Your search
Results 15 resources
-
Complexity theory (CT) has had a meteoric rise in management literature and the social sciences. Its fledgling importation into school leadership and management raises several questions and concerns. This article takes one view of CT and argues that, though its key elements have much to offer school leadership and management, caution has to be exercised in accepting CT too readily, as it: (1) is unclear on its own novelty, nature and status; (2) can be regarded as disguised ideology in conflating description and prescription; (3) confuses explanation with prediction; (4) is relativist, undermining its own status; (5) contains problems in its advocacy of self-organization; (6) neglects the ethical and emotional dimensions of leadership and management; and (7) risks exonerating school leaders and managers from reasonable expectations of accountability and responsibility. The article concludes that there are questions to CT at the levels of theory, ontology, deontology and ethics, but that it offers useful challenges for school leadership and management.
-
The argument is raised that, in an age of the networked, connected society in an information-rich environment with communication possibilities as never before experienced or made possible, the displacement of educational virtues of morality, ethics and the development of all-round human beings, by those of money, labour, power and work are speeding apace, and the disconnect between system and lifeworld is increasing. Drawing initially on the work of Habermas, in which the colonization of the lifeworld occurs by system imperatives of rationalization, labour, money and power, the paper argues that such moves are manifested starkly in discourses of the relation between education and work, and five areas are introduced in which the links operate. The marketization and commodification of education, together with its incorporation into the service of capital and labour, are attested through a short worked example of one small territory within the larger context of China. Then, taking a lead from Sertillanges and Habermas’s later work, the paper argues for: (a) a reaffirmation of the importance of moral, ethical and spiritual dimensions of education; (b) the breaking of a narrowly instrumental, capital-acquisitive view of education as serving the jobs market and social control and towards a liberating view of education as communicative action and the development of being rather than simply behaving; (c) the importance of transcendence and immanence; and, thereby, (d) moves towards the re-integration of system and lifeworld in participating subjects.