Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol 2, No 7 (2012), 1355-1362, Jul 2012
doi:10.4304/tpls.2.7.1355-1362

Reflective Leadership in EFL

Suleyman Davut Göker

Abstract


There seems to be a large discrepancy between leading and learning roles of EFL (English as a foreign language) teacher, learner and principal, which often makes EFL schools fail to build a coherent, collaborative system that supports powerful, equitable learning for all learners. Based on the discrepancy above, in this article, I introduce a reflective leadership framework (RLF) for EFL learners, teachers, and principals, which offers a vision of desirable practice for these three stakeholders with particular roles rather than a set of recipes or a change theory. Reflective leadership is used to describe the concept that learners, teachers and principals should be leaders and learners. I argue that with this reflective leadership type, in which all individuals are empowered to lead for learning, EFL schools could be more effective due to their unique contexts. In this leadership framework, 3 distinct concepts-learning, teaching, and leading-are mutually supportive for more powerful connections between leading and learning. This leadership type particularly offers a theoretically grounded framework for EFL schools, which desire to initiate a communicative curriculum with new leadership roles for students, teachers, and principals by drawing on the following bodies of literature: leading for learning, school-based management, creating a reflective learning community.


Keywords


reflective leadership; reflective learning community; leading for learning

References


 

[1] Adler, J., & Reed, Y. (2000). Researching teachers‘ ‗take-up‘ from a formal in-service professional development programme. Journal of Education, 25, 192–226.

[2] Bartlett, Leo. (1990). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J.C. Richards and D. Nunan (Eds), Second Language Teacher Education (pp. 2002-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.

[3] Benson, P. (1997). The Philosophy and Politics of Learner Autonomy. In P. Bensyon & P. Voller (Eds.). Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning, pp.29-30. London:Longman.

[4] Brown, D. J. (1990). Decentralization and school based management. London: Falmer Press.

[5] Butterworth, M., & O‘Connor, M. (2005). Thinking through English. New York: Chris Kington.

[6] Ceperley, P. (1991). Site-based decision-making: Policymakers can support it or undermine it. The Link, 10(21), 7–9.

[7] Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294–343.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00057

[8] Conley, S. C., & Bacharach, S. B. (1990). From school-site management to participatory school-site management. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 539–544.

[9] Crookes, G., & Schmidt R. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the research agenda. Language Learning, 41, 469–512.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1991.tb00690.x

[10] Deal, T., & Peterson, K. (l994). The leadership paradox: Balancing logic and artistry in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[11] Densten, I. L., and Gray, J. H. (2001). Leadership development and reflection: What is the connection? International Journal of Educational Management, 15(3), 119–124.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513540110384466

[12] Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language Learning, pp. 9-12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[13] Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development in education. Washington, DC: Shanker Institute.

[14] Farrell, T. (2001). Tailoring reflection to individual needs: A TESOL case study. Journal of Education for Teaching, 27, 23–38.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02607470120042528

[15] Fink, E., & Resnick, L. (2001). Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 598–606.

[16] Göker, Süleyman D. (2005). A School-based management and supervision model (SBMS) in EFL Schools. The Internet TESL Journal, January 2005.

[17] Göker, Süleyman D. (2006a). Leading for learning: Reflective management in EFL. Theory into Practice. Spring 2006, Volume. 45, No. 2, pp. 187-196.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4502_11

[18] Göker, Süleyman D. (2006b). Impact of peer coaching on self-efficacy and instructional skills in TEFL teacher education‖. System, An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics. 2006. 34/2 pp. 239-254.

[19] Göker, Süleyman D. (2007). Supervision without outside ‗Super‘ visor in ELT (English Language Teaching). GAU Journal, Social and Applied Sciences. Fall 2007/3.

[20] Gottesman, B. (2000). Peer Coaching for Educators, Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

[21] Hajnal, V., Walker, K., & Sackney, L. (l998). Leadership, organizational learning and selected factors relating to the institutionalization of school improvement initiatives. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 44(1), 70–90.

