Search results

1 – 10 of 23
Per page
102050
Citations:
Loading...
Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 December 2001

Robert Donmoyer

Critiques the 15‐year research program of Colin W. Evers and Gabriele Lakomski. Significant contributions are highlighted and the significance of each of the highlighted…

555

Abstract

Critiques the 15‐year research program of Colin W. Evers and Gabriele Lakomski. Significant contributions are highlighted and the significance of each of the highlighted contributions is discussed, since apparent problems with Evers and Lakomski’s substantive contributions to the field are also considered. In addition, critiques Evers and Lakomski’s discipline‐like way of working, which is oriented toward constructing the most inclusive and parsimonious theory that can be developed to make sense of educational administration practice. This disciplinary orientation is judged to be problematic, because, it is argued, educational administration is best conceptualized as a public policy field rather than as an academic discipline. The implications of the public policy field conceptualization are explored and this discussion is used further to highlight positive and problematic features of Evers and Lakomski’s research program.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 39 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 December 2001

Spencer J. Maxcy

Examines the coherentist project for educational administration of professors Colin Evers and Gabriele Lakomski from a critical and pragmatic perspective. It is argued that Evers…

1581

Abstract

Examines the coherentist project for educational administration of professors Colin Evers and Gabriele Lakomski from a critical and pragmatic perspective. It is argued that Evers and Lakomski really have three projects going: the first project seeks to ground coherence as a solution to the problems of educational administration research upon the history of educational administration inquiry philosophies since the Second World War. The second project attempts to justify the worth of coherency as a research philosophy upon purely logical grounds. A third, and most recent, (practical) project draws upon evidence from leadership practice to prove coherentism’s usefulness for school administration. Concludes that, rather than supporting their post‐positivist philosophic underpinnings, Evers and Lakomski’s third project finds them moving toward a raw pragmatism. Also concludes that coherentism is best redescribed from a pragmatic aesthetic perspective, a point of view that provides a potentially more meaningful way of understanding the relationship of coherentist theorizing and leadership action in contemporary schooling.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 39 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 January 1987

GABRIELE LAKOMSKI

Among recent criticisms levelled against traditional administrative theory those raised by adherents to the Critical Theory perspective have gained considerable influence. This…

1967

Abstract

Among recent criticisms levelled against traditional administrative theory those raised by adherents to the Critical Theory perspective have gained considerable influence. This paper examines their claim that Habermasian Critical Theory in particular is in a better position to solve the theoretical and practical problems of educational administration. The focal points of discussion are Habermas's fundamental categories of “interests” and the “ideal speech situation” since their theoretical coherence is a minimum requirement for the theory's validity and practical applicability. It is concluded that Critical Theory, while being the most ambitious attempt to date to provide a new, post‐positivist framework for social and administrative studies, has insufficient epistemological resources to justify its claims. As a result, the theory is driven to rational a prioris which deprive it of empirical content and relevance. Since Critical Theory claims to have reunited theory with practice, lack of empirical content would seem to disqualify the claim and render questionable the theory's value for educational administration.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 25 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Access Restricted. View access options
Book part
Publication date: 8 December 2016

Gabriele Lakomski

Leader-centric views have become a dogma in contemporary accounts of school leadership, and organizational performance is seen to reduce to explanations of what individuals do…

Abstract

Leader-centric views have become a dogma in contemporary accounts of school leadership, and organizational performance is seen to reduce to explanations of what individuals do. Hence, a school’s failure is attributed to poor principal performance that may range from merely indifferent to outright unethical conduct that may exhibit “the dark side” of leadership. Judging “good” or “bad” behavior in individualistic terms has a long history and is enshrined in the doctrine of the autonomous agent in possession of “free will.” Conceived thus, the autonomous agent can be held responsible for his or her actions. This chapter examines the notion of “free will” both in its philosophical and everyday meaning and argues that biological agents, such as principals, act responsibly or irresponsibly (or unethically), not on the basis of the presence or absence of metaphysical “free will,” but on the basis of the neurobiology of non-conscious decision-making processes and the constraints of the social, organizational, environments in which they work. The argument is developed by examining two positions from social psychology and neuroscience, respectively, which raise the specter of “free will” as mere illusion, with potentially negative consequences for responsible and ethical conduct. But “free will skepticism” is not warranted and “free will,” or the ability of biological-social agents to choose, is real but is also constrained by external, non-biological, factors. While individual responsibility remains important, it is enmeshed in a much wider causal field and cannot be assumed a priori. If and when it obtains is to be determined after investigation. Some implications of the social cognitive perspective on responsible action and accountability are sketched in the last part of this chapter.

