the use of cases in the leadership development of principals

The use of cases in the leadershipdevelopment of principals

A recent initiative in one large educationsystem in Australia

Neil CranstonSchool of Education, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to document the development and use of cases for the leadershipdevelopment of principals in one large education system in Australia. The case initiative was speciallytargeted at deepening understandings of the department’s recently released statement about theprincipalship, Leadership Matters. The theoretical underpinnings of cases and their use in leadershipdevelopment are examined. A discussion of critical feedback from users is provided with commentaryon future developments completing the paper.

Design/methodology/approach – The literature relevant to cases and their use (and relatedapproaches such as problem-based learning) is reviewed, providing the framework for the developmentof the cases themselves and the principles guiding their application via a series of workshops.A small-scale evaluation study accompanying the workshops provides critical feedback from principalsand principals’ supervisors on the efficacy of the cases themselves and the case method.

Findings – The cases have been very well received in the workshops. It is clear the cases representpowerful and authentic ways for leadership developments among school leaders, with considerablepotential to focus on supporting understandings of, and development with respect to LeadershipMatters. Some of the reported positives of the cases are that they are grounded in authentic “realworld” stories of challenges for principals and that the discussions at the workshops lead to creativeand constructive discussions about such leadership challenges.

Practical implications – The paper provides a number of practical suggestions for take-up byothers interested in the leadership development of principals in these challenging and changing timesfor school leaders. Ideas how to develop and construct cases are provided, together with suggestionsfor application in workshop situations.

Originality/value – While cases have been used in school leadership development previously, thefocus here is a specially constructed developmental process framed around a system’s statement aboutthe principalship, Leadership Matters.

Keywords Principals, Leadership, Management development, Australia, Case studies, Education

Paper type Research paper

Introduction and backgroundLike most education systems nationally and internationally and in response to thechanging and challenging demands on schools today, the state department ofeducation in Queensland, Australia (Education Queensland) recently reviewed itsstatement about the expectations on, and characteristics of, their principals. This bodyhas responsibility for some 1,260 schools in the state (including primary, secondary,special, P-12, P-10 schools and specialist academies). Such statements have typically

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm

The author wishes to acknowledge the ideas and contributions of Jan Alen, Bruce Wilson andGary Barnes to some of the background of this paper.

Leadershipdevelopmentof principals

581

Journal of EducationalAdministration

Vol. 46 No. 5, 2008pp. 581-597

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0957-8234

DOI 10.1108/09578230810895500

been couched as frameworks and more often than not based around extensive sets ofleadership competencies with managerialist undertones. For example, the previousstatement in Queensland was titled Standards Framework for Leaders (EducationQueensland, 1997) and was a competency driven model comprising almost 60 pages.The review of this Framework, together with subsequent developmental work, led tothe current statement about the principalship, Leadership Matters: LeadershipCapabilities for Education Queensland principals (Queensland Government,Department of Education, Training and the Arts, n.d.).

Leadership Matters is a concise articulation of leadership framed around fiveinter-related capabilities (Duignan, 2004): educational (encompass professional knowledgeand understanding of the art of teaching and learning to inspire commitment and achievequality outcomes for students), personal (inner strengths and qualities that underpinethical and professional practice), relational (interpersonal skills required to develop andmaintain quality relationships with a diverse range of people), intellectual (includes cleverthinking, sound judgment and wise decision-making) and organisational (involvescontinuous school improvement through effective management of human, financial andphysical resources). The purposes of the document include establishing a sharedunderstanding of the evolving roles of principals in Education Queensland, emphasisingthe capabilities required of all Education Queensland principals, providing a clear focusfor those who aspire to the principalship, and guiding all leadership development activity.It is the latter purpose that frames the discussion in this paper.

As one strategy to foster understanding of LeadershipMatters, and as part of a broaderthrust of leadership development of principals and aspirants, Education Queenslandcommissioned a project to develop a set of case studies[1] based around problem-basedlearning (PBL) notions (Cranston and Alen, 2007). This represented an innovation inleadership development for this schooling system. It was envisaged that the cases would beused in a series of developmental workshops for principals across the state. It is these cases,their development and implementation that provide the foci for this paper. Consideration ofparticipant data from a set of trial workshops using the cases concludes the discussion, withsuch data providing strong positive support for the use of the cases.

Case and case method as professional development tools have been embedded inlegal, health and business-management fields for many years, with Harvard Universitylaw and business schools having used them for a century or so (Clamp, 2007). PBL, thenomenclature used in some writings (see discussion of terminology later) originated inmedical education, spreading to architecture, law, nursing and engineering (Boud andFeletti, 1997). In education, Orr (2006, p. 495) has identified case and problem-basedteaching methods as now primary modes of teaching in many leadership developmentprograms “because they offer situated learning and the means to try out multipleperspectives.” In short, the approach provides professional development opportunitiesthat are “dynamic and grounded in ‘real-life’ experiences involving some of the myriadof highly complex challenges faced by school leaders” (Cranston, 2002, p. 4).

