consulting team leaders, or sometimes xiao weihui (school council) included a few teacher representatives, but that nowadays, “the circle of consultation was not limited to mid-level managers, with more teachers involved.” Before making important policies in the school, he often “consulted teachers extensively, soliciting suggestions from different jiaoyan zu (subject groups) and nianji zu (grade groups).” He regarded this as one obvious change since undertaking the course.

Moreover, George began to attach more importance to students’ active involvement in school management. Students previously “had little say in decision-making processes in school and were supposed to be managed strictly by school leaders and teachers.” School leaders may have solicited students’ suggestions through the Principal’s Letterbox or emails, but students played no role in making policy. Three students were now selected to act as assistants to the principal; they could attend some xiao weihui meetings or school team leader meetings. George believed, “student development should be the primary consideration for whatever school leaders do.”

George also proposed different requirements for teachers’ professional development. In the past, “school leaders generally followed directions issued by the local educational department, which allowed teachers to participate in some

Ting WANG 414

mandatory training courses.” But sometimes they were reluctant or even refused to let teachers attend due to financial considerations. George now adopted a different attitude and practice. In addition to mandatory training arrangements, the school provided school-based professional development courses or activities for teachers. There was a shift in focus from mandatory training and even unwillingness to support teachers’ further education to supplying more opportunities for teachers to design their individual career development paths.

George echoed other respondents’ comments on China’s differences from Anglo-American countries “in terms of historical, social and cultural background, and economic development.” While acknowledging his different learning experience of “studying abroad without going overseas” and “positive influence of alternative leadership perspectives,” he highlighted the importance of “adapting leadership practice to the local contexts.” He commented on his dilemma of addressing cultural and systemic constraints. Some of his “new ideas were not understood by teachers or shared by the school community” and he was obliged to conform to the prevalent social norms and practices.

George reported more consultative and collaborative leadership approaches after the course. He shared the notion of teacher and student leadership and did “walk his talk” in practice. He proposed other positive strategies for staff professional development in his school. In fact, he sent several deputy principals and heads of department to take this program between 2004 and 2009. This may echo his determination to promote participatory leadership and a collaborative learning culture in his school as indicated in the interviews. He was widely regarded as a proactive change agent in his school. The researcher’s school visit in 2004 and conversations with his executives who attended the program between 2004 and 2009 confirmed his claim of development in leadership practice and the significant impact of the program on promoting a learning culture in his school.

Self-Perceived Leadership Practice Changes of University Administrators

Five of the six university administrators seemed to pay particular attention to relational issues like empowering, motivating, and involving staff. Oliver, a president from a higher education institution, illustrated how he began to place an emphasis on empowerment and delegation of power in his leadership practice. He came to realize that his previous leadership style tended to “be a bureaucratic, closed or chief executive officer model.” He was now trying to “adopt more open, democratic, collaborative and empowering leadership to manage the college.” He reported a large change and illustrated how he delegated the power of recruiting staff to heads of departments. Four administrators indicated moderate change.

Paula described how she encouraged team learning among staff by preparing


teaching plans together. Others cited examples to show that they had begun to promote the staff’s participation in order to achieve their recognition and support (Tony), or communicate with staff effectively when setting tasks (William). A university administrator (Richard) reported little change and thought the influence on his leadership practice seemed limited.

Vignette 2 Steven: Moderate Change

A divisional director of a university (Steven) described how he began to place an emphasis on motivating and facilitating followers. In the past, he had considered himself more “as a line manager, following orders from the top and implementing plans faithfully.” He also asked his followers to do this. He believed that the nature of his job determined his role as a manager. For example, he used to ask the staff to follow his instructions strictly. When assigning tasks to a staff member, Steven usually gave him a detailed list of things to do. The staff would “obey the instructions faithfully but rarely did more than what was asked. Their initiative and participative awareness were severely hampered.” Steven stated that he now often gave staff more freedom and asked about their ideas and experience in dealing with the issues. He had come to realize that “it was important for a leader to empower and encourage staff to reflect on their work practice.” He used to emphasize top-down implementation and strict management, and regard staff members as one of his hands. Now he viewed them as “independent workers with their own ideas, capabilities, or influences rather than puppets following instructions rigidly.”

Steven highlighted an enriched perspective through dialogue based participatory learning and reflections. However, he viewed the change process in leadership practice as gradual and incremental given the strong influence of indigenous culture and local contexts. He made his points explicit in the following response.