Details

The Dark Side of Leadership: Identifying and Overcoming Unethical Practice in Organizations
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78635-499-0

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 December 2001

Colin W. Evers and Gabriele Lakomski

Provides an overview of a rather large research program, developed over the last 15 years, that seeks to offer a new perspective on the nature of theory and practice in…

3809

Abstract

Provides an overview of a rather large research program, developed over the last 15 years, that seeks to offer a new perspective on the nature of theory and practice in educational administration. The core ideas of the program, together with a considerable amount of detail, can be found in three books by Evers and Lakomski. However, because these volumes stand in a developmental sequence, there is merit in presenting in a brief compass an account of our overall strategy, especially in relation to the nature of administrative theory, and some of the conclusions reached along the way. The discussion has two main parts. First, the central theoretical features of our program are outlined, indicating some earlier results flowing from their application to various debates in educational administration. Then, some examples are offered focused on the main concern of our most recent research – developing and applying this framework to a cluster of problems about administrative practice and the nature of practical knowledge.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 39 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Available. Content available
Article
Publication date: 2 February 2010

Jeffrey S. Brooks

707

Abstract

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 48 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Access Restricted. View access options
Book part
Publication date: 7 February 2011

Gabriele Lakomski and Colin W. Evers

In this chapter, we present a critical assessment of contemporary organization theory variously described as either multiperspectival or fragmented. We argue that analytic…

Abstract

In this chapter, we present a critical assessment of contemporary organization theory variously described as either multiperspectival or fragmented. We argue that analytic philosophy as one of the major tools used for theorizing about organizations has had a major influence on the development of organization theory and largely explains the current state of affairs. At its core, we argue, is a fundamental methodological fissure in analytic philosophy itself: the distinction between descriptive and revisionary methods. The principal focus of descriptive analysis in organization theory is how agents use everyday language in organizational contexts, often by invoking language games. In contrast, revisionary approaches, concerned about the privileging of theories embedded in everyday language, as well as the complexity and ambiguity of ordinary-language use, aim for explicit theory evaluation and greater clarity by recasting ordinary language in formal systems, such as scientific, especially empiricist, theories, characteristic of the mainstream of theorizing about organizations from the 1940s onward. For a number of theoretical and epistemological reasons logical empiricism or positivism is no longer a widely held view either in the philosophy of science or in the organization theory. We examine some critical issues regarding logical empiricist epistemological foundations and propose a methodological naturalistic framework that supports the ongoing growth of knowledge in organization theory, naturalistic coherentism. In developing this new conception of science we thus opt for a revisionary methodology, but one that is beholden to neither the traditional logical empiricist/positivist conception of (organization) science nor the relativism and conservatism of postmodernist theory, widely considered to be the successor of positivist organization theory.

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 27 January 2012

Colin W. Evers and Gabriele Lakomski

The purpose of this paper is to offer a critical reflection on ideas that have been published in the Journal of Educational Administration over the last 50 years that present…

2085

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to offer a critical reflection on ideas that have been published in the Journal of Educational Administration over the last 50 years that present perspectives on the nature of educational administration and its various aspects, that are alternatives to the mainstream systems‐scientific view of educational administration.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper employs a standard analytic philosophy methodology with a focus on argument structures found in epistemology. The approach is to argue that the content and structure of administrative theories is shaped significantly by background epistemologies that determine the nature and justification of administrative knowledge

Findings

Epistemologies for both the traditional systems‐science approach to educational administration and a range of alternatives are identified and specified, and the most characteristic features of these approaches that follow from their epistemologies are described. The paper permits inferences about theory choice, and what approach is best, based on a discussion of the merits of the different epistemologies.

Originality/value

The principal value of the paper is to classify and demonstrate the most general features of the arguments that have been behind the large‐scale theoretical differences in the field of educational administration.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 50 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 April 2001

Gabriele Lakomski

Examines the claim that we need to change the organization’s culture if we want to bring about organizational change. Concerns itself with the mainstream conception of…

13748

Abstract

Examines the claim that we need to change the organization’s culture if we want to bring about organizational change. Concerns itself with the mainstream conception of (organizational) culture, especially in relation to what is called “the paradox of culture”, its twin tendencies towards stability and variability. In the process, the role of the leader and organizational learning are reassessed in their purported causal interrelation. Develops the notion of culture as cognitive process based on recent research in both cultural anthropology and the new cognitive science.

Details

International Journal of Educational Management, vol. 15 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-354X

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 21 March 2008

Gabriele Lakomski

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to argue that leadership, including distributed leadership, is a concept of folk psychology and is more productively viewed as an emergent…

1938

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to argue that leadership, including distributed leadership, is a concept of folk psychology and is more productively viewed as an emergent self‐organising property of complex systems. It aims to argue the case on the basis that claims to (distributed) leadership outrun the theoretical and empirical resources distributed and other leadership theorists can offer to support them.

Design/methodological approach

The paper employs contemporary scientific as well as traditional philosophical criteria in determining the knowledge claims made by distributed leadership theories. Of particular importance are the coherence theory of evidence that employs the super‐empirical virtues, especially coherence to establish the scientific virtue of theory, and the conception of leadership as part and parcel of folk psychology.

Findings

When considering the basis of claims to distributed leadership from a neuroscientific and empirical perspective, there is little basis in fact about the existence of (distributed) leadership as an ontological category. Talk of leadership is a conventional, commonsense label for vastly more complex and fine‐grained causal physiological and neuronal activities within certain social contexts. In this sense distributed leadership is a conception available for reduction.

Originality/value

The significance and originality of this paper lies in the fact that it proposes causal investigations of social phenomena such as leadership; demonstrates the importance and necessity of interdisciplinary research; and outlines exciting new research agendas that both question traditional taken‐for‐granted conceptions of social explanations and suggests directions of where solutions may be found in the future that are defensible by the best of current science.

Details

Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 46 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-8234

Keywords

1 – 10 of 23
Per page
102050