Leadership development and principalsThere is little doubt that being a principal today offers multiple challenges (Bottery,2004; Cranston et al., 2003). Equally challenging, is not only how best to prepareaspirants for the principalship, but also how to continue the leadership development ofthose already in principal positions. Not surprisingly, much has been written about

JEA46,5

582

how these challenges might be addressed (Barnett, 2004; Bush and Glover, 2005; Colesand Southworth, 2005; Fauske, 2002; Weindling, 2003). Griffith and Taraban (2002,para 1) have noted, “The need to develop new models for the preparation of schooladministrators has been a prominent concern in educational discourse.” Indeed, such isthe interest in this area that broadly focused education journals such as Phi DeltaKappan (Orr, 2006) are devoting more and more attention to it.

Danzig (1999, p. 130) frames a response to the question as to how might leadership betaught by highlighting that “Leadership is not understood by breaking it down into a setof component parts. Leadership is learning to analyse prior experiences in order betterto understand how they shape future courses of action.” As one response to thechallenge of providing contemporary leadership development experiences forprincipals, Griffith and Taraban (2002) have developed online case narratives fordeveloping school leaders, arguing that such an approach through cases can address thecomplexities of school leadership, including the social, cultural, relational, ethical andmoral context of school leadership. Walker and Dimmock (2005) make a similarargument that we need to frame leadership and leadership development in context. Thatis, leadership development needs to include “meaningful involvement of principals intheir own and their peers’ learning” (p. 80) and to take account of the importance ofcontext in how leadership is conceptualised and practised. This focus is also consistentwith the arguments of Halverson et al. (2004, p. 3) that we need to help “school leadersdevelop the ability to apply knowledge appropriately in their work (requiring) access torich examples of contextualized practical wisdom to guide their practice.”

What can cases and PBL contribute to leadership development?As already noted, the use of cases and PBL has been evident in education for some time,notably with an emphasis on leadership development for principals and aspiringprincipals. For example, in Australia, Queensland (Cranston, 2002; Crowther andLimerick, 1998) and more recently New South Wales (New South Wales Department ofEducation and Training, 2007) have had initiatives in this regard. Such is the interest in theuse of cases now in some educational jurisdictions that a whole journal is now dedicated tothe area (Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership – www.ucea.org/cases).

It should be noted that there are some definitional issues debated about the use ofterminology such as cases, case method and PBL. Some writers use the terms almostinterchangeably. For example, Fauske (2000, p. 1) has noted that “in a singleconversation, it may alternatively be called case method, PBL, case based instruction,or teaching from cases.” Bridges and Hallinger (1999, p. 1) see PBL as representing“another instructional modality that relies heavily on cases.”

Clamp (2007, para 4) provides a simple definition of a case as “an account ordescription of a situation or sequence of events confronting an individual, a group ofindividuals, or an organization.” Richert (1991) has suggested that case methodologycombines both artifactual and social elements. The artifactual component is the caseitself (a description of a leadership challenge), while the discussion about the case amongcolleagues forms the social component. Clamp (2007, para 1) sees “case method as aninstructional technique that presents situations to analyse and information from whichdecisions must be made, rather than delivering to the students concepts and theories.Learning in case studies takes place by doing by analysing data both quantitatively andqualitatively; by making decisions as to appropriate recommendations and actions; by


583

communicating such decisions and discussing their rationale” with colleagues.Halverson et al. (2004, p. 3) see cases as opportunities to illustrate both “exemplarypractices as well as to problematize situations for pedagogical purposes.” Hallinger andSnidvongs (2005, p. 9) capture some of these key concepts succinctly when they arguethat PBL “requires learners to understand and apply research, theory and craftknowledge to major problems faced by practitioners.”

In short, cases are the “core” or focus of a PBL approach. It is not the intention here toengage in an extended discussion of the differences in meaning across the variousterminologies – Fauske (2000) provides a useful analysis of some of the issues and terms.What is relevant here is that the focus is not on a problem as such, but on the many nuancesthat surround, impact on and complexify the problem. That is, the focus is about more thanjust a problem because a case may include a number of problems or challenges to beaddressed. For as Fauske (2000) points out, and this is relevant to the initiative underdiscussion here, cases are longer, thicker stories – they are less structured and messy.Divergent responses are encouraged in response to the various challenges raised and thelearner (here, the principal) is seen as an expert in the content relevant to a particular case.Hence, for the purposes of this discussion, cases are being used in a PBL context – theyprovide the focus for discussion, analysis and knowledge generation with the overallintention of fostering the leadership development of principals.

Of course, such approaches drawing on “real-life” examples alone are not sufficient forthe leadership development of principals, but they are effective where decision-makingskills are crucial as such cases offer opportunities to practice analysis, problem solving,action, planning and evaluation (Merseth, 1997). Importantly, Bridges and Hallinger (1999,p. 2) point out that PBL can also facilitate the acquisition of insights into the emotionalaspects of leadership, noting that leadership “involves more that cognitive activities such assolving problems and making decisions; it can sometimes be an emotional ordeal.”Hallinger and Snidvongs (2005, p. 9) re-enforce the important, albeit still limitedcontribution of cases in the learning of principals by warning that PBL is but one of a mosaicof possibilities and is not “the silver bullet that will enhance the professional development ofschool leaders. However, it does represent one useful tool for professional development.”

