SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Research in Educational Administration and Leadership / 2026 / Volume: 3 Issue: 1

Leadership Profiles of New Appointed Mexican School Leaders to Indigenous Schools Through the New System of Promotion

Manuel Lopez Delgado
Argelia Estrada Loya
Pages
—
Publication Date
2018-07-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Based on the previous experiences new appointed school heads bring to the job, three different profiles were identified: An Extended classroom teacher profile, a managerial profile, and in few cases a leadership for learning profile.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this research was to explore the leadership identity development and preparedness for the role of new appointed school heads to Mexican primary schools that serve indigenous students.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research was framed as a qualitative study and used semi-structured interviews as the method for data collection with twelve appointed school heads by the new system of promotion implemented in 2015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on the previous experiences new appointed school heads bring to the job, three different profiles were identified: An Extended classroom teacher profile, a managerial profile, and in few cases a leadership for learning profile.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Leadership Identity · Leadership Preparation and Development · School Leaders

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to explore the leadership identity development and preparedness for the role of new appointed school heads to Mexican primary schools that serve indigenous students. The research was framed as a qualitative study and used semi-structured interviews as the method for data collection with twelve appointed school heads by the new system of promotion implemented in 2015. The study was carried out to the highest ethical standards in educational research with anonymity, confidentiality, consent, and respect for the participants observed at all times. This research found that new appointed Mexican school heads in primary schools are assigned to the post with different levels of leadership development. Based on the previous experiences new appointed school heads bring to the job, three different profiles were identified: An Extended classroom teacher profile, a managerial profile, and in few cases a leadership for learning profile.

🔖

Cite This Article

Delgado, M. L., Loya, A. E. (2018). Leadership Profiles of New Appointed Mexican School Leaders to Indigenous Schools Through the New System of Promotion. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, Volume: 3 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.30828/real/2018.1.2

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (27)

  1. Bennis, W. (2009). On Becoming a Leader. New York: Basic Books. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
  2. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2012)
  3. Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57-71).
  4. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2003). Becoming a principal: Role conception, initial socialization, role-identity transformation, puposeful engagement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39 (4), 468-503.
  5. Bush, T. (2010). Leadership development. In T. Bush and D. Middlewood (Eds.), The Principles of Educational Management Leadership and Management (pp. 112-132).
  6. London, UK: Sage Publications. Crow, G., Day C., & Moller, J. (2016). Framing research on school principal’s identities. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(3), 265-277.
  7. Cuban, L. (1988). The managerial imperative and the practice of leadership in schools. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  8. Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Stanford, CA: Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. MacBeath, J., & Dempster, N. (2009). Connecting Leadership and Learning: Principles for Practice. London: Routledge. DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow: A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35 (4), 627–47.
  9. Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. (2011). Taking gender into account: Theory and design for women’s leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10 (3), 374–93.
  10. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unity of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 13 (4), 423 451. Harry, B., Sturges, K. M., & Klinger, J. K. (2005). Mapping the process: An exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educational Researcher, 34 (2), 3-13.
  11. Ibarra H., Snook, S., & Guillen Ramo, L. (2010). Identity-based leader development. In N. Nohria and R. Khuruma (Eds.), Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice (pp. 657-678).
  12. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
  13. Jenkins, B. (2009). What it takes to be an instructional leader. Principal, 88 (3), 34-37.
  14. Kaplan, R. E., & Kaiser, R. B. (2003). Developing versatile leadership. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44 (4), 19-26.
  15. King, N. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 257–270).
  16. London, UK: Sage. Knapp, M., Copland, M.A., Ford, B. & Markholt, A. (2003). Leading for learning sourcebook: Concepts and examples. Seattle WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Owen, J. E., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2006). A leadership identity development model: Applications from a grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 47(4), 401-418.
  17. Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management. New York: Free Press.
  18. Kotter, J. P. (2001). What leaders really do? Harvard Business Review, 79 (11), 85- 96. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 59 (8), 37 40. Leithwood, K., Seashore-Louis, K., Anderson, S., and Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. New York: The Wallace Foundation. Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91, 509 536. Lumby, J. & English, F. (2009). From simplicism to complexity in leadership identity and preparation: Exploring the lineage and dark secrets. International Journal of Leadership in Education 12 (2), 95–114.
  19. Moller, J. (2002). Democratic leadership in an age of managerial accountability. In: J. MacBeath and L. Moos (Eds.), Democratic learning: The challenge to school effectiveness (151-163). London: Routledge-Falmer. Moorosi, P. (2014). Constructing a leader’s identity through a leadership development programme: An intersectional analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 42(6), p. 792-807.
  20. Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E. & Porter, A. C. (2007). Leadership for learning: a research-based model and taxonomy of behaviours. School Leadership and Management, 27(2), 179-201.
  21. Newberry, A. J. H. (2005). A new time -A new schoolhouse leader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. National College for Leadership of School and Children's Services. (2009). School leadership today: An examination of how school leadership in England has changed over the last decade, its characteristics and context in 2009, and the challenges of leading schools in the 21’st century. National College Publishing: Nottingham. Petriglieri, G. (2011). Identity workspaces for leadership development. In S. Snook, N. Nohria & R. Khurana (Eds.), The Handbook for Teaching Leadership (295-312).
  22. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Richardson, A. & Loubier, C. (2008). Intersectionality and leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies 3(2), 142–61.
  23. Schon, D. (1984). Leadership as reflection in action. In T. Sergiovanni & J. Corbally (Eds.), Leadership and Organizational Culture: New Perspectives on Administrative Theory and Practice (64-72).
  24. Urbana and Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
  25. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R. & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36 (1), 33-34.
  26. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y.S Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd Ed.) (pp.435-450). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Starratt, R. (2001). Democratic leadership theory in late modernity: An oxymoron or ironic possibility. In P. Begley & O. Johansson (Eds.). The Ethical Dimension of School Leadership (13-31), Boston: Kluwer Press. National College for School Leadership. (n.d.). Learning to lead: NCSL’s strategy for leadership learning. National College Publishing: Nottingham. Van Knippenberg, D., Van Knippenberg, B, De Cremer, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership self, identity: A review and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825-856.
  27. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (Fifth Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.