The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19: Insights from the Field (Studies in Educational Leadership, 26) 3031515749, 9783031515743

Citation preview

Studies in Educational Leadership  26

Antonios Kafa Nikleia Eteokleous   Editors

The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19 Insights from the Field

Studies in Educational Leadership Volume 26

Series Editors Kenneth A. Leithwood, Toronto, ON, Canada Qing Gu, School of Education, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Leadership we know makes all the difference in success or failures of organizations. This series will bring together in a highly readable way the most recent insights in successful leadership. Emphasis will be placed on research focused on pre-collegiate educational organisations. Volumes should address issues related to leadership at all levels of the educational system and be written in a style accessible to scholars, educational practitioners and policy makers throughout the world. The volumes monographs and edited volumes  - should represent work from different parts in the world. Please contact Astrid Noordermeer at [email protected] if you wish to discuss a book proposal.

Antonios Kafa  •  Nikleia Eteokleous Editors

The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19 Insights from the Field

Editors Antonios Kafa Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership Open University of Cyprus Nicosia, Cyprus

Nikleia Eteokleous Frederick University Limassol, Cyprus

ISSN 1572-3909     ISSN 2543-0130 (electronic) Studies in Educational Leadership ISBN 978-3-031-51574-3    ISBN 978-3-031-51575-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Paper in this product is recyclable.

Antonios would like to dedicate the book: To my mother in heaven and my father on earth, who never stopped believing in me, and to those rare, beautiful people that change our lives forever – SL. Nikleia would like to dedicate the book: To my husband Andreas and my two children Konstantinos and Sofia.

Preface

This edited book in the field of school leadership emerges as an outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, which disrupted education systems globally, affecting approximately 1.6 billion students in over 200 nations. This particular health crisis triggered times of uncertainty in a range of unprepared educational contexts and affected the broader educational landscape, pointing to the critical aspect of digitalization and the usage of technology. As a result, school organizations shifted the context of teaching and adjusted their educational materials and teaching methodologies to meet the demands of an unknown situation through a distance/online teaching method, which dramatically altered teaching and learning practices. In this situation, during a crisis and uncertain times, school leaders1 play an important role in school organizations. School leaders’ practices, in particular, have changed significantly and, to some degree, irreversibly as a result of this health crisis. Based on the foregoing, school leaders must maintain their leadership dynamics and lead, coordinate, and support this new digital educational development, especially since technology has a growing impact on school organizations. In general, the field of technology in education has already seen significant growth in utilization in school organizations, despite the fact that it has been used in education since 1980 as a means of emergency remote teaching. However, there are fewer references accessible about the critical role of school leaders within this technology spectrum. As a result of the unexpected and dramatic change in the context of school organizations caused by the COVID-19 crisis, there has been a significant increase in the use of a specific technology, most notably distance learning or online teaching, which will continue to persist in the global education market. As a result of this unprecedented circumstance, education and training systems must promote and at the same time implement a high-performing digital education ecosystem with digitally competent and confident school leaders while dealing with the fallout from COVID-19.

 The edited book includes terminology such as “school principals” and “school leaders” interchangeably. 1

vii

viii

Preface

Having said that, the primary focus of this edited work is to examine and debate the relationship between technology and school leadership in educational practice. In particular, this edited book will provide a comprehensive perspective of approaching these themes through conceptual and empirical evidence, both in centralized and decentralized educational contexts. The collective chapters of this book from various countries will provide valuable experiences on school leaders’ experience, confidence, competence, skills, and practices to use digital technologies effectively both in autonomous and less autonomous educational systems (centralized and decentralized education systems), as well as how the pandemic crisis influenced the school leaders’ role in establishing effective processes towards educational digital transformation. This book will fill the void by providing knowledge on the relationship between school leadership and technology. Yet, it is also worth noting that this specific change had an impact on all internal and external levels of school organizations, including families, students’ parents, teachers, and so on. We do recognize that school leaders lead school organizations by considering both internal and external aspects of school organizations and acting as part of a broader community rather than individually. As a result, different facets of this internal and external leadership dimension are presented and discussed throughout the chapters of this book. More specifically, this book will provide: • Information about how the health crisis of COVID-19 promoted the use of technology in school organizations. • Information about how school leaders across various contexts used and utilized technology during the pandemic crisis. • Information about the challenges that occurred in the various contexts as a result of utilizing technology during the pandemic crisis. • Information about the future technological trends on technology and school leadership. Based on that, as part of the introduction to Part I, in Chap. 1, we provide a brief introduction to the topic of the pandemic crisis and how it affected school organizations worldwide. Also, a discussion is provided on the elements of technology, digitalization, and school leadership. Finally, this chapter concludes with a discussion of potential technological/digitalization developments in school leadership. Following, in Part II, International Perspectives on School Leadership and Technology during COVID-19, Chap. 2 offers an inside look at a longitudinal, cross-national analysis of the ways in which school principals in Kenya, Greece, and the USA used technology to maintain student instruction in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (spring 2020), through January 2021. In Chap. 3, the authors describe how technology has helped two school principals in Australia lead their schools successfully, and how it might help them accelerate their path to creating more inclusive and student-centred schools. Chapter 4, through a case study in Cyprus, offers insights into educational leadership in relation to school principals who play an important role as leaders within the digital environment during the COVID-19 crisis. Then Chap. 5 explores and describes the digital capacities of