Importantly, it is argued that what cases can uniquely contribute to the leadershipdevelopment of principals is in bridging the theory-practice divide, providing an effectiveresponse to the criticism of many leadership development programs, such as those oftenoffered through universities, as being too theoretical and not related to the real world facedby principals (Muse and Thomas, 1991). In response to this criticism, Danzig (1997, p. 125)has argued for the use of cases that emphasise “the value of both theory and practice,experience and reflection.” Danzig (1999, p. 118) has also argued that the stories used incase method “are a way to represent experience . . . and these stories can be subject toscrutiny and reflection. (They) connect the explicit, formal symbolic presentations ofknowledge and practical know-how found in action.” Richert (1991, p. 140) sees the use ofcases as a “dialectic between events and meanings, practice and theory.”

Griffith and Taraban (2002, para 53) argue for their use because they link professionalexperiences, providing the “cognitive basis for generalizing from local experience to themore general perspective required of school principals.” It is important to note thatbecause case methods (or PBL) almost invariably are conducted with groups or cohorts ofparticipants, the potential advantages of working in this way are promoted (Scriber and

JEA46,5

584

Donaldson, 2001). In fact, Morrissey (2000) has argued that working together in these sortsof ways has the potential to facilitate the development of learning communities.

Finally, in summary, Claudet (1998, p. 1) has concluded that “case methodapplication in the area of school leadership has proven a valuable tool for theprofessional training and continuing development of educational leaders.” In short,the use of case method and PBL are now well accepted, and indeed well regarded, asone effective strategy for the leadership development of school leaders.

Some underpinnings of cases and PBLIn considering the appropriateness and potential power of cases and PBL forleadership development in the rapidly discontinuously changing environment in whichschools now operate (Limerick et al., 2002), it is instructive to reflect on the argumentsof Taylor et al. (2002, p. 335), who see a need to reverse what they consider to have beensix traditional priorities in leadership education:

(1) from theory to practice;

(2) from parts to systems;

(3) from states and roles to processes;

(4) from knowledge to learning;

(5) from individual action to partnerships; and

(6) from detached analysis to reflexive understanding.

Each of these shifts resonates well with the principles underpinning PBL and case method.Indeed, these are the very characteristics that make cases such powerful tools in leadershipdevelopment. Consistent with Taylor et al.’s (2002) notions, Bridges and Hallinger (1992)have identified a number of principles that they believe need to underpin PBL. Theseinclude:

. the starting point for learning is a problem – this is usually presented as a case;

. the problem is one that participants are likely to face in their futures;

. the knowledge that participants need to acquire is organised around problemsrather than disciplines;

. participants, individually and collectively, assume a major responsibility fortheir own instruction and learning – the process is facilitated;

. the learning occurs within the context of small groups; and

. the participants are provided with resource materials.

Not surprisingly, these principles for PBL are framed by some important theories oflearning, adult learning in particular (Merriam and Cafferella, 1999), that focus on thenotion of the constructivist leader (Lambert, 2002). Aspects of relevance to behighlighted in the consideration of the use of cases include that:

. learning is an active rather than a passive process;

. learning is by nature social and is most likely to occur when learners share ideas,enquire, and problem solve together;

. learners must have opportunities to make sense of new knowledge and createmeaning for themselves based on individual and shared experiences;


585

. reflection and meta-cognition contribute to the construction of knowledge andthe process of sense-making; and

. new learning is mediated by prior experience, values and beliefs (Szabo andLambert, 2002).

Key notions of note here then are that leadership development activities built on PBLprinciples are undertaken as group activities, they focus on engaging participants actively in“real world” cases and that the learning of participants and the generation of new knowledgeis achieved through the shared collective understandings and insights among participants.As such, action learning provides additional foundations to the case method and PBLapproaches, which McGill and Beaty (2001, p. 21) see as an “experiential learning cycle:”

Action learning is a continuous process of learning and reflection, supported by colleagues,with an intention of getting things done. Through action learning, individuals learn with andfrom each other by working on real problems and reflecting on their own experiences.

The underpinnings of cases and PBL identified in the literature reviewed here providevaluable sets of guidelines and characteristics that need to be kept in mind whenpreparing cases and accompanying developmental processes. Indeed, they provideduseful benchmarks against which the cases discussed in this paper were reflected toensure they represented “best practice.” Specific guidelines, such as those articulatedby ANZSOG (n.d.) and Arcadia University (2006) were also useful in this regard. Beforelooking at the particular cases of interest here, it is instructive to note briefly some ofthe challenges likely to arise in the use of cases with principals.