Obviously, we have our own ideas, philosophies, and characteristics. We need to take Chinese culture and contexts into consideration. However, if we think there are more similarities than differences between Chinese culture and Western culture, we would adopt a more tolerant and open attitude to Western ideas. Undoubtedly, we can draw beneficial experiences from the development of Western countries.

Self-Perceived Leadership Practice Changes of System Administrators

Four of the six system officials tended to be interested in the big picture issues like macro level thinking, strategic policy planning, and organisational structure. Bruce, director of a district educational bureau, reported large change and

Ting WANG 416

described his efforts in promoting, shared vision and creating mission statements in twelve schools in his district. Three officials indicated moderate change. Cindy described how she made it a rule to have monthly strategic meetings regularly with the department heads in her bureau. They checked the implementation of last month’s plans and designed operational plans for the next month while referring to the long-term plan at the same time.

Diana and Eric reported little change in practice. Diana, head of a unit, maintained that she endeavoured to apply what she had learned within the sphere of her influence. However, due to the constraints of her junior position in her organisation, it was impossible for her to make any great difference in reality. Eric, a senior executive from the local educational bureau, insisted that his previous leadership ideas or behaviours had actually been influenced by some Western educational ideas long before he attended this course. He regarded a good leader as “a decision maker, a service provider, and facilitator.” Eric stated his purpose for taking part in the course was to “learn some knowledge and broaden his foresight.” However, he maintained “there are no ready theories for you to solve the practical problems you encounter in your workplace.” This suggests that he may value indigenous perspectives and be critical of Western perspectives.

Vignette 3 Felix: Moderate Change

Felix, a president of a large educational group, described how he reflected on the Western theory of flattened structures and began to emphasize establishing multiple channels of information flow in a school. The organisational structure of a primary school in his educational group used to be hierarchical, with the principal at the top, deputy principals at the next level, then heads of department at a lower level. This was a typical pyramid administrative model. Gradually a serious problem emerged. Teachers felt that the principal’s evaluation of them was not important at all but the comments or opinions from heads of departments counted. The principal made decisions mainly based upon information reported by middle level managers. The problem was that “information or feedback sifted by different layers may have gone to the principal in a distorted form. The principal was isolated from teachers and dependent upon some unreliable information reported by the middle level managers.”

Felix believed this problem was caused by congested information flow channels. He considered it as “premature and unrealistic to change the traditional organisational structure completely.” After undertaking the course he believed he could “draw on the idea of flattened organisational structures to improve communication.” Multiple channels of information flow were established although the basic organisational structure remained the same. The principal


could get information directly from teachers and heads of departments rather than only listening to reports from deputy principals. The principal could therefore “make decisions based on reliable information collected from different channels. This practice of establishing multiple channels of information flow proved to be effective in the school.”

In view of the contextual and structural factors, Felix regarded it as unrealistic to adopt Western ideas in their entirety or initiate radical structural reform. He reflected on and modified his previous beliefs about bureaucratic organisational structure. He appears to be a proactive practitioner who tried to align Western ideas with local contexts in a cautious but positive manner. He insisted that efforts should be made to “integrate the essence of Chinese leadership ideas with alternative leadership perspectives.” He emphasized “a balance between scientific management and participatory-making in leadership practice”:

Local context, cultural background, and qualities of followers need to be considered when adapting Western leadership theories. We may rationally propose that we should have flattened organizational structure and democratic management. But in reality this can be hardly be achieved. We need to consider the qualities of organizational members. If their qualities are not up to desirable standard, enforcing shared leadership or flattened structure may bring trouble to an organization.

Vignette 4 Adam: Moderate Change

A director (Adam) from a municipal bureau of education illustrated how he began to place an emphasis on a practical orientation in planning local educational policies. He indicated that “the course emphasized relating theories to practice and the assignments required workplace application.” He stated that “Australian school policies indicated very specific and feasible objectives. The teaching plans designed by Australian teachers or student assessments also listed specific objectives or criteria.” The policies or visions proposed by Chinese education administrators tended to “be comparatively abstract and macro level guidelines.” He indicated that “sometimes these policies became empty rhetoric or unrealistic slogans.” He lamented the difficulty of implementing many policies in China. He commented that one of the reasons was that those policies were abstract guidelines and not specific or practical enough. He explained that he “gained insights from an emphasis on practicality and feasibility of plans in the course.” For example, he presented a paper at a national conference, which outlined five specific, clearly defined and feasible strategies. This proposal became a local educational policy and was later published in several leading journals/newspapers in China. He stated that his way of “proposing a plan and developing strategies had been greatly influenced by the practical orientation of

Ting WANG 418

the course.” He believed “policy makers should propose policies and plans with specific objectives and strategies, rather than empty slogans, political rhetoric, or abstract principles.”

