The Impact of James H Theory of Leadership: Basis for Action and School Improvement
Keywords:
School leadership, Empowerment, Stakeholder collaboration, Technology adoption, Total Quality Management SystemsAbstract
This research explores the James H 21st Century School Leadership Model, focusing on its three critical components: empowering school leaders, stakeholders, and the adoption of technology for Total Quality Management Systems (TQM). Firstly, empowering school leaders involves developing transformational leadership, instructional leadership, and fostering collaboration, leading to continuous improvement within schools. Secondly, empowering stakeholders fosters collaboration and ownership, resulting in effective professional development and a meaningful learning environment. Thirdly, adopting technology enhances administrative efficiency, data-driven decision-making, and communication within the school community. Through a comprehensive literature review, this study highlights the significance of each component and its impact on educational outcomes. By empowering leaders and stakeholders while leveraging technology, schools can navigate challenges, promote collaboration, and ensure quality education delivery. The James H model offers a framework for effective school leadership in the 21st century, emphasizing innovation, collaboration, and continuous improvement to meet the evolving needs of students and communities.
References
Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational administration quarterly, 41(1), 49-82.
Blase, J., & Blase, J. (1999). Principals’ instructional leadership and teacher development: Teachers’ perspectives. Educational administration quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.
Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher, 38(3), 181-199.
Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships in teachers’ professional work. Journal of Education for Teaching, 44(3), 397-406.
Fullan, M. (2023). The principal 2.0: Three keys to maximizing impact. John Wiley & Sons.
Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students' perspectives with project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of problem-based learning, 5(2), 6.
Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of education, 33(3), 329-352.
Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin [Texas]: National Center for Family & Community: Connections with Schools.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of educational administration, 38(2), 112-129.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School leadership & management, 40(1), 5-22.
Mitra, D. (2006). Increasing student voice and moving toward youth leadership. The prevention researcher, 13(1), 7-10.
Perchard, S. R. (2022). Engagement through Emancipation, Empowerment, and Equity: Heutagogy and the 21st-Century Classroom.
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational administration quarterly, 44(5), 635-674.
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and teacher education, 24(1), 80-91.
Wayman, J. C., Jimerson, J. B., & Cho, V. (2012). Organizational considerations in establishing the data-informed district. School effectiveness and school improvement, 23(2), 159-178.