Challenges for principals in using casesSome writers have noted that often those engaged in working through cases can miss thecomplexities. Griffith and Taraban (2002, para 28) see this as arising from a desire to seekthe “right” answers, rather than “exploring the case complexities.” It might be argued thatthis in part exemplifies the life of many principals, who are often required to provide rapid(and it is expected they are the “right”) responses to a seemingly endless array of issues –from parents, teachers, students, systems – many of which are far from rational andstraightforward. By missing the complexities, responses may address the surfaceproblems rather than underlying problems (MacNeil, cited in Griffith and Taraban, para28). As Richert (1991) has argued, working with cases requires participants to learn tomanage, deal with and problem solve multiple complexities, diversities and perspectives.There is no one right answer! Nor is there likely to be only one way of dealing with thechallenges presented in a particular case. Indeed, it is facilitating principals to look for, andappreciate the deeper complexities in cases, and developing coherent and reasonedresponses to these complexities where real learning can occur (Scribner and Donaldson,2001). Mohr (1998) has developed a set of protocols or factors for success in working withprincipal groups, one key element of which is to get them to deepen their understandingsby being more descriptive and less judgemental. In brief, what is needed is for principals tocome together in small group workshops, to encourage them to “take on the life” of theprincipal at the centre of the case, to try to get them to understand the deeper complexitiesof the context and the key players and stakeholders and to take a longer (rather thanshorter) term view to problem-solving. They also need to be encouraged to engage with the“emotions” likely to be evident in case. Finally, sufficient time and opportunity for

JEA46,5

586

discussion are two critical ingredients and good facilitation another in order to maximisethe potential leadership developments from this approach.

Developing the cases and accompanying materialsThis section provides an overview of the development of the leadership cases of interesthere.

The Queensland education department commissioned two external consultants todevelop the cases to foster understanding ofLeadershipMatters, and as part of a broaderthrust of leadership development of principals and aspirants. One of the consultants hadextensive experience in developing various school materials and had previously held asenior leadership role in a national curriculum body. The other, an academic (the author),worked in the educational leadership area (e.g. as coordinator of a university Mastersprogram in leadership) and had extensive experience working with principals. He alsohad experience in earlier developing some PBL materials for leadership development ofprincipals.

The two consultants prepared a brief for the project, including templates as to whatmight be expected in the nature, focus and content of suitable cases – the principles andcontent of the brief reflected those outlined in the literature, such as that noted above.The brief was critiqued by departmental officers, with the final format used essentiallyas the “agenda” for a one-day case writing workshop subsequently held with a group oftwelve invited experienced and respected principals and some other senior departmentalofficers (e.g. one Regional Executive Director, one Executive Director (Schools) – eachhad previously been a principal). The workshop was facilitated by the two consultants.Some case developers (Danzig, 1999) have used interviews with principals to solicit theleadership stories from school leaders, with the actual cases developed around suchideas after the interviews. This is a strategy that has recently been employed indeveloping further cases in this project.

The workshop began with a detailed brief to participants about the nature and purposeof the case development task and followed with writing sessions (participants had accessto laptops, printers), reflection/sharing sessions and a final debrief. The key purpose inengaging principals directly in the development of the cases via this workshop was toensure each case reflected “real life” challenges and experiences of principals. In so doing,it was expected that when taken to a broader audience of principals across the state, thecases would have high credibility with users because of their origins and authenticity.Participants in the workshop were provided with some pre-readings to ensure they werewell prepared for the actual writing task – a template (Appendix) for them to think about,and start to draft ideas, was included with these materials. They were encouraged to havea clear case in mind for development at the workshop and to bring any materials theythought might provide useful background/context for this.

In the main, most principals found it difficult to generate anywhere near a “finalproduct” by the end of the workshop – they struggled to write in the required genre.One of the apparent problems was a difficulty in actually writing about what they haddone. Generally, they were able to describe an incident or a process, but were unable todraw out theirs (and others) leadership aspects in any detailed and critical way.Individual discussions with the consultants during the workshop assisted someprincipals to achieve this. Some of the materials were eventually discarded and notdeveloped further. Most of case “shells” developed on the day required considerablepost-workshop re-drafting to develop them into useable material. The consultants then


587

generated sets of questions relevant to each case, finally achieving seven cases thatwere considered suitable for including in a suit of leadership development materials –three related to secondary schools, three to primary schools and one to special schoolcontexts. Each received critical feedback from departmental officers, following whichthey were revised before finalisation. Broad focus topics of the cases included:

. a whole school reform process;

. curriculum reform – in one case at a particular year level, another involved awhole-school literacy change;

. human resource management – selection and subsequent removal of a poorperforming deputy principal; and

. administration of a special medicine to a disabled student.

Key sets of literature (such as journal articles, book chapters, books), relevant to theparticular leadership issues prominent in each case were identified and included with thecase materials. This was done to provide users of the cases with some tangible follow-upresources to encourage them to further pursue their leadership developments highlightedin the case activities, either individually or in some small-group way. Links were alsoprovided to relevant aspects ofLeadershipMatters as this was one of the prime reasons fordeveloping the cases, viz. developing deeper insights into the capabilities in LeadershipMatters.This particular link tended to be quite general as it was felt somewhat artificial totry to isolate particular leadership aspects when in reality multiple and interdependentaspects were evident in each case. These links then – to the literature and to LeadershipMatters – provide some developmental pathways for required leadership developmentsusers identified as a result of working through the cases.

In brief, each case is about five pages long and comprises:

(1) Summary. An overview of the case to provide an introduction, and outline of thefocus and nature of “the problem” and some of the key issues for the reader.

(2) Background. Important contextual and other background and scene-settinginformation for consideration of the case.

(3) Set of initial questions. A generic set of questions to assist participants to readthe case carefully and critically, encouraging them to make notes aboutimportant factual data provided in the cases and so on.

(4) The story. A detailed (approximately two to three pages) reporting of the story– details of key players and events are provided.