Preface

ix

10 school principals in inner-city schools in the context of Jamaica, during the pandemic crisis. Also, Chap. 6 attempts to explore school principals’ roles in employing digital technologies to support instruction during the lockdown in Greece. In addition, Chap. 7 draws on emerging research, reports, and present findings from interviews about how school principals in Australia have responded to adopting new digital technology and ways of learning as the new normal. Following, Chap. 8 captures first-hand accounts from K-12 school principals in southwest Texas as they led their rural schools through the unprecedented COVID-19 global pandemic with a reference also to the utilization of technology. In addition, Chap. 9 based on a qualitative research project, provides insights into the actions of school principals in Germany under the conditions of digitalization along with recommendations for school leadership research as well as for the professionalization of school principals in Germany. Finally, Chap. 10, through a qualitative research study, presents the Swedish perspective of 300 school leaders on how they perceive the development of digital practices based on their experience from the pandemic crisis. Following, in Part III, Technological Trends on School Leadership, Chap. 11 discusses the concepts of communities of practice and virtual communities of practice (VCoPs) as relevant theoretical constructs for the effective transition to mixed ability classes in virtual environments. This particular chapter provides a view on students with special needs with a reference to the role of the school principal. Then, Chap. 12 provides information about the AI perspective, as a tool, for education with a reference both to the field of educational leadership and educators. In particular, the chapter outlines the development and content of an impactful course, “AI Tools for Education,” designed to introduce educators to a diverse array of AI tools and resources. Finally, in Part IV, Conclusion, Chap. 13, as the concluding chapter, picks up the main themes and issues derived from the presented chapters in the various contexts and discusses the overall findings. Also, it provides a perspective on context and contextual variables that may affect school leaders’ engagement with technology and digital literacy and concludes with the main implications for school leaders in relation to technology, along with some future perspectives on this important topic (e.g., AI, ChatGTP). In general, in this edited book, throughout the chapters, authors with their contributions from various contexts will provide information about the presence of technology in school leadership based on the aftermath of the pandemic crisis. Therefore, what makes this edited book so distinctive is the fact that the information and knowledge derived from these two thematic areas will include both theoretical and empirical information, as well as support the future of a desirable education in this new online and distance learning era. Overall, the main benefit derived from this edited book is to present and explain through theory and practice two significant and emerging educational topics as an aftermath of the global pandemic crisis in school organizations, referring to the concepts of technology and school leadership. We believe that this book will be of great interest to: (1) scholars worldwide who are interested in the topic of school leadership and will use the insights for their teaching and research, including course improvement; (2) educational

x

Preface

policymakers, Ministries of Education, and professional development contributors who could use this book to further build school leaders’ digital capacity across various contexts, faculties of education in digital applications to curriculum, teaching, and learning; (3) graduates who immerse themselves in this area of study; and (4) school leaders around the globe who want to learn how other peers deal with the crisis and utilize technology. In a nutshell, readers of this edited book will be informed about school leaders’ ability to use digital technologies successfully through specific approaches and techniques, the technological challenges arising from this crisis, the obstacles derived from the lack of digital capacity of school leaders in various contexts, as well as the future trends in technology associated with the field of school leadership. Finally, we would like to acknowledge and thank everyone who has contributed to the writing of chapters in this book. Essentially, this work has been built on the expertise and research of colleagues in different parts of the world, and this collaboration paved the way for the publication of this edited book. In addition, we would like to express our gratitude to Springer Publications for providing us the opportunity to address this important field in an era of constant changes and upheavals. In particular, we would like to thank Astrid Noordermeer for her support and guidance during the initial stages of conceptualizing this idea, as well as Deepthi Vasudevan for her support throughout the book’s implementation. Finally, we acknowledge the work of school principals in both centralized and decentralized education systems who struggle to be excellent leaders and lead school organizations effectively, and we hope that this book will also trigger further discussions and publications that could concentrate on the important aspects of technology and school leadership in this contemporary era.

Nicosia, Cyprus  Antonios Kafa   Limassol, Cyprus  Nikleia Eteokleous 2024

Contents

Part I Introduction 1

The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership: An Introduction ������������������������    3 Antonios Kafa

Part II International Perspectives on School Leadership and Technology During COVID-19 2

Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19: An International Study of School Leader’s Use of Technology��������������������������������������������������������������������   17 Betty Merchant, Lucy Wakiaga, Birgul Yilmaz, and Martha Zurita

3

Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools Through the Pandemic Crisis��������������������������   39 David Gurr, Campbell McKay, and Christopher Reed

4

School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections from Cyprus��������������������������������������   55 Georgia Pashiardis, Stefan Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, Petros Pashiardis, and Antonios Kafa

5

Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications, Challenges, and Solutions ������������������   77 Ann-Marie Wilmot

6

School Principals as Agents on the Path to the Digitization of Greek Schools: Lessons Learned from the Pandemic����������������������  105 Angeliki Lazaridou and Vasiliki Polymeropoulou

7

 The Digital Divide: Insights into an Uneven Playing Field������������������  121 Lawrence Drysdale and Helen Goode

xi

xii

Contents

8

Leadership in Rural Texas During COVID-­19: Testimonios from the Field����������������������������������������������������������������������  135 Sarah J. Atkinson and Juan Manuel Niño

9

School Leadership Under the Conditions of Digitalization: A German Insight into Conditions and Challenges for School Leaders ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������  151 Ulrike Krein

10 Digitalization,  School Leadership, and the New Normal: School Leaders’ Perceptions of Post-pandemic Development in School Organizations ��������������������������������������������������  169 Fanny Pettersson, Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist, and Åke Grönlund Part III Technological Trends on School Leadership 11 Virtual  Communities of Practice as a Means of Confronting with Educational “Emergency Situations” for Inclusive School Communities: The Case of COVID-19 Pandemic��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  189 Kyriaki Koullapi and Olga Lyra 12 AI  Tools for Education: The Development of a Free Asynchronous Course������������������������������������������������������������������������������  213 Angelos Rodafinos Part IV Conclusion 13 School  Leaders and Technology During COVID-19: Lessons Learned from the Field and Future Implications ������������������  233 Antonios Kafa and Nikleia Eteokleous