Adam believed it was inappropriate to “adopt Western leadership ideas indiscriminately without considering the contemporary Chinese context.” He emphasized active mediation between his cultural heritage and insights from other nations. He made the most sophisticated comments on intercultural interaction and capacity building:

Australian academics have introduced many theories and practices in Australia and other Western countries. There are also many theories and best practices in China . . . . We have lots of best practices, but our efforts in analyzing, synthesizing, summarizing practices and coming up with theories are far from enough. We should not only learn and adapt theories from Western countries, but also propose new theories applicable to Chinese contexts. If Australian academics help with Chinese educators in this regard, they will make great contributions to capacity building and creativity promotion of Chinese educators.

Discussion

One question in this study was to investigate whether a change in Chinese educational leaders’ conceptions of learning and leadership towards more elaborated levels and complex perspectives would lead to better developed leadership practice. A finding of this study was that all those who espoused more complex conceptions of learning and leadership after undertaking the course, reported to have changed their leadership practice over the year of study. In addition, most interviewees were able to demonstrate their claims of change in practice through relating credible examples of new leadership practices as reported in the vignettes. This implies that change did not only remain at the espoused level, and there was high probability that it would bring about changes in practice. Moreover, because participants invested so much in their learning, they would be motivated to see some improvement in practice. In the case of this study, consequential changes in leadership practices happened within a short time frame during a one-year course. This finding suggests that a change in conceptions of learning and leadership may also develop leadership practice. This belief underlies the leadership development course. The ultimate goal of educational leadership development is to improve learning, teaching and leadership practice. Echoing observations on the impact of conceptual change on the improvement of teaching (Gibbs, 1995; Gow & Kember, 1993; Ho, 2001; Ramsden, 1992; Trigwell, 1995), the findings of this study present a promising view that learning and the development of leadership concepts is likely to lead to


improvement in leadership practices. Various themes emerged from cited examples which show that the course may

have played a role in expanding participants’ leadership strategies and developing their practice. The different cultures of the three sectors and the nature of their work may explain different emphasis in each sector. School principals were generally educational practitioners and site-based leaders who were practically oriented. Compared with education officials and university administrators, they tended to pay more attention to operational issues related to learning, teaching, and site-based leadership. They also seemed to have increasing autonomy in running the schools within a broadly prescribed framework. They operated in a less bureaucratic culture than the other two groups, and tended to hold an open attitude toward alternative ideas, emphasizing the use of Western learning and leadership theories to their workplaces.

Officials from local and provincial educational authorities were mostly bureaucrats and policy makers. They were likely to be policy oriented and tended to focus on macro level issues. They attached considerable importance to policy planning and implementation at various levels. They tended to focus on emergent, big picture issues of educational reform in China and generally held a more cautious if not skeptical or resistant attitude towards Western ideas compared with the other two groups. Constrained by a more bureaucratic and hierarchical culture, they might have been concerned that any radical decisions may lead to irreparable impact on educational development in local education systems. Consequently, they seemed to be critical of alternative perspectives, and likely to take cautious measures in practice.

University administrators in this study were professional academics as well. They were academically oriented and therefore paid more attention to the course content and academic disciplinary knowledge. They were more likely to focus on the controversial issues arising from the course content compared with their counterparts from the other two sectors. They tended to hold a reflective and inquiring attitude towards Western theories and ideas. It is speculated that the academic freedom fostered by university culture and their analytical minds as academics helped them to develop their conceptions and leadership practice in a reflective and gradual manner.

Despite these observable differences in conceptions and practice reported by participants from the three sectors, there seemed to be more similarities than variance in these aspects. One implication is that these educational leaders had been trained and operated in a broader Chinese cultural, social, and educational context, which played a more important role in shaping their perspectives and practical work than the subcultures of their different sectors. In other words, a generic educational culture in China plays a unifying role across different educational sectors. This finding is congruent with Hallinger and Leithwood’s

Ting WANG 420

(1996) argument that the societal culture exerts a significant influence on educational administrators beyond that of the specific organisation’s culture. This also relates to the bureaucratic culture commonly occurring in the socialist organizational structures and the Chinese cultural traditions such as collectivism, harmony and respect for hierarchy (Bush & Qiang, 2000). The participants’ different learning experiences and alternative leadership perspectives seemed to challenge their “deep leadership structures” and existing cultural norms of high power distance and hierarchical compliance (Walker, 2004; Walker & Hallinger, 2007; Walker, et al., 2007). This finding is also in line with Chen’s (2002) observation of a confrontation between the existing bureaucratic culture and the emerging democratic culture in contemporary Chinese schools.