(5) Main questions. Specific questions targeted at core issues in the case.

(6) Outcome. The next step in the case – here some details are provided forparticipants, but some “unfinished business” is also raised for consideration.

(7) Questions for the workshop. Specific questions about the case to drive and focussmall group discussion – in some instances, participants are required to actuallydevelop draft materials for use in some particular scenario relevant to the case, e.g.items for an agenda for a school community meeting about a curriculum reform.

(8) Links to Leadership Matters. The aim here is to highlight specific leadershipcapabilities – in particular, where each participant may identify aspect(s) fortheir own further personal/professional development.

JEA46,5

588

(9) Links to some relevant literature. For participants to follow up some readings ofparticular relevance to the particular issues raised in the case.

As well as the cases materials themselves as detailed above, comprehensive companionmaterials – facilitators guide, participants guide and so on – were also developed.These materials provided future case workshop facilitators as well as participants withdetailed information on the background to the cases and their development,step-by-step guides and suggestions as to how to use the cases appropriately andeffectively and ideas for follow-up activities after the workshop. This resulted in thecompilation of a comprehensive stand-alone volume of leadership developmentmaterials for use in workshop settings across the state with principals and aspirants –under appropriate facilitation.

Case workshopsFour workshops were held to explore and critically examine the use and efficacy of thecases. Three of these were held in Brisbane with executive directors (schools) (thesupervisors of principals) and executive principals – all participated voluntarily byinvitation. (These participants are expected to be future facilitators for groups ofprincipals in using the cases.) The fourth workshop was held with a group of principalsin a non-Brisbane location together with two further executive directors (schools). Thefacilitators were invited to work with this group by one of the executive directors whohad participated in the first workshop – again, all participants attended voluntarilyfollowing invitation. Workshops ranged in size from 10 to 15 participants and werejointly facilitated by one of the original consultants (the author) together with themanager of leadership development of the department of education. Each workshopwas conducted over a little more than half a day, including a morning tea and lunchbreak and comprised an introductory session (outlining the rationale for use of thecases, some theoretical ideas and discussion of use of the cases), a two-hour actual casefocussed activity and following lunch, a reflection/debrief session for individuals toreflect on their own personal leadership developments from their having workedthrough the case and what they planned next in that journey. Participants were alsoasked to discuss and identify some key strategies that would be most effective intaking the cases to wider groups of principals and aspirants throughout the state.

Critical feedback from users of the casesThe first phase of implementation of use of the cases in the four separate workshops asoutlined above included a small scale evaluation process that sought comments fromworkshop participants on various aspects of the cases and accompanying processes asan effective leadership development strategy for principals and aspirants. Data werealso sought on particular cases as to how they might be further refined and developedto enhance their efficacy as professional development tools.

Workshop participants were invited to complete a short six item questionnairedistributed to participants electronically a few days after the workshops to allow timefor critical reflection on the issues raised. The items on the questionnaire were designedto elicit feedback on some of the critical issues raised in the writings about PBL andcases noted earlier (Taylor et al., 2002; Bridges and Hallinger, 1992). The shortquestionnaire comprised mainly closed items in an effort to maximise return rates andemployed Likert-type scales. Linked to these items were some optional open ended


589

items, included to solicit more detailed responses to particular issues raised in theclosed items. The questionnaire took about ten minutes to complete and return.

Additional critical feedback from workshop participants was provided in thereflective/debrief sessions held at the end of the workshop itself. In addition, the twoworkshop facilitators met after each workshop especially to reflect on and identifyissues arising from the workshop, including any particular strengths and weaknessesobserved during the workshops.

About half of the workshop participants (23 of 45 participants) responded to thequestionnaire. About 60 percent of these were male and 40 percent female, comprising 11principals, 11 executive directors (schools) and one departmental professional developmentofficer. The feedback from these workshop participants is discussed under a number ofgeneral categories.

The use of cases as professional development “tools”Respondents were asked to comment generally on the use of the cases as leadershipdevelopment “tools.” Table I summarises these data (responses were on a four-pointscale – very effective, effective, not effective, not sure). Relevant open-ended commentsprovided by respondents are also noted.

These data indicate very positive support for the use of the cases as leadershipdevelopment tools, and in particular with respect to Leadership Matters. Open endedcomments provided with respect to this item included:

I think it is a very powerful tool (Prinicpal).

They provide opportunity for deep thinking and creative responses (ED[S]).

[. . .] approach has direct implications (for) Leadership Matters [. . .] effective method inunpacking the facets of LM creating greater understanding (Principal).

The case studies will provide a great addition to the suite of leadership development activitiesoffered to leaders (ED[S]).

Cases are highly suitable for use with current and/or aspiring leaders (ED[S]).

Factors for consideration in using the casesRespondents were asked to comment on a number of factors/issues important to theeffective use of the cases. Table II summarises these data (responses were on a four-pointscale – very important, important, not important, not sure). Relevant open-endedcomments are also noted.

