Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold, to answer two questions: how do senior educational administration (EA) field members perceive the field's scholarly aims and boundaries and the meaning of their intellectual work? and what are the similarities and differences between “outsider” and “insider” perceptions of the field's major purposes and directions?

Semi-structured interviews with 12 Israeli academics who work in departments of EA in varied universities and colleges.

The field members in the study shared similar views of the field's purposes and challenges, but were divided about the field's desired knowledgebase and scholarly boundaries. Some implications for the field's future development are suggested.

The exploration of academics’ perceptions of their own field of study may increase the intellectual and theoretical understandings of major epistemological aspects of EA as a field of study.

The purpose of this paper is to sharpen the intellectual identity of the field of educational administration (EA) and to understand its scholarly boundaries by comparing between the writings of this field and those of the field of organisational behaviour (OB), an area of study usually located in faculties of management, and share many commonalities with EA.

A qualitative content analysis of textbooks and journal papers in OB and EA, reading of previous writings that revolved around the epistemological dimensions of these fields.

The author sheds light on the theoretical and empirical distinctions of OB and EA historically and provides insight into the distinctive intellectual identity of the latter field during the 2000s. A special attention is given to paradigms and theories in EA imported to the field from outside and transformed in a way that specify the unique identity of EA in the academic world.

This comparison is warranted in order to clarify more profoundly the unique contributions of EA, both theoretically and practically, to emphasise the differences that separate it from other disciplines, and to legitimate its independent position in higher education.

In this opening chapter the authors analyse current scholarship on teacher emotion and leader emotion produced almost entirely in western countries, and call for contextualising this research by juxtaposing emotion with basic characteristics of traditional and transitional societies. Some attention is given to the meaning of emotion across national culture, including those of developing countries.

Tristan Bunnell began teaching International Baccalaureate economics at the International School of London in 1990. He is currently head of economics at the Copenhagen International School. He was awarded his MA in school marketing and development from the University of Surrey in 1993. He obtained his doctorate on ‘public relations activity as an indicator of the unique nature of international schools’ from the University of Southampton in 2003. He has published a number of articles about distributed leadership, marketing strategy and public relations activity in international schools. His current research interests include global curricula developments, especially the growth and development of the International Baccalaureate.

Based on a qualitative content analysis of 57 curricula vitae of authors who published their work in the major journals of the educational administration (EA) field, this paper seeks to display the career of EA authors and to suggest some epistemological implications for the field.

The analysis is based on both quantitative and qualitative modes of inquiry, according to which the curricula vitae is seen as a document that is susceptible to textual analysis.

EA authors receive their academic degrees in a host of disciplines from many countries and universities, usually work in the compulsory educational system, and hold many academic roles in their university. They teach courses, conduct research and publish works on a host of topics, three of which are very widespread: leadership, managerial processes, and organisational aspects.

The analysis acquaints the reader with some of many aspects of the professoriate in diverse countries, and helps probe the uncertainty and fragmented nature of the field of EA. It ends with scholarly implications for the recruitment of new field members.

The paper argues for the introduction of pedagogies of optimism (and implicitly of hope) in schools as a response to the danger of pessimism, skepticism and helplessness characterizing periods of armed conflicts.

A conceptual analysis.

Following an analysis of armed conflicts and their impact on educational systems, the critical contribution of pedagogies of optimism is illuminated. Teachers are encouraged to follow major phases in this kind of pedagogy, such as discovery, acceptance of the situation, imagination and critical thinking.

Practical suggestions are provided at the end of the paper.

Based on journal articles that focused on epistemological issues in the field (e.g. the field's nature, purposes, borders, knowledge base, uniqueness, etc.), this paper seeks to outline the intellectual discussions in the field of educational administration (EA) since the foundation of its major journals and suggest some lessons for the state of the field at the present time.

The review is based on all papers, scholarly, historical or empirical, that observed philosophical, epistemological and methodological issues and concerns in this field. The papers were analyzed and coded by their purposes, arguments, epistemological questions, criticism, findings and insights.

The major concluding epistemological message of this historical account is of “recycling,” i.e. the field is typically embedded with debates over similar ideas, assumptions, and insights about EA as a field of study throughout the last five decades. Therefore, it is a time for radical changes in the understanding of the field's intellectual missions and boundaries.

The historical overview is likely both to acquaint one with the historical scholarly streams, trends and debates in knowledge development of EA as a field of study, and help international field members understand and mould their professional identity.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the legacies of the Journal of Educational Administration (JEA) since its foundation in 1963 to the present (2011) and to illuminate the main contributions of the Journal to the academic field of educational administration (EA) worldwide.

The method employed in analysing the Journal's articles was “qualitative content analysis” which includes constant comparisons for discovering patterns, emphases and themes in an array of documents. The first stage of analysis included extensive reading, sorting and searching through the Journal's abstracts resulting in the coding of categories, key words and themes. In the second stage, themes and categories were identified and compared until main themes and sub‐categories in each abstract emerged.

The paper traces the Journal's legacies in every decade since its foundation, and highlights the dynamic nature of this publication. Likewise, the dominance of the “empirical legacy” as compared to the other five legacies is emphasised, and the rise and fall of different topics and perspectives throughout the years are illuminated. Some thoughts about plausible future directions of the Journal conclude the paper.

The historical review provides an opportunity to glean information about the distinctive intellectual identity of the field of EA. Likewise, reviewing existing research and scholarship in the JEA may increase our intellectual and theoretical understanding of the ways by which the scholarly boundaries of EA as a field of study have been shaped and reshaped, after all, JEA has long been an outlet for hundreds of works from the four corners of the earth.