Most participants seemed to try to relate their learning to practice. They were aware of political, cultural, social and economic factors and highlighted the importance of absorbing what is advantageous from other cultures and keeping the essence of their indigenous culture (Chen, 2002). Some lamented their dilemma in addressing the discrepancy of their “theory espoused” and “theory in practice” (Argyris & Schon, 1974; Gow, et al., 1992; Samuelowicz & Bain, 2001). The findings show that self-perceived leadership practice change is the result of national and indigenous cultures interfering with the Western theories on leadership and affecting the leadership practices of participants. This study suggests that leadership development programs across national boundaries are helpful for educational leaders in so far as they enhance intercultural awareness, help participants learn about contemporary educational ideas and practices in other countries, and enable reflection on participants’ own perspectives and practices and accommodation of alternative perspectives. These benefits are critical to the development of leadership practices. This supports Ozga’s (2005) argument that embedded policies and practices mediate global policy in distinctive ways. It also echoes a call for intercultural understanding, localized curriculum, culturally sensitive approaches to learning and leading, and awareness of societal and local contexts in international education and leadership development programs (Hill, 2007; Walker, et al., 2007).

Conclusion

This study was primarily interpretative, since it was based on the interview responses of participants. Further, the study was exploratory, and researchers tentatively indicated sectoral differences between groups with no intention of generalizing the findings to the wider population. It should be noted that the data of this study were collected between 2002 and 2003 and that Chinese society and its education system have undergone significant changes since. The author did


not conduct a longitudinal study of leadership practices in the workplaces of participants to see if changes were maintained. Follow-up research is suggested to examine further how those participants or recent graduates are integrating alternative perspectives into their workplaces over time, through observations of the participants and consultation with relevant stakeholders. The author’s visits to a number of program participants’ workplaces from 2004 to 2010 as well as two focus group interviews conducted by an independent quality review team in October 2010 with 18 graduates and 16 enrolled students, provided strong evidence in support of the positive impact of this transnational leadership development program and the importance of culturally sensitive pedagogies and intercultural understanding. This aspect is beyond the scope of this paper but would be a worthwhile focus for further discussion.

This study suggests that exposure to different perspectives appeared to expand Chinese participants’ views and equip them with a wider range of strategies in leadership practice. They seemed cautious about radical changes in practice, reiterating that local contexts and cultures must be taken into account when accommodating Western educational ideas. They were also aware of the tensions existing in their workplaces between the traditional Chinese and Western orientations. Their self-perceived changes in leadership practice were the results of mediating contextual and cultural conditions rather than the direct transfer of Western ideas and practices into the Chinese context. This strong theme is consistent with responses from different cohorts of this program. The main argument is that leadership programs across borders may enhance reflections on practices and accommodate optional perspectives to advance leadership practices.

References

Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2009). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. Paris, France: UNESCO.

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Blunt, P., & Jones, M. L. (1997). Exploring the limits of Western leadership theory in East Asia and Africa. Personnel Review, 26(1/2), 6–23. doi:10.1108/00483489710157760

Bush, T., & Qiang, H. (2000). Leadership and culture in Chinese education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 20(2), 58–67.

Chen, J. (2002). Secondary school leadership: A study on the leadership role of secondary school principals in China with a reflection on that role in Australian principals (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Chen, M. (1995). Asian management systems: Chinese, Japanese and Korean styles of business. London, England: Routledge.

Chen, Z. L. (2002). 我国加入WTO对教育的影响及对策研究 [China’s entry into the WTO:

Ting WANG 422

The impact on education and policy implications]. 人民教育 [People’s Education], (3), 4–7.

Cheng, K. M. (1998). Can educational values be borrowed? Looking into cultural differences. Peabody Journal of Education, 73(2), 11–30.

Child, J. (1994). Management in China during the age of reform. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Diao, P. E. (Ed.). (2000). 教育文化学 [Educational Culture]. 南京,中国: 江苏教育出版社 [Nanjing, China: Jiangsu Educational Press].