Very effective þ effective(percent)

Very effective(percent)

How effective do you think cases like those you havebeen introduced to will be in the leadershipdevelopment of principals and aspiring principals? 100 78How effective do you think cases like those you havebeen introduced to will be in the leadershipdevelopment of principals and aspiring principalswith particular reference to Leadership Matters? 100 83

Table I.General questions aboutcases as leadershipdevelopment “tools”

JEA46,5

590

These data highlight some key issues for consideration by those taking the cases forwardinto future workshops. Each of these are matters raised in the facilitators guide,e.g. participants need to be well prepared for the workshop having read the case andresponded to the first set(s) of questions. Of significance in the questionnaire responses isthe importance attached to the quality of the workshop facilitation. Some of the open endedcomments highlight and/or elaborate on some of the matters noted in the closed items:

Time to be utilised for the discussion is important (Principal).

[. . .] preparedness of the participants to be a risk taker, to share ideas. Even though this isdone within a total “safe” environment, each participant has to become the decision-maker asif it were in his or her own school (Principal).

I enjoyed the discussion of the case in the small group situation and found the diversity ofopinion refreshing. I found the level of engagement high due to the relevance of the case studyto the real life application in the field (ED[S]).

Comments on particular case studiesWorkshop participants were asked to comment on the particular case(s) they considered.To date, three of the cases have been used in the workshops – as such, these commentsshould be taken as simply broad indicative feedback on, as yet, this limited set of cases.Notwithstanding this limitation, the cases themselves received strong endorsementfrom participants as being authentic leadership challenges for principals (Table III).

Some open-ended comments are worth noting:

It worked well on the day with our group [. . .] good discussion (Principal).

This was a great way to engage in dialogue around Leadership Matters (Principal).

Summary commentsIn considering the feedback provided by the workshop participants (this includes theirformal questionnaire responses as well as their post-workshop comments), togetherwith the critical reflections from the post-workshop debriefing discussions held by thefacilitators, the following general summary points can be made on the use of the casesbased on the experiences from this first set of workshops:

(1) Overall all, the cases have been very well received in the workshops by theprincipals and executive directors (schools).

Factor

Veryimportant þ important

(percent)

Veryimportant(percent)

The quality of the workshop facilitation 100 91The level of preparation participants undertake before theworkshop 100 65The clarity of expectations of participants about the intents ofthe workshop 96 61The clarity of follow-up to the workshop 96 56The need to be augmented with other PD strategies to beeffective 100 56

Table II.Factors/issues are in theeffective use of the cases

for leadership learningof principals


591

(2) The cases represent powerful and authentic ways for leadership developmentamong school leaders – with considerable potential to focus on supportingunderstandings of, and development with respect to Leadership Matters –participants indicated that workshop discussions assisted them identify theirown (further) leadership development needs and potential strategies forundertaking these.

(3) Some of the real positives of the cases is that:. they are grounded in authentic “real world” stories comprising challenges

for principals; and. that the discussions at the workshops lead to creative and constructive

discussions about such leadership challenges.

(4) The workshops have been characterised by high engagement of participants –in part this is due to participants being well prepared for the workshops.

(5) Quality facilitation of workshops seems to be a key to successful engagement ofparticipants – for maintaining a strong focus on leadership and leadershipdevelopment as the core of discussion as well as challenging participants tothink “differently” and moved their thinking beyond the “known.”

(6) Smaller sized groups seem to be preferable, e.g. 20 participants would seem to be theupper limit if one is seeking highly dynamic interactions/discussions amongparticipants as well as opportunities for facilitators to effectively “guide” the process.

(7) A “grounded” approach to “spreading” the use of the cases seems highlypreferable, e.g. participants were strongly of the view that it would be better touse the “natural” groups of principals (e.g. existing principal networks) indistricts as the development forums for future workshops as opposed to asystemic “top down” centrally driven approach.

(8) Participants have suggested ideas for additional cases to augment the setdeveloped thus far.

(9) Ideas about the how the materials might best be structured/formatted fromutility and presentation points of view has been offered – this will be useful indeveloping future sets of the materials, e.g. facilitators guide.

Stronglyagree þ agree

(percent)

Stronglyagree

(percent)

This case focuses on issues likely to be found in schools 100 74This case provides sound leadership challenges for principals to consider 100 100This case exemplifies (and helps develop) aspects of Leadership Matterscapabilities 100 83The questions posed provide appropriate challenges for leaders to thinkabout and respond to 100 74This case has sufficient detail for participants to make considereddecisions and judgments 100 43This case would be useful for aspiring principals as well as principals 94 43Overall, this case is an effective leadership development exercise forprincipals (and aspiring principals) 100 74

Table III.Specific questions aboutthe case you looked at

JEA46,5

592

The experiences with this set of cases resonate strongly with the ideas and theoreticalarguments discussed earlier in this paper, such as the principles identified for PBLdeveloped by Bridges and Hallinger (1992) and the matters for consideration in the use ofcases raised by Szabo and Lambert (2002). Quite clearly, the notions of action learningidentified by McGill and Beaty (2001) are also highly evident. What the experiences alsohighlight is that the use of the cases in these workshops has reversed, as has been calledfor, the six traditional priorities in leadership education noted by Taylor et al. (2002)earlier. While not the panacea for leadership development for principals, the use of thecases has certainly provided another strategy for this challenge, one that is characterisedby authenticity, by making theory-practice links and by facilitating the opportunity forchallenging “real life” collegiate discussions among principals in the quest to generatenew meanings, understandings and learnings.