Editors and Contributors

About the Editors Antonios Kafa  Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus Nikleia Eteokleous  Frederick University, Limassol, Cyprus

Contributors Sarah J. Atkinson  University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA Stefan Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz  Alpen-Adria-Universität, Klagenfurt, Austria Lawrence Drysdale  The University of Melbourne – Faculty of Education, Parkville, VIC, Australia Nikleia Eteokleous  Frederick University, Limassol, Cyprus Helen  Goode  The University of Melbourne  – Faculty of Education, Parkville, VIC, Australia Åke Grönlund  School of Business, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden David Gurr  The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Antonios Kafa  Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus Kyriaki Koullapi  School of Education and Social Sciences, Frederick University, Limassol, Cyprus Ulrike Krein  University of Kaiserslautern-Landau, Kaiserslautern, Germany Angeliki Lazaridou  University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

xiii

xiv

Editors and Contributors

Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist  Department of Education, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden Olga  Lyra  School of Education and Social Sciences, Frederick University, Limassol, Cyprus Campbell  McKay  Mount Waverly Primary School and the University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Betty Merchant  University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA Juan Manuel Niño  University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA Georgia Pashiardis  Ministry of Education, Sprorts and Youth, Nicosia, Cyprus Petros Pashiardis  Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus Fanny Pettersson  Department of Education, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden Vasiliki Polymeropoulou  University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece Christopher Reed  Mother Teresa Catholic Primary School and the University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Jason Rochester  University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA Angelos Rodafinos  Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece Lucy Wakiaga  African Population Health and Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya Ann-Marie Wilmot  The University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston, Jamaica Birgul Yilmaz  University of Exeter, Exeter, UK Martha Zurita  J. Sterling Morton High School District 201, Cicero, IL, USA

Part I

Introduction

Chapter 1

The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership: An Introduction Antonios Kafa

Abstract  This chapter provides an overview of the pandemic crisis and how it affected school leaders, teachers, students, and school organizations worldwide. This chapter, in particular, discusses the critical factors of leadership and management during times of uncertainty and crises. Furthermore, information on critical elements of technology, digitalization, and school leadership is presented. Finally, this chapter concludes with a discussion of potential technological/digitalization developments in school leadership.

Introduction: “Unknown Unknowns” Modern societies are increasingly confronted with “unknown unknowns” (Ansell & Boin, 2019). At the same time, these “unknown unknowns” events and circumstances have an impact on organizations and businesses. School organizations are regarded as microsystems because they are mainly responsible for supporting and promoting students’ learning performance, as well as providing a safe and secure social environment for all students on school grounds. However, as in any microsystemic environment, school organizations must deal with “unknown unknowns” arising from conflicts, sudden changes, sudden crises, and a variety of issues. Academic discourse addressed the issue of crisis in school organizations to some extent. In reality, the majority of the literature treats crisis incidents and school problems as interchangeable. However, what distinguishes the crises is that they are rare and unusual events that are unrelated to the day-to-day problems that school organizations encounter. According to Smith and Riley (2012), problem incidents in the

A. Kafa (*) Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_1

3

4

A. Kafa

literature are associated with well-known, predictable events and challenges in school organizations and do not meet the commonly accepted description of a crisis. In other words, crises in school organizations mostly relate to internal problems rather than actual emergency situations. Striepe and Cunningham (2022) stated in a scoping review of empirical research studies on school leadership during times of crisis that crises impacting school organizations are divided into natural disasters and human disasters. Natural disasters include fires, hurricanes, tornadoes, and so on, whereas human disasters include numerous school disasters, shootings, and deaths, among other things (Striepe & Cunningham, 2022). Due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the problem of a crisis has resurfaced. In particular, in the context of a rare health crisis, the topic of crisis and uncertainty emerged as a significant factor influencing various parts of the global economy and businesses, including, of course, educational organizations and in particular school organizations. The pandemic crisis has had an impact on companies, the economy, and the travel and tourism industry, as well as on education systems all over the world, disrupting how students are taught (Kafa & Pashiardis, 2020; Bartsch et al., 2021). Sutherland (2017) stated that school organizations confront a complex landscape of challenges in which uncertainty has become the norm. In reality, in recent years, the aforementioned statement has been associated with the pandemic crisis that affected the entire planet and caused upheavals in everyone’s lives, including educational systems worldwide. During the onset of a crisis, a leader is thought to play an important role. According to AlAjm (2022), when the education system was overwhelmed by the COVID-19 health crisis, school leaders had to take on the mantle of digital literacy by ensuring that students and teachers had access to and used digital tools and platforms. This new crisis, or “supernova” force, as Azorìn (2020) refers to it, triggered periods of uncertainty in various school contexts that were unprepared, and changed the overall educational landscape. Therefore, the school leader in this particular context played, once again, an important role. In school organizations, school leaders were brought into the spotlight, and they were expected to adjust their educational practices from the conventional learning environment into this new distance/online learning environment with insufficient and/or minimum training and preparation. As a result, leading and managing a school organization during a crisis requires a school leader who is capable of acting and reacting on this particular matter.