Du, J., & Liang, Y. L. (2005). 教育全球化的现实境遇与价值选择 [Conflicts and options of educational globalization]. 比较教育研究 [Comparative Education Review], 26(12), 52–56.

Feng, D. M. (Ed.). (2002). 沟通与分享:中西教育管理领衔学者世纪汇谈 [Communication and sharing in educational administration: The dialogue between leading Chinese and Western scholars at the turn of the century]. 上海, 中国: 上海教育出版社 [Shanghai, China: Shanghai Educational Press].

Gibbs, G. (1995). Changing lecturers’ conceptions of teaching and learning through action research. In A. Brew (Ed.), Directions in staff development (pp. 21–35). Buckingham, England: SRHE and Open University Press.

Gordon, R. D. (2002). Conceptualising leadership with respect to its historical-contexual antecedents to power. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(2), 151–167.

Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 20–33.

Gow, L., Kember, D., & Sivan, A. (1992). Lecturers’ views of their teaching practices: Implications for staff development needs. Higher Education Research and Development, 11(2), 135–149.

Gronn, P. (2001). Commentary: Crossing the great divides: Problems of cultural diffusion for leadership in education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4(4), 401–414.

Gu, J. X. (2009). Transnational education: Current developments and policy implications. Frontiers of Education in China, 4(4), 624–649. doi:10.1007/s11516-009-0033-y

Gu, M. Y. (2006). An analysis of the impact of traditional Chinese culture on Chinese education. Frontiers of Education in China, 1(2), 169–190. doi:10.1007/s11516-006-0001-8

Gu, M. Y. (2010). A blueprint for educational development in China: A review of “The national guidelines for medium- and long-term educational reform and development (2010−2020).” Frontiers of Education in China, 5(3), 291–309. doi:10.1007/s11516-010-0101-3

Hallinger, P., & Leithwood, K. (1996). Culture and educational administration: A case of finding out what you don’t know you don’t know. Journal of Educational Administration, 34(5), 98–116. doi:10.1108/09578239610148296

Heyward, M. (2002). From international to intercultural: Redefining the international school for a globalized world. Journal of Research in International Education, 1(1), 9–32. doi:10.1177/147524090211002

Hill, I. (2007). A pedagogy for international education. In R. Maclean (Ed.), Learning and teaching for the twenty-first century: Festschrift for Professor Phillip Hughes (pp. 35–55). New York, NY: Springer.

Ho, A. S. P. (2001). A conceptual change approach to university staff development. In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (Eds.), Teaching the Chinese learner: Psychological and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 239–254). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong, Comparative Education Research Centre and Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.


Huang, F. (2008). Regulation and practice of transnational higher education in China. In L. Dunn & M. Wallace (Eds.), Teaching in transnational higher education: Enhancing learning for offshore international students (pp. 23–33). London, England: Routledge.

Jones, K., & Alexiadou, N. (2001, September). Travelling policy/local spaces. Paper presented at the Congrès Marx. International 111, Paris, France.

Kirkbride, P. S., Tang, S. F. Y., & Westwood, R. I. (1991). Chinese conflict preferences and negotiating behaviours: cultural and psychological influences. Organisation Studies, 12(3), 365–386. doi: 10.1177/017084069101200302

Knight, J. (2005). Borderless, offshore, transnational and cross-border education: Definition and data dilemmas. London, England: The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.

Knight, J. (2006). IAU 2005 internationalization survey: Preliminary findings report. Paris, France: International Association of Universities.

Ling, W., Chia, R. C., & Fang, L. (2000). Chinese implicit leadership theory. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140(6), 729–739. doi:10.1080/00224540009600513

Liu, X. K. (Ed.). (2002). 中国传统文化与教育 [Chinese traditional culture and education]. 长春, 中国: 东北师范大学出版社 [Changchun, China: Northeast Normal University Press].

Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, (10), 177–200.

Marton, F. (1986). Phenomography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(2), 28–49.

Marton, F. (1992). Phenomenography and “the art of teaching all things to all men.” Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(3), 253–267.

Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. In T. Husen & T. N. Poslethaite (Eds.), The international encyclopaedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 8, pp. 4424–4429). London, England: Pergamon.

Marton, F., & Booth, S. A. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ozga, J. (2005). Modernizing the education workforce: A perspective from Scotland. Educational Review, 57(2), 207–219. doi:10.1080/0013191042000308378

Punch, K. F. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London, England: Sage Publications.

