Content area
Full text
Introduction
The deputy principals’ (DPs) role in school effectiveness and improvement is now critical as schools face an era of greater accountability (Heck and Hallinger, 2010). Australian schools’ participation in international and national testing regimes, has increased the pressure on schools to improve student performance data (Klenowski, 2011). A powerful way to effect school improvement is through instructional leadership (IL), defined by Hattie (2012) as teachers who work as learning leaders, whose key focus is on improving pedagogy for students and teachers.
However, most of school improvement research centres on the principal’s leadership role and there is little on the role of the deputy (Cranston et al., 2004). Cranston et al. (2004, p. 224) saw DPs as “forgotten leaders” and Harvey (1994, p. 17), the Australian deputy role as “[…] a wasted educational resource”. In fact, little is known about the role of the DP (Muijs and Harris, 2003), other than that they have a wide range of tasks (Marshall, 1991), which is increasing as principal’s delegate more responsibilities to them as a result of school-based management (Muijs and Harris, 2003). Unfortunately, there is limited research providing a, “conceptual framework for understanding vice principalship” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 188), and therefore no formalised job description for their roles and responsibilities (Wong, 2009).
Moreover, the deputy’s role has not changed a lot in many schools since its inception and is, “historically linked to practices and taken-for-granted notions of the past” (Glanz, 1994, p. 286). DPs are often given only, “clerical, custodial and other ‘social duties’” (Panyako and Rorie, 1987, p. 6) resulting in deputies spending most of their time on management and organisational administration (Arar, 2014). This is because “to a great degree, principals and other educators view the assistant principal’s role as non-instructional” (Kaplan and Owings, 1999, p. 82).
Nevertheless, the literature suggests that deputies should be an important part of leading and improving learning as instructional leaders (O’Connor, 2010) and should have a leading role in enhancing school performance (Cranston et al., 2004). Unfortunately, the research about the deputy’s role, “as an instructional leader is virtually non-existent” (Celikten, 2001, p. 67) but does suggest that the DPs themselves do want to be instructional leaders and managers of organisational change (Cranston