[22] Hess, F. (2003). A license to lead? A new leadership agenda for America‘s schools. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute, 21st Century School Project.

[23] Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning, pp. 2-5. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

[24] Hord, S. M. (Ed.). (1992). The new alliance of superintendents and principals: Applying the research to site-based decision making. Issues About Change, 2(1), 20–23.

[25] Jingnan,Shen. (2011). Autonomy in EFL Education. Canadian Social Science, Vol. 7, No. 5, 27-32.

[26] Jordi, Richard. (2011). Reframing the concept reflection: Consciousness, Experiental learning and reflective learning practices. American Association for Adult and Continuing Education. 61(2) 181-197.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741713610380439

[27] Knapp, Michael S.; Copland, Michael A.; & Talbert, John E. (2003). Leading for learning: Reflective tools for school and district leaders, CTP Research Report. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, Seattle, WA.; DeWitt Wallace/Reader‘s Digest Fund, Pleasantville, NY.

[28] Kofman, F., & Senge, P. (l993). Communities of commitment: The heart of the learning organization. Organizational Dynamics, 22(2), 5–23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(93)90050-B

[29] Korthagen, F. (1993). Two modes of reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 317–326.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(93)90046-J

[30] McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[31] Milner, H.R. (2003). Teacher reflection and race in cultural contexts: History, meaning, and methods in teaching. Theory into Practice 42, 173–180.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_2

[32] National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2002). Leading learning communities: Standards for what principals should know and be able to do. Alexandria, VA: Author.

[33] National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2004). The nation's report card, 26 August 2004 (accessed 20 September 2011). Available from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/.

[34] Ouchi, W. (2003). Making schools work: A revolutionary plan to get your children the education they need. New York: Simon & Schuster.

[35] Pacheco, A. Quesada. (2005). Reflective teaching and its impact on foreign language teaching. Revista Electrónica “Actualidades Investigativas en Educación” Volumen 5, Número Extraordinario, Año 2005.

[36] Raymond, Margaret E., & Eric A. Hanushek. (2003). High-Stakes research. Education Next 3,no.3 (Summer):48-55.

[37] Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667169

[38] Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667305

[39] Seferoğlu, S. S. (2001). Peer coaching: A new approach in professional development of teachers. Education and Science (Eğitim ve Bilim), 26, (119), s. 20-25.

[40] Sergiovanni, T. J. (l996). Leadership for the schoolhouse. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[41] Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. New York: Manpower Development Research Corporation.

[42] Snyder, J. (2002). New Haven Unified School District: A teaching quality system for excellence and equity. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 94–110). New York: Teachers College Press.

[43] Southern Regional Education Board. (2003, March). Good principals are the key to successful schools: Six strategies to prepare more good principals. Atlanta, GA: Author.

[44] Stoeckel, P. R., and Davies, T. G. (2007). Reflective leadership by selected community college presidents. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 31(11), 895–912.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10668920600932876

[45] Thomas B. Fordham Institute & the Broad Foundation. (2003). Better leaders for America‘s schools: A manifesto. Washington, DC: Author.

[46] Watkins, Paul. (2005). The Principal's role in attracting, retaining, and developing new teachers: Three strategies for collaboration and support. The Clearing House Vol. 79, No. 2 (Nov. - Dec., 2005), pp. 83-87.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.79.2.83-87

[47] Young, D. (1991). Creating a low anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research suggest? Modern Language Journal, 75, 426–439
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05378.x

[48] Zimmerman, Judith. A. (2011). Principals preparing for change: The importance of reflection and professional learning. American Secondary Education 39(2), 107–114.


Full Text: PDF


Theory and Practice in Language Studies (TPLS, ISSN 1799-2591)

Copyright @ 2006-2012 by ACADEMY PUBLISHER – All rights reserved.