Summary (1136308), страница 4
Текст из файла (страница 4)
On the other hand, almost every sixth teacher has a leadership potential.Given that the workload of senior managers is much higher and they do not always lead theteaching, the resource of informal leadership is very significant. In addition, teacher-leaders inabsolute numbers are more than administrators (72% compared to 28%).However, the study revealed a contradiction between the high potential of informal leadersand the current attitudes of teachers:Teachers demonstrate low request for feedback from colleagues. When answering the questionabout the teachers whom the respondents would like to see at their lessons, most of them choose infavor of the administration (an average, 7 answers given), and not teachers of the same status (onaverage, 2 answers).
It can be assumed that managers are resource holders, and this makesinteraction with them more prestigious and meaningful, which is not necessarily related toprofessional growth. Such a situation can lead to an even greater centralization of interactions andinformation flows around managers and a reduction in horizontal professional exchange.
Althoughthe previous conclusion points at the availability of the resource of teachers-leaders, this remainsunnoticed within the collectives.However, at the same time we can conclude that at the moment this resource is used only tosome extent. In this regard, we can offer the heads of general education organizations the followingrecommendations on professional development of pedagogical collectives:To build management, considering their organization as a network of professionalinteractions, since such an approach makes it possible to identify and use the resource of teachersleaders who are not members of the management team, that is, to consider social capital as an objectof management;To reduce the influence of the high hierarchy and develop horizontal interactions in theorganization, which will bring a more complete implementation of the potential of informalpedagogical leaders in the school through continuous in-house training based on mutual classesattendance;To develop formal structure of the organization for horizontalTo develop social capital not only quantitatively (for example, the creation of dyads), but alsoqualitatively: to build up interactions around the issues of teaching and upbringing;To create stable professional communications in a team based on triads and a clique withreciprocal connections among all the participants, since such a network configuration is maximallyresistant and stable in the course of time;To focus on classes attendance by teaching staff as a form of sharing experience.
The findingsof the research show that at present this process is built hierarchically, the control function prevails,and young employees are involved in attending their colleagues’ lessons very little, althoughmonitoring colleagues is one of the most effective forms of newcomers’ integration.The practical importance of the work can be defined at different levels of the educationalsystem.At the level of a particular school: making school administration realize the structures ofcurrent and potential professional leadership can help in planning the school development system.At the level of the vocational education system: the results of this research can be used by theEducation development institutes and other similar structures involved in training specialists whocould most effectively assume the role of pedagogical leaders.
The findings of the studies performedin specific schools can be used for educational consulting.Possible continuation of the research is related to the use of a larger sample, which could berepresentative of the whole Russian Federation, the organization of qualitative research aimed atdetermining the motives and factors of professional leadership in schools, the study of therelationship between professional leadership and educational outcomes, and comparative analysis ofsimilar problems with other educational systems, as well as the search for managerial solutions forthe development of distributed leadership in general education organizations.Main References1.
Akindinova N.V., Kuzminov Ya.I., Yasin E.G. Ekonomika Rossii: pered dolgimperekhodom / N.V. Akindinova, YA.I. Kuz'minov, E.G. Yasin // Voprosy ekonomiki. –2016. – №. 6. – P. 5-35.2. Barber M., Mourshed M. Kak dobitsya stabilnogo vysokogo kachestva obucheniya vshkolah. Uroki analiza luchshih sistem shkolnogo obrazovaniya mira / M. Barber, M.Murshed // Voprosy obrazovaniya. – 2008. – №. 3. - P. 7-60.3.
Bonacich P. Power and centrality: A family of measures / P. Bonacich //American journal ofsociology. – 1987. – Vol. 92. – №. 5. – P. 1170-1182.4. Bourdieu P. Formy kapitala / P. Bourdieu // Ekonomicheskaya sociologiya. – 2002. – T. 3. –№. 5. – P. 60-75.5. Bysik N. et al. missing link? Contemporary insights into principal preparation and training inRussia / N. Bysik et al. // Asia Pacific Journal of Education. – 2015.
– Vol. 3. – No. 35. – P.331-342.6. Coleman J.S. Social capital in the creation of human capital / J. Coleman // AmericanJournal of Sociology. – 1988. – Vol. 94. – Р. 95-120.7. FarkhatdinovN.G.,EvstigneevaN.V.,KurakinD.Yu.Modeliupravleniyaobshcheobrazovatelnoy organizaciey v usloviyah reform: opyt sociologicheskogo analiza /N.G. Farkhatdinov, N.V. Evstigneeva, D.Yu. Kurakin // Voprosy obrazovaniya.
