- Show more
School leadership in Chile
What can we share from evidence in school leadership?, where it is pointed out that in the last 10 years Chile appears as a regional reference in Latin America in terms of production in research on school leadership, and regarding innovation and implementation of guided improvement policies and programs by the notion ofleadership. For example, it is stated that school leadership is more powerful and that its effect is greater in environments with more socio -economic and cultural shortcomings, and even more intense at the highest levels of the school system. Also that the variance explained by the school factor is higher at secondary education levels than primary, and at the same time, this effect is more decisive in environments with less resources.
The leadership model is proposed on the site as a mediating influence factor in learning achievements, pointing out that when leadership really works, and in the school context what is distributed is the instructional influence:
When an organization that is capable of distributing instructional leadership, managers (directors or intermediate leaders) who share a vision of teaching and learning, motivating empowered teachers in their subjects and in the design of collective teaching practices,managing to train students oriented by high expectations. At the same time, it is pointed out that when these school organizations are grouped into networks (corporations, foundations, local education administrations, etc.), with synergistic strategic visions and with resources based on teaching objectives, more permanent and focused on learning are generated1.
In that sense, the hypothesis of action proposed on the site indicates that school leadership works as a chain of influence that is distributed among the different agents and that when it takes an instructional approach, it allows to accelerate and facilitate desired effects in changes in pedagogical practices andIn the quality of learning.
This conception of school leadership is in tune with international evidence, which proposes a partial mediation model of the effects of leadership focused on learning on teaching learning: “The findings reaffirm the role of leadership by creating conditions to motivate, compromise and sustain the continuous learning of teachers ”2.
In this line, flyer (2012) conducted a study to establish hierarchical relationships between the variables that include academic performance: at the organizational level the instructional leadership of managers and the beliefs of collective efficiency of teachers, and at the individual level the goals and motivationof the students, controlling the socio -economic level of the establishment and the student of the student. With these variables, the analysis under 4 analysis models that correlate the variables and their levels of interaction were performed.
Its results indicate that 27% of the difference observed in the academic achievement between establishments (variance between) is explained by organizational characteristics (instructional leadership of managers and the beliefs of collective efficiency of teachers), once the effect of theadministrative dependence and the average socioeconomic level of families. The differences in academic achievements are explained to a greater extent by the individual characteristics of the students, while the magnitude of the organizational effect detected is close to 30% of the total variance.
This implies that the perception of instructional leadership is greater in management roles, who are more affected by this influence, and that in organizations where the perception of instructional leadership is higher, the level of average academic achievement is higher (PSU scores according toAverage leadership perception: μ low = 482, μ medium = 512, μ high = 524). A significant correlation between collective efficacy and the variable "instructional leadership" was also confirmed: a mediating effect of collective efficiency beliefs in the relationship between instructional leadership of managers and the academic achievements of students were verified.
This proposes to ask ourselves about what are the key tensions for school leadership, as well as what are the most desirable types of leadership and authority in school, how to maintain a balance between management and administrative tasks and the most instructional cut -out leadership and whichThey are leadership practices that could be considered more effective in our region. In that sense, some of the answers are in line with creating formal structures within schools (for example with clear and specific tasks and functions), which support improvement. On the other hand, it is expected to ensure a correct implementation of key administrative processes, in order to focus organizational abilities in teaching and learning. In the background, it is about creating a chain of influence, where directors can involve their managers, leaders and teachers, focusing them on improvement.
In the research "evaluating the influence of instructional leadership and academic heterogeneity on teachers’ efficiency beliefs" (Fromm, 2017) it is pointed out:
A team of teachers with high expectations and shares a standard for teaching and learning is important for what teachers believe about themselves. This constitutes an "operational culture", which in turn does not depend on the academic composition of the students, at least compared to the leadership of its director 3.
Then understanding leadership as a process of influence towards collective efficacy for student achievement, allows us to identify factors in the work of leaders who can influence the development of collective efficacy, such as opening to organizational learning through professional experiences, delivering the explicit message that it is possible to enhance educational achievements and create a strong shared vision about school, giving a clear sense of purpose4.
However, literature also establishes that the functioning of schools is no stranger to the characteristics of the "environment" in which they are inserted and with which they interact. Key elements of the environment are the regulatory and institutional framework that defines the rules of operation of the school system and its sub-systems, the guidelines of the National Educational Policy, the programs and actions in which it is expressed and the way in which the policy, theprograms and actions reach schools and insert themselves in them (Raczynski, 2012).
However, the document “Report on World Development 2018” is discussed on the site, made by the World Bank, in which it is mentioned that the current crisis in the educational field has three dimensions: first of all, they highlight the results ofLittle satisfactory learning, second, the breakdown of the relationship between teaching and learning. Third, the deep causes at the system level5 stand out5.
The current system, or structure, for example in the alignment at the level of policies and implementation of the same does not favor the development and implementation of a leadership with focus on the instructional component, but rather relegates the function of the director to that of aAdministrator, at the expense of the function of a leader with focus on teaching-learning processes.
The main structural problems that hinder the improvement, development and quality of municipal education are:
- Absence of long -term development and projection horizons
- Low accountability due to the educational and dissemination of responsibilities
- Disrupt and insufficient capabilities
- Atomization and inappropriate scale
Within the framework of the new Educational Reform of New Public Education (MINEDUC, 2015), it is intended to establish an educational system at three levels: School, District and Government. This system would facilitate: i) contextualize the policy and educational process by increasing its relevance for students and families;i) build closer relationships between schools, families and community;iii) mobilize local resources to strengthen teaching and iv) achieve synergy between the training process of local students and social programs (Raczynski, 2012).
This system would allow directors, to exercise leadership that enhances learning, which promotes a change in teachers, promoting learning communities, to achieve an impact of instructional leadership.