Leading and Managing During Times of Crisis It has already been stated that leaders are the most essential factor in dealing with a crisis or uncertain times. This is a standard that is justified in all organizations in the world’s top societies, including those in business and education. In particular, in school organizations, it is critical for a school leader to first and foremost support their school staff during a crisis or time of uncertainty. According to Smith and Riley (2012), crisis leadership entails dealing with emotions, repercussions, and

1  The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership…

5

events in the present, in ways that minimize personal and organizational damage to the school organization and school community. Netolicky (2020) mentioned that school leadership is already a complex and demanding task, and we must accept that this task has been dramatically and unexpectedly altered by the pandemic crisis. In general, this global health crisis has altered overall perceptions of school leadership practices and dramatically altered all teaching and learning practices, leading to a redesign of the general educational practice (Harris, 2020). As a consequence, education systems embraced this “digital checkmate imposed” (Azorìn, 2020) as a result of this unprecedented crisis and shifted the instructional aspect from the well-­ known conventional teaching context to the distance/online context. Based on that, school leaders were responsible to take small steps, reflect on the changes brought about by the pandemic crisis, recognize that feelings of anxiety are a normal response, and accept the overall added challenges. As a consequence, school leaders will be held more accountable and better prepared to deal with future crises and challenges in their schools. In general, we have to acknowledge that during any crisis, school leaders must keep a leadership dynamic since any unpredictable event disrupts the usual operations of school organizations and requires an immediate response (Bhaduri, 2019; Fener & Cevik, 2015). School leaders’ roles were altered and redefined as a result of the COVID-19 crisis (Harris, 2020; Netolicky, 2020; Harris & Jones, 2020; Ärlestig et al., 2021), and school leaders were constantly asked to review their leadership status (Drysdale & Gurr, 2017) and adjust their role to this new situation. In fact, during this crisis, school leaders who manage and lead school organizations emerged as a significant source of influence (Harris, 2020; Netolicky, 2020; Kafa & Pashiardis, 2020; Kafa, 2021) and were asked to maintain a leadership dynamic and provide guidance to help school organizations navigate through this health crisis, including the utilization of digital capacity and technology. In particular, school leaders had a responsibility to control and coordinate the new distance learning process, to be aware of ongoing developments that occurred during the online and distance teaching and learning process, to coordinate the school staff, to contribute to the development of school staff, and finally to evaluate the overall situation within the school organization (Kafa & Pashiardis, 2020). More specifically, some of the actions that school leaders were required to carry out in most education systems were (i) to record the names of teachers who had various health problems and were considered vulnerable to the disease, (ii) to record students’ lack of technological equipment during their online lessons, and (iii) to record teachers’ availability and promptness to participate in this new distance/online e-learning process. As a result, the challenge for a school leader was to identify all of the variables, primarily of an organizational nature, that could favorably impact the new environment of online and remote learning. This particular structural component would undoubtedly have a beneficial impact on the pedagogical and psychological behavior of the teaching staff. According to Pashiardis and Johansson (2021), this structuring leadership area is connected to an important aspect of a school’s structural organization, including how space and time are used, as well as how tasks are done and given. This aspect

6

A. Kafa

of leadership, known as the structuring leadership style in the literature (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011; Pashiardis, 2014), is regarded as critical because it can provide tangible coordination, clarity, and guidance in dealing with any given crisis. In general, a school leader must assess the crisis situation and use evidence-based information to handle the problem through critical thinking and coordination. In addition, through the structuring and coordinating leadership aspect, to constantly monitor and evaluate the circumstance in order to promote a concrete decision-­making process. According to Smith and Riley (2012), there is a large body of study and literature that discusses the critical role of school leaders during a crisis, including minimizing harm to staff and ensuring the organization’s overall recovery and survival. However, as mentioned before, much of the “crisis” literature is linked to known predictable events and challenges in school organizations and does not meet the widely recognized definition of a crisis (Smith & Riley, 2012). Based on recent empirical studies associated with the COVID-19 crisis, the pandemic crisis put pressure on teachers and school leaders (e.g., Walls & Seashore, 2021; Ärlestig et al., 2021), while school leaders’ roles were altered and redefined as a result of this unprecedented change (Harris, 2020; Netolicky, 2020; Harris & Jones, 2020). Hence, to deal with this particular crisis, or any other crises, school leaders must recognize that the idea of “crisis leadership/management,” or as it is referred to in the educational field, “crisis management education” (Shrivastava et  al., 2013), must be adapted and implemented in school organizations. According to Smith and Riley (2012), this “crisis management” component has the following nine characteristics: (1) optimism, (2) flexibility, (3) decisive decision-making, (4) communication skills, (5) procedural intelligence, (6) synthesizing skills, (7) creativity/lateral thinking, (8) empathy and respect, and (9) intuition. Therefore, as part of the “crisis leadership and management” concept, school leaders must identify the type of crisis and promote methods for managing it, as well as develop a specific crisis escape plan. Drysdale and Gurr (2017) mentioned the following: “In times of change and uncertainty, leaders must constantly review their leadership.” We contend that, despite the many authors who argue that leaders must reinvent themselves in times of change, there are certain practices that are likely to stay constant, whereas the capabilities that underlie these practices can change” (p. 131). Therefore, the transformational leadership theory could be used to guide an organization, clarify roles, and provide guidance to followers (Shadraconis, 2013). In reality, this theory is widely used and has been thoroughly researched, including school organizations (e.g., Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). In addition, distributed leadership abilities are essential for school leaders to develop in order to deal with a crisis. The collaboration and distribution of leadership and other tasks to all internal actors in a school organization is what distributed leadership entails. The importance of distributed leadership arises, in particular, in school organizations, from the need to distribute tasks and responsibilities in order to more effectively and collectively handle a crisis. According to Holcombe and Kezar (2017), a straightforward crisis response can be effectively addressed by implementing a distributed leadership model in which

1  The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership…

7

different individuals in an organization can exercise creative influence during times of change. Furthermore, Arturo Fernandez and Paul Shaw (2020) argued that with the help of distributed and decentralized leadership, teachers could actually improve their teaching quality and surmount all of the teaching and learning challenges that were observed during the pandemic crisis. Furthermore, Azorìn (2020) argued that in the current health crisis, distributed leadership has become the norm, necessitating more school leaders to share, learn, network, and connect. Likewise, Harris and Jones (2020) claimed that, due to the plethora of challenges posed by this pandemic crisis, distributed leadership is a requirement for survival. Overall, during a crisis or time of uncertainty, a school leader may be able to support elements of transformational and distributed leadership to alleviate the burden and address the crisis in a more collective manner. In addition to all these information, it is claimed that the COVID-19 crisis has prompted the exploration of new educational frontiers including the technology/digital aspect. AlAjm (2022) argued that technology is now used in nearly all classrooms, from elementary schools to higher education facilities. In fact, based on this health crisis, school leadership and technology/digitalization were intertwined, and more exploration is required.