Future directionsWhile the current intention is to now use the cases developed thus far with groups ofschool principals across the state, one powerful leadership development opportunity forthe future centres around individual school leadership teams working collectively andcollegially on cases. That is, leadership development synergies potentially available foran individual school will be derived if whole school leadership teams are provided withthe opportunity to work together on the cases. All the advantages of action learning andso on referred to earlier are likely to be enhanced in this way. Another powerful futureoption is use them with aspirant leaders, by so doing placing potential future principals“in the shoes” of a principal confronted with authentic leadership challenges.

Concluding commentsThere is no doubt that education systems across the world are employing variousstrategies to enhance the leadership capacities of their principals as schools are subjectedto increasingly complex demands. The use of cases (and PBL) has been one such strategyattracting increasing interest and has been effective in this regard, particularly in makingthe theory-practice links for principals and in facilitating cooperative and collaborativelearning among principals. This paper has documented an initiative by one largeAustralian education system to augment their other leadership development strategieswith a set of cases. The early evidence from the participants in the case workshopsreported here indicate the workshop discussions have contributed to the leadershipdevelopment of the participants as well as assisting them to identify their own (further)leadership development needs, especially as they relate to the capabilities of LeadershipMatters, and potential strategies for achieving these. Importantly, the cases have beendeveloped from the ideas of principals for use with/by principals, thus ensuring theirauthenticity. The story of the case development and workshop application contributessome fresh and highly effective insights to the challenges of developing competent andresponsible leaders for tomorrow’s schools (Griffith and Taraban, 2002).

Note

1. A brief discussion of terminology is provided later – for current purposes, cases are used ina problem-based learning context – they provide the focus for discussion, analysis,knowledge generation, leadership development.


593

References

ANZSOG (n.d.), Discovering the Leader Within: An Approach to Case Analysis, Course Materials,Australian and New Zealand School of Government, Carlton.

Arcadia University (2006), “Introduction to business: an approach to case analysis”, available at:http://plato.acadiau.ca/courses/buis/IntroBus/CaseMethod.html (accessed March 1, 2007).

Barnett, D. (2004), “School leadership preparation programs: are they preparing tomorrow’sleaders?”, Education, Vol. 125 No. 1, pp. 121-9.

Bottery, M. (2004), The Challenges of Educational Leadership, Sage, London.

Boud, D. and Feletti, G. (Eds) (1997), The Challenge of Problem-based Learning, 2nd ed., KoganPage, London.

Bridges, E.M. and Hallinger, P. (1992), Problem-based Learning for Administrators, ERICClearing House on Educational Management, Oregon.

Bridges, E.M. and Hallinger, P. (1999), “The use of cases in problem based learning”, Journal ofCases in Educational Leadership, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 1-6.

Bush, T. and Glover, D. (2005), “Leadership development for early headship: the new visionsexperience”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 217-39.

Clamp, C.J. (2007), “College of business administration teaching through the case method”,available at: www.abacon.com/lefton/case-method.html (accessed March 22, 2007).

Claudet, J. (1998), “Using multimedia case simulations for professional growth of school leaders”,available at: http://thejournal.com/the/printarticle/?id ¼ 14078 (accessed March 20, 2007).

Coles, M.J. and Southworth, G. (2005), Developing Leadership: Creating the Schools of Tomorrow,Open University Press, Glasgow.

Cranston, N. (2002), “Enhancing the skills of school leaders: leadership development viaproblem-based e-learning”, Unicorn on-line refereed article, ORA No. 16, pp. 3-16.

Cranston, N. and Alen, J. (2007), “Developing school leaders: the use of cases as a learningstrategy for principals”, Perspectives on Educational Leadership, September.

Cranston, N., Ehrich, L. and Billot, J. (2003), “The secondary school principalship in Australia andNew Zealand: an investigation of changing roles”, Leadership & Policy Studies in Schools,Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 159-88.

Crowther, F. and Limerick, B. (1998), “Leaders as learners: implication for postmodern leaderdevelopment”, International Studies in Educational Administration, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 21-30.

Danzig, A. (1997), “Leadership stories: what novices learn by crafting the stories of experiencedschool administrators”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 122-37.

Danzig, A. (1999), “How might leadership be taught? The use of story and narrative to teachleadership”, International Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 117-31.

Duignan, P. (2004), “Forming capable leaders: from competence to capabilities”, Journal ofthe New Zealand Journal of Educational Leadership, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 5-13.

Education Queensland (1997), Standards Framework for Leaders, Queensland GovernmentDepartment of Education and the Arts, Brisbane.

Fauske, J.R. (2000), “Linguistic and instructional precision in teaching cases and problems”,Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1-7.

Fauske, J.R. (2002), “Preparing school leaders: understanding, experiencing and implementingcollaboration”, International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, Vol. 6 No. 6.

JEA46,5

594

Griffith, A.I. and Taraban, S. (2002), “Mentoring narratives ON-LINE: teaching theprincipalship”, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 10 No. 27, available at: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n27.html (accessed March 25, 2007).

Hallinger, P. and Snidvongs, K. (2005), Adding Value to School Leadership & Management:A Review of Trends in the Development of Managers in the Education and BusinessSectors, National College for School Leadership, Nottingham.