– 2015. –№. 2. – P. 196-219.8. Freeman L. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification / L. Freeman // Soc.Networks. – 1979. – Vol. 1. – № 1968. – P. 215–239.9. Froumin I.D. et al. Obrazovatelnaya politika i dolgovremennye tendencii / I.D. Froumin etal. - Social'naya politika v Rossii: dolgosrochnye tendencii i izmeneniya poslednih let // M. :Izdatel'skiy dom NIU VSHE, 2015. – S. 239-289.10. Gradoselskaya G.V. Analiz socialnyh setey : avtoreferat diss.
na soisk. uch. step. kand.sociol. n.: 22.00.01 / Galina Galina Vital'evna – M., 2001. - 16 p.11. Hallinger P., Heck R.H. Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness:1980‐1995 / P. Hallinger, R.H. Heck // School effectiveness and school improvement. –1998. – Vol. 9. – №. 2. – P.
157-191.12. Hanneman R., Riddle M. Introduction to Social Network Methods / R. Hanneman, M. Riddle// Network. University of California. – 2005. – Vol. 46.– № 7 – P. 5128–513013. Hargreaves A., Fullan M. Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school / A.Hargreaves, M.
Fullan // New York : Teachers College Press, 2012. – 240 p.14. Harris A. Distributed leadership and school improvement: leading or misleading? / A. Harris// Educational Management Administration & Leadership. – 2004. – Vol. 32. №. 1. – P. 1124.15. Ivaniushina V.A., Alexandrov D.A. Anti-school attitudes, school culture and friendshipnetworks / V.A.
Ivaniushina, D.A. Alexandrov // British Journal of Sociology of Education.– 2018. – Vol. 39. – No. 5. – P. 698-716.16. Kasprzhak A. G., Isaeva N. V. Pochemu direktora avtoritarny i chto iz etogo sleduet? / A.G.Kasprzhak, N.V. Isaeva // Narodnoe obrazovanie.
– 2015. – № 8. –P. 52-66.17. Krackhardt D. The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations / D. Krackhardt// Research in the Sociology of Organizations. – 1999. – Vol. 16. – P. 183–210.18. Leana C.R., Pil F.K. Social capital and organizational performance: Evidence from urbanpublic schools / C.R. Leans, F.K. Pil // Organization Science. – 2006. – Vol.
17. – №. 3. – P.353-366.19. Leithwood K., Jantzi D. The relative effects of principal and teacher sources of leadership onstudent engagement with school / K. Leithwood, D. Jantzi // Educational administrationquarterly. – 1999. – Vol. 35. – №. 5.
– P. 679-70620. Parygin B.D. Rukovodstvo i liderstvo / B.D. Parygin // L. : LGPI, 1973. – 144 p.21. Patarakin E.D., Yarmahov B.B. Analiz sovmestnoy setevoy deyatel'nosti uchastnikovobrazovatelnoy organizacii / E.D. Patarakin, B.B. Yarmahov // Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii.– 2016. – № 2. – S. 51–65.22. Pinskaya M.A. et al Chto my uznali o nashih uchitelyah i direktorah? Rezultatymezhdunarodnogo sravnitelnogo issledovaniya TALIS-2013 / M.A. Pinskaya et al.
//Narodnoe obrazovanie. – 2015. – №6. – P. 34-47.23. Spillane J. P. et al. Taking a distributed perspective: Epistemological and methodologicaltradeoffs in operationalizing the leader-plus aspect / J.P. Spillane et al. //Journal ofEducational Administration. – 2008. – Vol. 46. – №. 2. – P. 189-213.24. Spillane J.P., Kim C.M. An exploratory analysis of formal school leaders’ positioning ininstructional advice and information networks in elementary schools / J.P. Spillane, C.M.Kim // American Journal of Education.
– 2012. – Vol. 119. – №. 1. – P. 73-102.25. Sravnitelnyy analiz rezultatov testov PISA i TIMSS v Rossii i stranah Evropy / Pod. red. T.E. Havenson, YU. D. Kersha // M. : NRU HSE, 2017. — 32 p.26. Ushakov K.M. Diagnostika realnoy struktury obrazovatelnoy organizacii / K.M. Ushakov //Voprosy obrazovaniya. – 2013. – №.
4. – P. 46-60.27. Ushakov K.M., Kukso K.M. Vozmozhnosti setevogo analiza dlya issledovaniy v obrazovanii/ K.M. Ushakov, K.M. Kukso // Narodnoe obrazovanie. – 2015. – № 3. – P. 79-88.28. Ushakov K.M., Kukso K.M. Advantages of Social Network Analysis in EducationalResearch / K.M. Ushakov, K.M. Kukso - Translation from Russian // Russian Education andSociety. – 2015. –Vol. 57. – No. 10. – P. 871-888..
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
