Understanding Educational Leadership and Curriculum Reform
Beyond Global Economism and Neo-Conservative Nationalism
Keywords:hermeneutic educational leadership, non-affirmative education, Bildung
On a state level both curriculum policy work and educational leadership are increasingly challenged by new transnational phenomena in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas alike: expanding cultural neo-national-ism, more populist politics, economic protectionism, new forms of self-centered identity formation, reli-gious fundamentalism, mistrust in democratic political participation, and decreasing respect for knowledge institutions and established media. These developments have many roots but appear partly as consequences of neoliberally driven policy initiatives and globalization. Consequently, there is increasing mistrust as to whether curriculum, leadership, and evaluation initiatives driven by a global neoliberal policy may provide sustainable solutions for guiding reforms in the public sector, including education. Not surprisingly, also the existing curriculum and educational leadership theory are under scrutiny. This article provides openings pointing to a hermeneutic and systems-oriented, multilevel and professional approach for reorienting na-tional systems with respect to collaborative work on curriculum, leadership, and evaluation. Such a Bild-ung-centered view on human identity, growth, and citizenship is congruent with a non-affirmative educa-tion theory (NAT). It provides a conceptualization that is able to deal with curriculum and leadership gen-uinely based on an idea of education. Such a position grounds educational leadership, curriculum, and pol-icy work, as well as evaluation and school reform, in education theory. As a general education theory the non-affirmative position is able to bring together an analysis of educational aims, contents, and methods of schooling, teacher professionalism, and leadership. In addition, NAT frames an understanding of how cur-riculum work at different levels is initiated, implemented, and enacted. In bridging these perspectives, it is argued that critical and hermeneutic NAT provides a theoretically productive approach to present-day local, national, and global education problems. As a foundational frame of reference, NAT allows us to perceive curriculum discourses as different forms of mediating, hermeneutic invitations, and summoning to self-activity and self-formation (Bildung), within and for a democratic polity.
Beck, U. (2006). Cosmopolitan vision. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Benner, D. (2015). Allgemeine Pädagogik (8. edition). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Brincat, S. (2009). Hegel’s gesture to radical cosmopolitanism. Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies, 1, 47–65.
Burgess, D., & Newton, P. (Eds.). (2015). Educational administration and leadership. Theoretical foundations. New York: Routledge.
Day, C. (2005). Sustaining success in challenging contexts: Leadership in English schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(6), 573–583. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230510625674
Deng, Z. (2016). Bringing curriculum theory and didactics together - A Deweyan perspective. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 24(1), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2015.1083465
Fang He, M., Schultz, B., & Schubert, W. (2015). The SAGE Guide to Curriculum in Education. Los: Angeles: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346687
Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Corwin Press.
Gervais, J. (2016). The operational definition of competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(2), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1011
Green, B. (2017). Curriculum, Politics and the Postmodern; or, Beyond the Knowledge Question in Curriculum Inquiry. Currículo sem Fronteiras 17(3), pp. 501-514, under the title “Currículo, Política E A Pósmodernidade: além da questão do conhecimento na pesquisa em currículo.”
Grek, S. (2008). From symbols to numbers: the shifting technologies of education governance in Europe. European Educational Research Journal, 7(2), 2018–2218. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2008.7.2.208
Gunter, H. M., Grimaldi, E., Hall, D., & Serpieri, R. (2016). New public management and the reform of education: European lessons for policy and practice. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315735245
Gunter, H., & Ribbins, P. (2003). Challenging orthodoxy in school leadership studies: knowers, knowing and knowledge? School Leadership & Management, 23(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1363243032000091922
Hopmann, S. T. (1999). The Curriculum as a Standard of Public Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 18, 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005139405296
Hopmann, S. (2015). Didaktik meets Curriculum’ revisited. Historical encounters, systematic experience, empirical limits. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.27007
Hveem, H. (1999) Political Regionalism: Master or Servant of Economic Internationalization? In B. Hettne, A. Inotai, & O. Sunkel (Eds), Globalism and the New Regionalism (pp. 85–115). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27268-6_4
Jank, W., & Meyer, H. (1997). Didaktikens centrala frågor. In Uljens, M. (Ed.), Didaktik – teori, reflektion, praktik (pp. 47–76). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Karseth, B., & Sivesind, K. (2010). Conceptualising curriculum knowledge within and beyond national context. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01418.x
Kant, I. (1915). Avhandlingar om fred och rätt. Stockholm: Albert Bonnier.
Kemp, P. (2010). Citizen of the world: The cosmopolitan ideal for the twenty-first century. New York: Humanity Books.
Klafki, W. (1995). On the problem of teaching and learning contents from the standpoint of critical-constructive Didaktik. In S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum (pp. 187–200). Kiel: IPN.