Halverson, R., Linnekin, B., Gomez, L.M. and Spillane, J.P. (2004), “Multimedia cases of practice:on-line learning opportunities for school leaders”, Journal of Cases in EducationalLeadership, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-24.

Lambert, L. (Ed.) (2002), The Constructivist Leader, 2nd ed., College Press, New York, NY.

Limerick, D., Cunnington, B. and Crowther, F. (2002), Managing the New Organisation:Collaboration and Sustainability in the Postcorporate World, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

McGill, I. and Beaty, L. (2001), Action Learning: A Practitioners Guide, Kogan Page, London.

Merriam, S.B. and Cafferella, R.S. (1999), Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide,2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Merseth, K. (1997), Cases in Educational Administration, Longman, New York, NY.

Mohr, N. (1998), “Creating effective study groups for principals”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 55No. 7, pp. 41-4.

Morrissey, M.S. (2000), “Professional learning communities: an ongoing exploration”, p. 20,available at: www.sedl.org/pubs/change45

Muse, I. and Thomas, G. (1991), “The rural principal: select the best”, Journal of Rural and SmallSchools, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 32-7.

New South Wales Department of Education & Training (2007), “Professional learning andleadership development: case based learning”, available at: www.det.nsw.edu.au/proflearn/areas/sld/resources/index.htm (accessed March 20, 2007).

Orr, M.T. (2006), “Mapping innovation in leadership preparation in our nation’s schools ofeducation”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 87 No. 7, pp. 492-9.

Queensland Government, Department of Education, Training and the Arts (n.d.), LeadershipMatters: Leadership Capabilities for Education Queensland, Queensland Government,Department of Education, Training and the Arts, Brisbane.

Richert, A. (1991), “Case methods and teacher education: using cases to teach teacher reflection”,in Tabachnic, R. and Zeichner, K. (Eds), Issues and Practices in Inquiry-oriented TeacherEducation, Falmer, New York, NY, pp. 130-50.

Scribner, J.P. and Donaldson, J.F. (2001), “The dynamics of group learning in a cohort: fromnon-learning to transformative learning”, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 37No. 5, pp. 605-36.

Szabo, M. and Lambert, L. (2002), “The preparation of new constructivist leaders”, in Lambert, L.et al. (Eds), The Constructivist Leader, 2nd ed., Chapter 8, College Press, New York, NY.

Taylor, M., De Guerre, D., Gavin, J. and Kass, R. (2002), “Graduate leadership education fordynamic human systems”, Management Learning, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 349-69.

Walker, A. and Dimmock, C. (2005), “Developing leadership in context”, in Coles, M.J. andSouthworth, G. (Eds), Developing Leadership: Creating the Schools of Tomorrow,Open University Press, Buckingham, pp. 80-94.

Weindling, D. (2003), Leadership Development in Practice: Trends and Innovation, Full Report,National College for School Leadership, Nottingham.


595

Appendix. Drafting template for case development workshop

Section What should the section include? Indicative length

The issue Describe briefly the issue which youplan to write about

One paragraph (about 100 words)

Why it matters Describe briefly why this issue wasimportant to the school

One paragraph (about 100 words)

The series of events Tell the story of what happened.Include as much detail as you can.Please make sure that all the keyevents are described. This sectionshould be the most substantial anddetailed. It should be clear about whatyour role, and that of critical others,was in intervening to achieve anoutcome. It should also includeanecdotes or incidents which mightenliven the case study for a reader

Two pages (about 800-1,200 words)

The outcome Briefly describe the outcome of theseries of events, focusing on results:

Two paragraphs (about 180 words)

What changed as a result of theseries of events?How was this similar to or differentfrom what was expected to occur?

Causes Briefly indicate what you see as thereasons for the successes and failuresof the initiative


Reflection What did you learn about your ownleadership from this experience? Whatdid you do well? What would you dodifferently next time? What leadershipdevelopments, if any, are there forcritical others involved in the case


How it links withLeadership Matters

Describe how the issue links with theLeadership Matters framework


The people Provide brief character sketches ofyourself, and up to four of the othermain players in the series of events (aparagraph on each is enough). It wouldbe helpful if the character sketcheshelped explain why people acted asthey did

One paragraph per character (about100 words per character)

Setting Describe the school and the area inwhich the events took place. Includerelevant details such as:


Size and characteristics of thestudent populationCharacteristics of the schoolState of the buildingsCharacteristics of the areaDemographic changes in the area

(continued )Table AI.

JEA46,5

596

Corresponding authorNeil Cranston can be contacted at: [email protected]

Section What should the section include? Indicative length

School cultureRecent changes (e.g. in key staff),main events, etc. that may haveimpacted on the case

Staff Describe the staff of the school(numbers, any significant leaders orcharacters, atmosphere and morale)


Antecedents List any relevant previous events orissues which impacted on the chain ofevents you are going to describe (e.g. aprevious principal tried to change thecurriculum and met resistance; theschool was seen as at risk of closure; amajor building program had recentlybeen completed)


Documents Please provide any documents whichwould be useful to us in understandingwhat happened and why

Digital copies if possible

Table AI.


597

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints