The paper deals with the fashioning idea of distributed leadership and the related issue of education ecology democratization. The analysis of distributed leadership theories is carried on using two interpretative dimensions: ontological and epistemological presuppositions and the discursive regime of truth. The first recalls Seddon’s distinction between categorical and relational education contexts and, drawing on Bottery’s and Gronn and Ribbins works, exploites it in the light of a focus on human and practice ontologies. The discursive dimension referes to the classical tripartition between welfarism (bureau-professionalism), managerialism and democratic discourse. The paper shows three conceptions of distribution. The first one is recognisable through the connection between the ontology of practice and the welfarist discourse (distributed leadership in practice). Another conception could be called delegated, more than distributed, leadership because it stresses this idea from a managerialist perspective grounding on a human ontological basis. The third one refers to different conceptions such as dispersed or ecological leadership or to the anchoring of leadership practices to the social division of labour and to the power relationships in the field of education. The anchoring of leadership theories to the structuring properties of practice, it is argued, is crucial to ‘discuss’ the idea of distribution in a democratizing perspective.
Discourses of Distribution: Anchoring Educational Leadership to Practice / Serpieri, Roberto. - (2010). (Intervento presentato al convegno ECER Annual Conference 2010 tenutosi a Helsinki nel 25-27 Agosto 2010).
Discourses of Distribution: Anchoring Educational Leadership to Practice
SERPIERI, ROBERTO
2010
Abstract
The paper deals with the fashioning idea of distributed leadership and the related issue of education ecology democratization. The analysis of distributed leadership theories is carried on using two interpretative dimensions: ontological and epistemological presuppositions and the discursive regime of truth. The first recalls Seddon’s distinction between categorical and relational education contexts and, drawing on Bottery’s and Gronn and Ribbins works, exploites it in the light of a focus on human and practice ontologies. The discursive dimension referes to the classical tripartition between welfarism (bureau-professionalism), managerialism and democratic discourse. The paper shows three conceptions of distribution. The first one is recognisable through the connection between the ontology of practice and the welfarist discourse (distributed leadership in practice). Another conception could be called delegated, more than distributed, leadership because it stresses this idea from a managerialist perspective grounding on a human ontological basis. The third one refers to different conceptions such as dispersed or ecological leadership or to the anchoring of leadership practices to the social division of labour and to the power relationships in the field of education. The anchoring of leadership theories to the structuring properties of practice, it is argued, is crucial to ‘discuss’ the idea of distribution in a democratizing perspective.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.