| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Döös, Marianne, et al.
(author)
-
Shared Principalship : The Perspective of Close Subordinate Colleagues
- 2019
-
In: Leadership and Policy in Schools. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1570-0763 .- 1744-5043. ; 18:1, s. 154-170
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper presents a study of five schools with shared principalship. It contributes knowledge about how shared principalship is experienced by people who work closely (“close subordinates”) with the shared principalship constellations. Data consists of 20 semi-structured interviews. Close subordinates describe that the shared principalship meant a reasonable workload for their principals and welcome their level of accessibility. Confidence in the leader collaboration was heightened if close subordinates were able to witness that collaboration in action with their own eyes. The findings are discussed in relation to the conditions introduced by current school legislation in Sweden.
|
|
| 3. |
- Döös, Marianne, 1949-, et al.
(author)
-
The Principle of Singularity : A Retrospective Study of How and Why the Legislation Process behind Sweden’s Education Act came to Prohibit Joint Leadership for Principals
- 2018
-
In: Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education. - : OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University. - 2535-4051. ; 2:2-3, s. 39-55
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper provides insight into the legislative process behind the current Education Act of Sweden. The aim is to shed light on how and why it came to prohibit joint leadership for principals. Joint leadership is a sub-form of shared leadership between managers characterised by complete formal authority, hierarchic equality and merged work tasks. The sharing of a principal’s position is, in previous research, identified as potentially favourable for principals and schools as it decreases principals’ often heavy workload. Five retrospective interviews were done with people involved in the legislative process. The analysis points out both distrust in the governing line and uninformed notions of leadership among legislators as explanations behind the prohibition. In the legislative work, joint leadership was at most a marginal issue. Thus the legal prohibition was an unintended side-effect, yet completely in line with traditional and uninformed notions of leadership. The principle of singularity ruled and joint leadership was extinguished for principals without considering whether this favoured or harmed the overarching aims of the Education Act: increased pedagogical responsibility and leadership with a focus on the students’ learning, results and democratic upbringing.
|
|
| 4. |
- Döös, Marianne, 1949-, et al.
(author)
-
The principle of singularity : A retrospective understanding of losing a collaborative potential through the legislation process behind Sweden’s Education Act
- 2017
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The sharing of a principal’s position by two people on equal footing is described as a way of decreasing an often heavy burden and as favourable to principals and schools. However, when Sweden’s current Education Act (2010:800) became operative in 2011, it wetblanketed the issue of shared principalship. The act states the principle of singularity in that there must be a person with the title of principal in each, so-called, school unit and that this principal must be one. Thereby the collaborative potential of joint principalship (i.e. complete cooperation, where formal hierarchic equality is in place and work tasks are merged) was extinguished. This paper aims to shed light on how and why this prohibition was introduced in the legislative process. The fact that the prohibition of joint principalship came into effect may be understood as a consequence of the length, forms of work, extent and political prestige of the legislative process; shared leadership was at most a marginal issue. In the cathedral-building project there was no intent to question traditional ideas about leadership. The important lines of argument concerned lack of trust in the way the municipalities organised their schools. Therefore, there was a wish for increased direct state control by going via the principals as the appointed responsible authority., This, together with the late invented school unit concept had unforeseen effects for the organising of the principal’s position. The principle of singularity ruled and a ban on joint leadership was the consequence – without consideration whether this favoured the overarching aim of the law: increased pedagogical responsibility and leadership with a focus on the students’ learning, results and democratic upbringing.
|
|
| 5. |
- Döös, Marianne, et al.
(author)
-
The shared principalship : invitation at the top
- 2018
-
In: International Journal of Leadership in Education. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1360-3124 .- 1464-5092. ; 21:3, s. 344-362
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A school principal’s workload is recognised as being heavy, with an imbalance between demands and resources. This paper contributes to the development of collective leadership. The principalship constellations of six schools in Sweden were studied with the aim of strengthening the current knowledge about structures and experiences of shared principalship. The empirical basis is qualitative data from interviews with principals and vice-principals. The analytical focus was on how the sharing structures were organised and how the shared principalship was experienced. The results point to a considerable variation in the organisational structures of shared principalship. Despite the type of model, form and constellation, the principals and vice-principals voiced a striking sense of relief in not feeling alone in their duties, as problems and troubles became manageable. An intensified interaction level in the principalship constellation created opportunities to develop competence. Theoretically, this study broadens the invited leadership concept to include horizontal invitations across unit boundaries between principals in different units within the same school. The knowledge contribution of this study is useful in discussing the legal possibilities for shared principalship, which may be especially relevant in times when the Swedish school system is being criticised for not delivering good student outcomes.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
