Editorial: Journal of Educational Administration and History, Volume 56, Issue 2

We begin this editorial by paying tribute to three of the leading figures in our discipline area/related areas: Dr Eugenie Samier, Emeritus Professor Jacky Lumby and Professor Martin Mills. Sadly, they recently passed away. Many readers will know their names and some will know them personally – as friends, colleagues, esteemed supervisors and possibly also family members. We would like to pay a heartfelt tribute to each of these key scholars.

Dr Eugenie Samier, University of Strathclyde. Scotland was a member of the JEAH editorial board and a renowned intellectual. As aptly noted in a tribute by Professor Fenwick English:

Dr. Samier was a prolific researcher and author. She spoke fluent German and passable Russian. Her dissertation at the University of Victoria was a reading of Max Weber in the original German regarding bureaucracy. She edited many books, handbooks and other professional publications. She was an original thinker and an inspiration to many colleagues around the world. She will be missed.

Eugenie was a remarkable scholar and intellectual - one of a kind. Her contributions to JEAH and other scholarly outputs were invaluable - thoughtful, novel and erudite. She was a generous colleague and we were honoured to have her on our JEAH editorial board.

Although not on our editorial board, it would be remiss of us to not recognise the recent passing away of Emeritus Professor Jackie Lumby, University of Southampton, England and Professor Martin Thrupp, University of Waikato, New Zealand. Jacky was a wonderful scholar and feminist, dedicated to the study and practice of leading for equity. Martin was a renowned scholar in the area of educational policy with a particular focus on school reform. They were also kind and giving colleagues who nurtured many early career academics. We are grateful for their legacy and extend our deepest sympathies to family, friends, colleagues, students and all who knew of and were inspired by their work. They will be greatly missed.

This general issue covers a range of issues and questions around social justice and equity in school leadership and education policy. Kevin Magill and Arturo Rodriguez argue for the need to rethink educational leadership as an intellectual activity rather than a bureaucratic management role. They envision such leadership as growing partnerships with students, teachers and community in order to facilitate possibilities for working towards social justice ‘in and beyond the classroom’.

In their different ways, two of the articles put flesh on the bones of this argument. Doxakis Savvopoulos and coauthors’ study of Greek school leaders investigates the factors that hinder or facilitate the implementation of culturally responsive leadership. They argue that ‘the application of moral values and inclusiveness begins with school leadership agency’ and that education plays a crucial role in the acceptance of diversity in culture. Given the key role that Greece is playing in the reception of refugees from outside Europe, this is a timely examination of how to build such acceptance.

Katrina MacDonald et al examine the economic maldistribution of public-school funding in Australia, arguing that it remains a ‘poisonous debate’. Drawing on urban theorist Edward Soja’s (2010) notion of spatial (in)justice, they map the policies of school choice; the spatial and economic maldistribution between state jurisdictions; and the economic maldistribution within state public systems. In so doing, they expose a major reason why Australian education now ranks in the bottom third of OECD countries when it comes to educational equity (OECD 2023).

Another two papers examine the higher education sector and partnerships within the sector and between schools and higher education. Amanda Lizier addresses the increasingly popular topic of middle leadership in higher education but from a less examined angle – function or discipline leadership roles within departments. Employing the theory of practice architectures, this case study of twelve middle leaders in an Australian faculty analyses the arrangements enabling and constraining middle leading for discipline leaders and coordinators. She concludes that understanding the practice landscape in which middle leaders’ practice unfolds is crucial so that universities can provide appropriate resources and support for their development.

Kjersti Loken Odegaard and Ann Gunnulfsen examine partnerships between Norwegian schools and higher education institutions through an analysis of government reform policy documents. Employing discourse analysis, their aim is to understand the values and beliefs that underpin government initiatives for educational reform. Their analysis exposes ‘new tensions regarding the power to define focus areas in the local reform work.’

Jeffrey Brooks Hall and coauthors examine Norwegian policy reforms of schools from a different angle. They examine the arrangements and tensions in enacting government reforms of curriculum from the perspective of principals and superintendents. Employing organisational theory and in particular, entrepreneurship, they analyse the tensions navigated by these key players in two municipalities. They note that much of this entrepreneurial work entailed various forms of adaptation of local arrangements and resources to better fit the needs and contexts of the municipalities in which these reforms were playing out.

Finally, Denise Mifsud provides a very useful systematic review of distributed leadership in compulsory schooling between 2010–2022 – a time when this concept ‘exploded’ throughout the field. The author undertakes a critical analysis of the literature, mapping the expansion of distributed leadership scholarship over a ‘broader geographical and cultural spectrum’. The author identifies key gaps in the distributed leadership narrative, thus contributing to a growing body of critique of this theory’s dominant status.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.