Radnor, A. H. (2001). Researching your professional practice: Doing interpretive research. Buckingham, England: Oxford University Press.

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London, England: Routledge. Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York, NY: Walter De Gruyter. Ribbins, P., & Gronn, P. (2000). Researching principals: Context and culture in the study of

leadership in schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 20(2), 34–45. Ribbins, P., & Zhang, J. H. (2004). Headteachers in rural China: Aspects of ambition.

International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 7(2), 127–146. doi:10.1080/1360312042000211437

Ribbins, P., & Zhang, J. H. (2006). Culture, societal culture and school leadership: A study of selected head teachers in rural China. International Studies in Educational Administration, 34(1), 71–88.

Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers. Higher Education, 24(1), 93–112.

Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. (2001). Revisiting academics’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Higher Education, 41(3), 299–325. doi:10.1023/A:1004130031247

Ting WANG 424

Seagrave, S. (1995). Lords of rim: The invisible empire of the overseas Chinese. London, England: Bantam Press.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (2001). Moral authority, community and diversity: Leadership challenges for the twenty-first century. In K. C. Wong & C. W. Evers (Eds.), Leadership for quality schooling: international perspectives (pp. 1–11). London, England, and New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London, England: Sage.

Trigwell, K. (1995). Increasing faculty understanding of teaching. In W. A. Wright (Ed.), Teaching improvement practices: Successful faculty development strategies (pp. 76–99). New York, NY: Anker.

Trigwell, K. (2000). Phenomenography: Discernment and variation. Improving Student Learning, (7), 133–158.

Walker, A. (2004). Constitution and culture: Exploring the deep leadership structures of Hong Kong schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 25(1), 75–94. doi:10.1080/0159630042000178491

Walker, A. (2005, October). Leading authentically at the crossroads of culture and context. Paper presented at the 10th Annual Values and Leadership Conference, Philadelphia, PA.

Walker, A., & Dimmock, C. (2000a). Insights into educational administration: The need for a cross-cultural comparative perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 20(2), 11–22.

Walker, A., & Dimmock, C. (2000b). One size fits all? Teacher appraisal in a Chinese culture. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 14(2), 155–178. doi:10.1023/ A:1008106803772

Walker, A., & Hallinger, P. (2007). Navigating culture and context: The principalship in East and South-East Asia. In R. Maclean (Ed.), Learning and teaching for the twenty-first century: Festschrift for Professor Phillip Hughes (pp. 255–273). New York, NY: Springer.

Walker, A., Hallinger, P., & Qian, H. (2007). Leadership development for school effectiveness and improvement in East Asia. In T. Townsend (Ed.), International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement (Vol. 1, pp. 659–680). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Wang, T. (2007). Understanding Chinese educational leaders’ conceptions in an international education context. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(1), 71–88. doi:10.1080/13603120500445275

Wang, T. (2008a). Chinese educational leaders’ conceptions of learning and leadership: An interpretative study in an international education context. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.

Wang, T. (2008b). Intercultural dialogue and understanding: implications for teachers. In M. Wallace & L. Dunn (Eds.), Teaching in transnational higher education: Enhancing learning for offshore international students (pp. 57–66). London, England: RoutledgeFalmer.

Wang, T., & Collard, J. (2009a). Changing conceptions of learning and leadership in Zhejiang Province, China, 2002−2004. In J. Collard & A. H. Normore (Eds.), Leadership and intercultural dynamics (pp. 211–232). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Wang, T., & Collard, J. (2009b). Chinese leaders and Western discourses 2002−2004. In J. Collard & A. H. Normore (Eds.), Leadership and intercultural dynamics (pp. 233–258). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Wong, K. C. (2001a). Chinese culture and leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4(4), 309–319. doi:10.1080/13603120110077990

Wong, K. C. (2001b). Culture and educational leadership. In K. C. Wong & C. W. Evers (Eds.), Leadership for quality schooling: International perspectives (pp. 36–53). London, England,


and New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer. Zhang, R. B. (2001). 关于中外合作办学之我见 [My opinion on Sino-foreign cooperation in

running schools]. 中国高等教育 [China Higher Education], (2), 20–21. Zhang, Y. Q. (1999). 文化视野中的高等教育 [Higher education from cultural perspective]. 南京, 中国: 南京师范大学出版社 [Nanjing, China: Nanjing Normal University Press].

critical perspectives on changes in educational leadership practice

Documents