School Leadership and Technology/Digitalization Krein (2023) claimed in her systematic literature analysis on school leadership and digitalization from the previous 20 years that the data suggested that there are just a few studies that clearly address school leadership and digitalization. At the same time, digitalization appears to be primarily negotiated as a synonym for the usage or integration of digital media, or associated with other phenomena such as social networks, and thus clearly delimited, albeit limited to a techno-deterministic perspective (Krein, 2023). Also, Bathon and Socol (2021) acknowledged that prior to the pandemic crisis, primary and secondary school systems largely underestimated digital learning technologies. They were now vastly overstated overnight. Despite the fact that there was no technologically feasible substitute for the conventional experience, technology has the potential to be a lifeline for many people (Bathon & Socol, 2021). Based on this, school leaders within school organizations may be able to use this technological viewpoint to lead future schools. Nonetheless, McLeod and Richardson (2011), over a decade ago, supported the notion that there is a scarcity of empirically written articles or presentations on the subject. In the same vein, Dexter et al. (2016) reached the same conclusion after reviewing empirical papers on school leadership and technology published up to 2015. Dexter and Richardson (2020), in another systematic review of the literature conducted between 1998 and 2018, supported technological vision, professional capacity building, and facilitating educational technology use for students. However, following the health crisis of COVID-19, scholars in the field of educational leadership are becoming increasingly interested in understanding how schools are embracing digital innovations and

8

A. Kafa

how these digital changes are impacting the roles and possibilities of school leaders in unique ways (Richardson, 2021). For instance, Tulowitzki et al. (2022) assert that the field of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) is having an increasing effect on school organizations. Furthermore, as an aftermath of the pandemic crisis, the researchers emphasized the significant role of school leaders as important drivers of innovation in ICT-related subjects (Tulowitzki et al., 2022). Overall, the unexpected crisis within school organizations resulted in a substantial increase in the use of a specific technology, mainly referring to distance or online teaching, which will continue to persist in the global education market. The European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2019) stated in the report “Digital Education at School in Europe” that European countries must continuously review and create new strategic policies and measures to meet the new demands for high-­ quality digital education. According to the study, half of European education systems are currently reforming digital competence curriculum, with only one third actively promoting school leaders’ roles in this digital transformation. Following that, the European Union, in response to the dearth and readiness that educational organizations faced, is making progress with the EU “Digital Education Action Plan” (2021–2027), which seeks to address and support Europe’s education and training systems in dealing with the fallout from COVID-19. According to the EU report, education systems must (1) strengthen an ecosystem for integrated digital education and (2) support the digital skills of teachers and school leaders. As a result, education systems in Europe and around the world must embrace this “digital checkmate imposed,” as well as accept the digital transformation of educational practice and work to improve it. This digital transformation may contribute to more digital or technologically oriented school leadership. AlAjm (2022) agreed that digital leadership refers to the implementation and application of digital-age leadership approaches, such as reliance on contemporary technology platforms. High levels of innovation are required for digital success. The strategic use of an entity’s IT assets to optimize its business achievements is what digital leadership entails. School leaders dealt with the COVID-19 health crisis, which led them to redefine their leadership through the use of digital capacity or technology, without any training or capacity building. A school leader is someone who, in addition to being a manager, morally and emotionally supports teachers and successfully promotes a school organization. As a result of this digital leadership, digital communication channels for both internal and external school stakeholders are an essential factor. A school leader can use technology and the digital aspect to create various communication channels through social media, “online office hours,” and texting groups through mobile phone apps to support and ease teachers’ work, among other things. In general, it is critical to create a digital community where teachers can pose questions and get answers from their school leaders as well as other teachers. In this context, school leaders must maintain their leadership agility and malleability while leading, coordinating, and facilitating this new and emerging digital educational development, particularly given the impact ICT has on school organizations and learners.

1  The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership…

9

Few studies have focused on the skills required for school leaders to become digital leaders and have a beneficial impact on technology integration in schools (AlAjm, 2022). Despite their growing focus on technology leadership, the role of school leaders in the efficacy of technology integration has received little attention (Kozloski, 2006). Richardson et al. (2021), for example, argued that many researchers in educational management, administration, and leadership have long been dedicated to the core ideals of social justice and equality. The COVID-19 pandemic only served to emphasize the role those digital technologies play in addressing and exacerbating issues of inequality and inequity. It is our responsibility to demonstrate that there are better ways to do education and that technology and the overall digital aspect are part of that path forward. As researchers, we must take the lead in better understanding what is going on in school organizations, where digital innovation is taking root, and how it is changing teaching and learning. AlAjm (2022) investigated the effect of digital leadership among school leaders on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis in Kuwait. According to the findings of the quantitative study, digital leadership among school leaders had a positive effect on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic. School leaders specifically adopted digital leadership characteristics such as visionary leadership, excellence in professional practice, a digital-­ age learning culture, digital citizenship, and systemic improvement. During the pandemic crisis, school leaders’ digital leadership influenced teachers’ use of technology in the classroom. Also in their research, Richardson et al. (2021) attempted to gain a better understanding of the challenges encountered by school leaders who have demonstrated excellence in integrating technology into teaching and learning in P-12 schools in the United States. Responses to emergency online learning in the United States varied from optimism to skepticism, and from acceptance to resigned frustration. While school leaders were required to support the sudden shift in teaching and learning mode during the pandemic, not all were equipped for such a digital shift (Richardson et al., 2021). As a result, school leaders who can and have effectively used digital technologies for teaching and learning can teach us a lot. Investigating the intersections of technology, innovation, and schools is frequently mentioned as a required priority in the literature, but as mentioned above, there are only a few empirical studies available (Richardson et al., 2021).