Moland, L. L. (2011). Hegel on political identity. Patriotism, nationality, cosmopolitanism. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Moos, L. (2017). Neo-liberal governance leads education and educational leadership astray. In M. Uljens & R. Ylimaki (Eds.), Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Theory and Didaktik - Non-Affirmative Theory of Education (pp. 151–180). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58650-2_2
Moos, L., & Wubbels, T. (2018). General education: Homogenised education for the globalized world? Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-018-0809-z
Møller, J. (2017). Leading education beyond what works. European Educational Research Journal, 16(4), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117705487
Niesche, R. (2017). Critical perspectives in educational leadership: a new ‘theory turn’? Journal of Educational Administration and History, 50(3), 145–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2017.1395600
Nordin, A., & Sundberg, D. (Eds.). (2014). Transnational policy-flows in European education: The making and governing of knowledge in the education policy field. Oxford: Symposium.
Nordin, A., & Sundberg, D. (2018). Exploring curriculum change using discursive institutionalism – a conceptual framework. Journal of Curriculum Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1482961
Normand, R. (2016). The changing epistemic governance of European education. The fabrication of the Homo Academicus Europeanus? Cham: Springer.
Normand, R., & Derouet, J.-L. (2017). A European politics of education. Perspectives from sociology, policy studies and politics. London: Routledge.
Oettingen, von. A. (2016). Almen didaktik. Köpenhamn: Munksgaard.
Paraskeva, J. M., & Steinberg, S. (Eds.). (2016). Curriculum: Decanonizing the field. New York: Peter Lang.
Perander, J. J. F. (1883). Herbartianismen i pedagogiken. Helsingfors: J. C. Frenckell & Son.
Peters, M. A., Paraskeva, J. M., & Besley, T. (Eds.). (2015). The global financial crisis and educational restructuring. New York: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-1492-2
Petersen, O. H. & Hjelmar, U. (2014). Marketization of welfare services in Scandinavia: A review of Swedish and Danish experiences. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration 17(4), 3-20.
Pettersson, D., Popkewitz, T. S., & Lindblad, S. (2017). In the grey zone: large-scale assessment-based activities betwixt and between policy, research and practice. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 3(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2017.1316181
Pinar, W. F. (2011). The character of curriculum studies: Bildung, currere, and the recurring question of the subject. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137015839
Priestley, M. (2011). Whatever happened to curriculum theory? Critical realism and curriculum change. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19(2), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2011.582258
Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342
Shields, C. M. (2012). Transformative leadership in education: Equitable change in a uncertain and complex world. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203814406
Sivesind, K., & Wahlström, N. (2017). Curriculum and leadership in transnational reform: A discursive-institutionalist approach. In M. Uljens & R. Ylimaki (Eds.), Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Theory and Didaktik - Non-Affirmative Theory of Education (pp. 439–464). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58650-2_14
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2004). The global politics of educational borrowing and lending. New York and London: Teachers College Press.
Tian, M., & Risku, M. (2018). A distributed leadership perspective on the Finnish curriculum reform 2014. Journal of Curriculum Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1499806
Tiihonen, S. (2004). From Governing to Governance. A process of change. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Uljens, M. (1997). School didactcs and learning. Hove: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203304778
Uljens, M. (2015). Curriculum work as educational leadership: Paradoxes and theoretical foundations. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 1(1), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.27010
Uljens, M. (2016). Non-Affirmative Curriculum Theory in a Cosmopolitan Era? Revista Tempos e Espaços em Educação, Sergipe, Brasil, (Time and Space in Education), 9(18), 121–132.
Uljens, M., & Nyman, C. (2013). Educational Leadership in Finland or Building a Nation with Bildung. In L. Moos. (Ed.), Transnational Influences on Values and Practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 31–48). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6226-8_3
Uljens, M., & Ylimaki, R. (2017). Non-Affirmative Theory of Education as a Foundation for Curriculum Studies, Didaktik and Educational Leadership. In M. Uljens & R. Ylimaki (Eds.), Bridging Educational Leadership, Curriculum Theory and Didaktik - Non-Affirmative Theory of Education (pp. 3–145). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58650-2_1
Wahlström, N., & Sundberg, D. (2018). Discursive institutionalism: towards a framework for analysing the relation between policy and curriculum. Journal of Education Policy, 33(1), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1344879
Wraga, W. G. (2016). Arresting the decline of integrity in curriculum studies in the United States: The policy of opportunity. In J. M. Paraskeva & S. Steinberg (Eds.), Curriculum: Decanonizing the field (pp. 99–110). New York: Peter Lang.
Young, M. (2013). Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory - A knowledge-based approach, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2013.764505
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2018 Michael Uljens
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaration on copyright
- The author/s will keep their copyright and right of reproduction of their own manuscript, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, but give the journal a permanent right to 1) present the manuscript to the public in the original form in which it was digitally published and 2) to be registered and cited as the first publication of the manuscript.
- The author itself must manage its financial reproduction rights in relation to any third-parties.
- The journal does not provide any financial or other remuneration for contributions submitted.
- Readers of the journal may print the manuscripts presented under the same conditions that apply to reproduction of a physical copy. This means that mass reproduction of physical copies or production of copies for commercial purposes is not permitted without the agreement of the author/s.