ºÚÁϲ»´òìÈ

The English education system is at a point of national transformation, the likes of which have not been seen for over a decade. With February’s long-awaited publication of the and associated special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) reform , sustainable educational leadership is a timely and valid issue for examination within this blog post.

Sustainable leadership requires that action taken today ‘. In essence, it is an ethical act incorporating equitable practice at both intra-generational (in the present society) and inter-generational (in future society) levels (Bottery, 2016). This blog post will focus on how effective leadership can support sustainability, reflecting on governmental action in SEND reform. The theory of ethical humility will be explored and recommendations for future policy and practice, in relation to both SEND reform and wider leadership, outlined.

Know your limits

A key challenge to educational sustainability is the existence of hubris within its leaders, whereby those in power fail to recognise their own limitations (Bottery, 2016), leading to ineffective decision-making and unsustainable outcomes. This can present tension in two key ways. First, if leaders are overly confident in their own ability, they may fail to accurately identify or define the problem to be addressed (Bottery, 2016), particularly if they limit stakeholder consultation. Leaders must recognise that their own knowledge, taken in isolation, is . A further tension occurs where leaders fail to allocate sufficient time to problem and solution exploration (Bottery, 2016). In both aspects, leaders of the current SEND reform appear to be demonstrating strength, suggesting a humble approach to wicked problems (Bottery, 2016, 2019).

Strength in humility

Bottery (2016, p. 51) asserts the need for an ‘ethic of humility’, encouraging leaders to acknowledge their limitations and give due recognition to the complexity of societal problems. He also highlights the need for a culture (that is, the education system) which allows space for changes to be envisioned and implemented. Bottery (2019) continues by arguing for the importance of humility not only at the school level but in the wider political landscape. Embracing an ethic of humility is not without challenge: some leaders may feel threatened, viewing it as personal failure rather than an appreciation of the limits of being human (Bottery, 2016). Being humble also conflicts with the underlying ego of some leaders, who wish for their own excellence to be recognised (Hargreaves, 2011). If the outcomes of the SEND reform are to be sustainable, leaders must continue to approach this highly complex problem with an ethic of humility. In reality, this requires an acceptance, at both school and societal level, that effective progress in SEND reform will take time, collaboration and perseverance.

‘If the outcomes of the SEND reform are to be sustainable, leaders must continue to approach this highly complex problem with an ethic of humility.’

Future implications

While it can be argued that sustainable leadership lasts (Hargreaves, 2011), this term can be misinterpreted. Certainly, sustainable leadership should enable continuity of success, whereby knowledge is passed from leader to leader through time (Hargreaves, 2011). It must also acknowledge, however, that contextual factors are likely to change what this success looks like over time. Moving forward, an ethic of humility is necessary (Bottery, 2016, 2019) for leaders to continue to examine the issue of inclusion from a place of unknowing and uncertainty, working collaboratively and with sufficient timescales to create sustainable outcomes. On a practical level, this might include revisiting parental consultation, responding to professionals’ feedback, and learning from international practice. The SEND reform document is a positive step in this direction; whether it is sustainable remains to be seen.

Beyond England, sustainable leadership and an ethic of humility offer scope for colleagues across international educational contexts. Consider whether you and/or your leaders recognise their limitations. Is the complexity of issues given due consideration? Is collaborative problem exploration and problem solving encouraged? Is there an acceptance that what is perceived as a successful outcome today is likely to change in light of contextual factors? How can you lead in a more sustainable way?

References

Bottery, M. (2016). Educational leadership for a more sustainable world. Bloomsbury.

Bottery, M. (2019). An ethics of educational leadership for turbulent and complex times. In T. Bush, L. Bell, & D. Middlewood (Eds.), Principles of educational leadership and management (3rd ed., pp. 39–56.). Sage Publishing.

Hargreaves, A. (2011). Sustainable leadership. In B. Davies (ed.), The essentials of school leadership (2nd ed., pp. 183–202). Sage ºÚÁϲ»´òìÈ.