 he Future Steps of Technology/Digitalization T in School Leadership The future of learning, education, and schooling will be even more technological than it is today. Based on  that, school leaders must maintain their leadership dynamic, and the lack of confidence and ability to effectively use digital technologies must be addressed. Hamzah et al. (2021) mentioned that school leaders must demonstrate how to use technology in their everyday administrative and

10

A. Kafa

professional duties in order to encourage staff to do the same. Therefore, governments and educational policymakers across the globe should rethink the improvement of school leaders’ digital capacity building in this post-COVID-19 era. All relevant stakeholders, in particular, should prioritize specific practices to allow effective school leadership based on the digital transformation of school organizations. This mostly refers to a rise in school leaders’ training, seminars, professional growth, and digital support. This can be accomplished by involving other government and commercial stakeholders with digital competence (e.g., universities, private companies, and other governmental bodies). In Italy, for example, universities assisted neighboring educational settings by sharing their expertise and providing the necessary professional development to guarantee the fundamentals of e-learning (Girelli et  al., 2021). Furthermore, in order to implement the e-learning process across Cyprus, the Ministry of Education collaborated with the Cyprus Pedagogical Institute (whose main activities focus on pre-service and in-service training for teachers and school leaders), as well as the Ministry of Research, Innovation, and Digital Policy (Kafa & Pashiardis, 2020). This can also be performed with the cooperation of superintendents or school inspectors for promoting the school’s digital ability and, in particular, the digital capacity of the school leaders. Despite the various challenges superintendents have within their working environment in promoting technology in school organizations (Sterrett & Richardson, 2019), a study by Richardson et al. (2020) investigated superintendents as part of the top of educational policy, and how they engage various school-level stakeholder groups, such as school leaders, students, and teachers, using technology in general and technology integration in particular. According to the findings, superintendents supported and engaged these school stakeholders in terms of technology by (1) collaborating and communicating with stakeholders, (2) providing relevant and timely professional development opportunities for stakeholders, and (3) cultivating a technology-­ infused learning culture across the district for all stakeholders (Richardson et al., 2020). In addition, Rojas Briñez et al. (2023) examined how school leaders assist ICT integration at school organizations in a systematic literature analysis conducted between 2011 and 2020. According to the findings, school leaders affect ICT integration in seven ways: supporting ICT integration in the school community, facilitating ICT use, providing financial assistance, offering ICT training, collaborating, planning, and monitoring. The authors endorsed the premise that policymakers might use the research findings to offer a baseline for future assessments and guidance for school leaders’ professional development based on their findings. In essence, educational systems worldwide must emphasize the significance of school leadership digital capacity by promoting school leaders as (1) “digital coordinators” and (2) “digital pedagogical school leaders.” Regarding the first aspect (digital coordinators), it is critical to promote school leaders’ coordination roles by fostering strong digital communication with various internal and external school stakeholders, as well as promoting a digital conflict management system via forums and digital discussion support groups. Regarding the second aspect (digital pedagogical school leaders), it is critical to promote school leaders’ digital pedagogical role in assisting teachers in integrating digital technologies into their teaching,

1  The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership…

11

as well as promoting the implementation of digital learning communities among teachers within their own school organizations and across other school organizations. Furthermore, proper budget allocation, as well as suitable educational policies, is required to improve school leaders’ digital capacity. This is particularly relevant to the technological infrastructure that should be integrated into school organizations, as well as collaboration with various organizations and enterprises with digital competence that will aid in the professional training and capacity development of school leaders. As a result, the Ministries of Education and Finance must work closely together to ensure that sufficient revenues are available to meet the needs of their school members, including school leaders, in this new digital age. The open public consultation on the “Digital Education Action Plan (2021)” report gathered data from more than 2700 people in 60 nations. The COVID-19 health crisis, according to 95% of respondents, is a watershed moment in the use of digital technology in education and training. The situation highlights the critical significance of digital education for all educational systems. In particular, educational systems and school organizations must have a concrete digital educational implementation framework in the post-COVID-19 era. A concrete plan for the pedagogical aspect of distance teaching and learning procedures must be included in this framework. The preceding reference addresses the two most important stakeholders in this digital age of educational change: teachers and students in school organizations. As AlAjm (2022) argued, school leaders are significant and powerful stakeholders in the use of digital leadership and technology in schools. Having said that, a higher degree of digital competence is required. Through digital competence, they can improve and promote the use of digital leadership in the classroom by creating mechanisms aimed at empowering and enlightening teachers on digital leadership and technology issues. Many school leaders have received inadequate technology training. As a result, ministries of education and educational policy centers should assess their training requirements and develop in-service programs to satisfy those requirements. Adequate school leadership training would be beneficial in terms of improving competence and embracing technology in their school organizations. McLeod (2021), for example, argued that if there is anything we have recently learned about school leadership, one of the primary lessons must be the significance of sound technological leadership. School leaders who made digital investments in previous years received the benefits during the pandemic, but mostly in the United States (McLeod, 2021). In fact, McLeod (2021) highlighted some significant concerns that we need to take into consideration. For instance, why are so few educational leadership researchers interested in technological problems in the first place? For example, it’s hard not to wonder: would more schools have been better positioned to respond to the pandemic if we had previously invested more in school technology leadership research and practice? (McLeod, 2021). While the pandemic has brought to light many of the ongoing deficiencies that schools confront in terms of technology integration and implementation, none of these deficiencies come as a surprise (McLeod, 2021).

