Session Information
26 SES 08 B, Educational Leadership in Early Childhood Care and Primary Schools
Paper Session
Contribution
Result-based management (RBM) and quality management have been central drivers in the development of the educational sector across the globe (Hansen 2010).
This is also the case in day care (year 0 to 6). In Denmark the political day care goal is to ensure quality in the pedagogical work, i.e., a good and stimulating environment for children, and a greater effect for children in the form of more learning and better well-being in the small years. The political focus is on top-down management, e.g., quality reports and educational curriculum.
In research and politics focus is less on the daily unfolding leadership practices which shall improve the quality of the educational work. A review of international literature on leadership in early childhood from 2004 points in a limited number studies (Muijs et al. 2004), and there is a need for more knowledge (Aubrey, C. et al 2012).
This paper explores and develops a perspective on early childhood leadership that focuses on impact evaluation as a professional leadership tool that helps improve pedagogical quality. A central idea in professional leadership is that leaders must drive the professional development and ensure quality in the daycare work, including mentoring, advising and setting professional standards for the professional work (Voxted 2016). A central idea in impact evaluation is to assess what creates value for the citizen, and using this evaluative knowledge to develop welfare work (Dahler-Larsen 2013). Therefore, impact evaluation as a tool for professional leadership is professional leaders in day care centres who mentor, guide and set professional standards from the knowledge that impact evaluation produces about children’s’ learning and well-being.
We ask the following research question:
How does impact evaluation affect how pedagogical leaders engage in developing pedagogical employees and practices?
Our analysis is based on empirical material produced during a one year research and development project (R&D Project), "Better Life for Children - professional leadership, evaluation and day care quality", which was conducted in cooperation with a Danish municipality during year mid-2015 and mid-2016. This means that we in the paper develops our perspective on early childhood leadership by testing and exploring how the perspective unfolds and develops in the practices of daycare centres.
We use practice theory as an analytical resource (Kemmis et al. 2014). A practice is a project going on at a place in time and space, and this place has a practice architecture consisting of cultural-discursive, material-economic and socio-political resources, also called enabling preconditions (Kemmis et al. 2014: 35). The idea is that new practices projects, and the practice architectures mutually condition and affect each other (ibid.). A practice project such as evaluating and developing, e.g., the morning assembly (a 30 minutes sequence in the morning where the employees and the children gather to sing a song, talk about the day to come etc.), is conditioned by the day care centers existing practice architecture, however, the new project also affect the existing sayings, doings and relations in the day care center.
We analyse how three early childhood leaders in three day care centres talk about impact evaluation, do impact evaluation and as a consequence form new leadership relationships with the pedagogical employees and the children. Thus, leadership is a practical achievement in specific arrangements of people, objects and artifacts that come into play in specific activities (Nicolini 2012), e.g., evaluative and pedagogical activities.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Alvesson, M. (2003). “Methodology for Close up Studies - Struggeling with Closeness and Closure”. Higher Education 46: 167-193 Aubrey, C., Godfrey, R., Harris, A.(2012). “How Do They Manage? An Investigation of Early Childhood Leadership”. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Dahler-Larsen, Peter (2013): Evaluering af projekter og andre ting, som ikke er ting, Odense, Syddansk Universitetsforlag Duus, Gitte m.fl. (red.): Aktionsforskning – en grundbog, Samfundslitteratur. Hansen, H. F. 2010. “Educational Evaluation in Scandinavian Countries: Converging or Diverging Practices?” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 53 (1): 71–87. Kemmis, Stephen m.fl. (2014). Changing Practices, Changing Education, Springer. Muijs, D., Aubrey, C., Harris, A., Briggs, M. (2004). “How do they manage? A review of the research on leadership in early childhood. Journal of early Childhood Research. Nicolini, Davide (2012): Practice Theory, Work & Organization – An Introduction, Oxford Phillips, Louise m.fl. (red.) (2013): Knowledge and Power in Collaborative Research – A reflexive Approach, Routledge. Staunæs, Dorthe m.fl. (red.): Læringslaboratorier og – eksperimenter, Aarhus Universitetsforlag. Voxsted, S. (2016). Faglig ledelse i offentlige organisationer. Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.