12

A. Kafa

Currently, the literature presents a connection between the essential aspects of school leadership and artificial intelligence (e.g., ChatGTP), as well as how these are related (e.g., Wang, 2021; Tyson & Sauers, 2021). This specific aspect focuses on the relationship between school leadership and technology in the near future. There is also a link between virtual reality and the development of instructional ability in school leaders (Militello et al., 2021). This is something we will continue to engage in, as part of our ongoing technological capacity building for school leaders around the world. To summarize, policymakers, professional development organizations, governments, education boards, educational institutions, and other relevant stakeholders must take the necessary steps to transform education by developing educational leaders’ digital competence and supporting them in developing their roles as both digital coordinators and digital instructional leaders in this new and emerging digital era. McLeod, 2021 argued that a key observation here is that educational leadership faculty do not have to be technology-fluent to contribute to the scholarship of school technology leadership. Whether your scholarly lenses are within the fields of organizational theory, finance, principalship or superintendency, social justice, law, curriculum, instruction, assessment, family-community engagement, or a whole host of other educational leadership domains, there are technology-related intersections with each and every one of those. And that is where we need help. We need more scholars—and their doctoral students—researching these kinds of intersections.

References AlAjm, M. K. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kuwait 1–10. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, 1–10. Ansell, C., & Boin, A. (2019). Taming deep uncertainty: The potential of pragmatist principles for understanding and improving strategic crisis management. Administration & Society, 51(7), 1079–1112. Ärlestig, H., Breslin, T., Johansson, O., Gombe, L., & Pashiardis, P. (2021, November). Striving for stability in the chaos: School principals and COVID-19 [Paper presented]. UCEA Convention, Columbus, OH, United States. Arturo Fernandez, A., & Paul Shaw, G. (2020). Academic leadership in times of crisis: The coronavirus and Covid-19. Journal of Leadership Studies, 14(1), 39–45. Azorìn, C. (2020). Beyond COVID-19 supernova. Is another education coming? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3,4), 381–390. Bartsch, S., Weber, E., Büttgen, M., & Huber, A. (2021). Leadership matters in crisis-induced digital transformation: How to lead service employees effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Service Management, 32(1), 71–85. Bathon, J., & Socol, I. D. (2021). Commentary – A time for recoding school. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 385–391. Bhaduri, R. M. (2019). Leveraging culture and leadership in crisis management. European Journal of Training and Development, 43(5/6), 534–549.

1  The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis and the Use of Technology in School Leadership…

13

Brauckmann, S., & Pashiardis, P. (2011). A validation study of the leadership styles of a holistic leadership theoretical framework. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(1), 11–32. Dexter, S., & Richardson, J. W. (2020). What does the technology integration research tell us about the leadership of technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(1), 17–36. Dexter, S., Richardson, J. W., & Nash, J. (2016). Leadership for technology use, integration, and innovation: A review of the empirical research and implications for leadership preparation. In M. D. Young & G. M. Crow (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 202–228). Routledge. Drysdale, L., & Gurr, D. (2017). Leadership in uncertain times. International Studies in Educational Administration, 45(2), 131–158. European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice. (2019). Digital education at school in Europe. Eurydice report. Publications Office of the European Union. Fener, T., & Cevik, T. (2015). Leadership in crisis management: Separation of leadership and executive concepts. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 695–701. Girelli, C., Bevilacqua, A., & Acquaro, D. (2021). COVID-19: What have we learned from Italy’s education system lockdown? International Studies in Educational Administration, 48(3), 51–58. Hamzah, H. N., Nasir, M. K., & Wahab, J. A. (2021). The effects of principals’ _digital leadership on teachers’ _digital teaching during the Covid-19 pandemic in Malaysia. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 8(2), 216–221. Harris, A. (2020). COVID-19 – School leadership in crisis? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 321–326. Harris, Α., & Jones, Μ. (2020). COVID 19  – School leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership & Management, 40(4), 243–247. Holcombe, E., & Kezar, A. (2017). The Whys and Hows of shared leadership in higher education. Higher Education Today. https://www.higheredtoday.org/2017/05/10/ whyshows-­shared-­leadershiphigher-­education/ Kafa, A. (2021). Advancing school leadership in times of uncertainty: The case of the global pandemic crisis. Leading & Managing, 27(1), 37–50. Kafa, A., & Pashiardis, P. (2020). Coping with the global pandemic COVID-19 through the lenses of the Cyprus education system. International Studies in Educational Administration, 48(2), 42–48. Kozloski, K. C. (2006). Principal leadership for technology integration: A study of principal technology leadership. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Drexel University). Krein, U. (2023). What’s your take on school leadership and digitalization? A systematic review of publications from the last 20 years. International Journal of Leadership in Education. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2023.2237939 Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 112–129. McLeod, S. (2021). Commentary – Why aren’t more educational leadership scholars researching technology? Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 392–395. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JEA-­06-­2021-­263 McLeod, S., & Richardson, J. W. (2011). The dearth of technology coverage. Journal of School Leadership, 211(2), 216–240. Militello, M., Tredway, L., Hodgkins, L., & Simon, K. (2021). Virtual reality classroom simulations: How school leaders improve instructional leadership capacity. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 286–301. Netolicky, D. (2020). School leadership during a pandemic: Navigating tensions. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 391–395. Pashiardis, P. (2014). Modeling school leadership across Europe: In search of new frontiers. Springer.

14

A. Kafa

Pashiardis, P., & Johansson, O. (2021). Successful and effective schools: Bridging the gap. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(5), 690–707. Richardson, J. W. (2021). Guest editorial. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 253–255. Richardson, J.  W., Clemons, J., & Sterrett, W. (2020). How superintendents use technology to engage stakeholders. Research in Educational Administration & Leadership, 5(4), 954–988. Richardson, J. W., Watts, J. L. D., & Sterrett, W. L. (2021). Challenges of being a digitally savvy principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 318–334. Rojas Briñez, K. D., Duart, M. J., & Galvis Panqueva, H. A. (2023). Findings and derived challenges concerning how school leaders should support ICT integration at schools. School Leadership & Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2023.2237514 Shadraconis, S. (2013). Organizational leadership in times of uncertainty: Is transformational leadership the answer? LUX: A Journal of Transdisciplinary Writing and Research, 2(1), 1–15. Shrivastava, P., Mitroff, I., & Alpaslan, C. M. (2013). Imagining an education in crisis management. Journal of Management Education, 37(1), 6–20. Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership & Management, 32(1), 57–71. Sterrett, W., & Richardson, J. W. (2019). The change-ready leadership of technology-savvy superintendents. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(3), 227–242. Striepe, M., & Cunningham, C. (2022). Understanding educational leadership during times of crises: A scoping review. Journal of Educational Administration, 60(2), 133–147. Sutherland, I. E. (2017). Learning and growing: Trust, leadership, and response to crisis. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1), 2–17. Tulowitzki, P., Gerick, J., & Eickelmann, B. (2022). The role of ICT for school leadership and management activities: An international comparison. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(2), 133–151. Tyson, M. M., & Sauers, N. J. (2021). School leaders’ adoption and implementation of artificial intelligence. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 271–285. Walls, J., & Seashore, K. (2021, November 11–14). Moral distress amongst district leaders: Intensity, dilemmas, and coping mechanisms. [Conference presentation]. UCEA 2021 Convention, Columbus, OH, United States. Wang, Y. (2021). Artificial intelligence in educational leadership: A symbiotic role of human-­ artificial intelligence decision-making. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 256–270.

Part II

International Perspectives on School Leadership and Technology During COVID-19

Chapter 2

Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19: An International Study of School Leader’s Use of Technology Betty Merchant

, Lucy Wakiaga

, Birgul Yilmaz, and Martha Zurita

Abstract  This chapter presents a longitudinal, cross-national analysis of the ways in which school principals in Kenya, Greece, and the USA used technology to maintain student instruction in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (spring 2020 through January 2021). The research was qualitative in nature, and data were obtained through interviews and focus groups. The researchers identify common themes across the three countries, as well as the findings that are unique to each national context. In particular, this chapter explores school principals’ response to an unprecedented global pandemic for which schools were largely unprepared, yet which necessitated a quick response from school principals with a  focus on the ways in which school principals were able to maximize the use of instructional technology for the benefit of their students, despite the challenges they faced.

Introduction This chapter presents a longitudinal analysis of the ways in which school principals in Kenya, Greece, and the USA used technology in their efforts to provide continuity of student instruction through technology during the COVID-19

B. Merchant (*) University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA e-mail: [email protected] L. Wakiaga African Population Health and Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya B. Yilmaz University of Exeter, Exeter, UK M. Zurita J. Sterling Morton High School District 201, Cicero, IL, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_2

17

18

B. Merchant et al.

pandemic. In addition, in the Epilogue to our chapter, we provide the preliminary findings of our exploratory study of teachers’ perceptions of their school principals’ role with respect to technology, post-COVID, in one urban school district in Texas.1 Our research was qualitative in nature, and data were obtained through interviews, surveys, and focus groups. We draw upon Bronfenbrenner’s socialecological framework (Bronfenbrenner, 1975, 1979) as the conceptual lens for discussing our findings. That is, we acknowledge that school principals work within several nested sociological systems which constrain as well as facilitate their ability to lead their schools, and they are both the recipients and the initiators of actions within these systems (See Appendix for graph and explanation of terms). In reporting the results of our cross-national exploration of the use of technology during COVID-19, we (1) examine the interpersonal and technical factors associated with the transition from in-person instruction to online teaching and learning during COVID-19; (2) explore the ways in which school principals addressed the issue of teacher accountability for student learning during this time; (3) discuss the findings and implications of our study; and (4) provide recommendations to school principals for leading their schools in the new digital ecosystem.

Methodology The methodology we followed in conducting our research was qualitative in nature. We used a common core of questions to obtain our data through interviews that were conducted largely in person, although a few were conducted over Zoom. The data from Greece were derived from 20 interviews with teachers and school principals in urban and rural areas of the country. The research in Kenya was also conducted in both urban and rural areas and consisted of personal interviews with 20 school principals; in addition, it included four focus group discussions with eight teachers in each group. The Texas data drew from individual interviews with 26 school principals and teachers in an urban part of the state and from the responses provided in the reflective journals written by 25 teachers and school principals from rural districts. Classroom discussions with the same teachers, who were graduate students at the time, also contributed to the study. For the Illinois portion of this study, five school principals and ten teachers from the suburbs of Chicago were interviewed. All of the researchers analyzed their data in order to identify emerging themes, and in this chapter, we present the themes that emerged in common across all four of the research sites.

 Although the other coauthors of this chapter have not yet had an opportunity to conduct similar studies in their own contexts, the anecdotal evidence they do have is consistent with the findings of this initial exploratory study. 1

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

19

 actors Associated with the Transition from In-Person F to Online Teaching and Learning During COVID The themes that emerged from our research regarding the school principals’ ability to support the transition from in-person teaching and learning to online learning during COVID-19 fell into two distinct, but related categories: (1) the nature and quality of the interpersonal relationships between school principals and members of the school community and (2) the technical challenges associated with the transition to online learning. We first discuss the themes regarding the nature and quality of the interpersonal relationships that existed prior to the pandemic between school principals and their teachers, students, families, and community members with respect to (a) trust, respect, and care; (b) familiarity with the community; and (c) effective communication. Next, we discuss the themes related to the technical challenges associated with the transition to online learning with respect to (a) school principals’ digital literacy; (b) teachers’ digital literacy; (c) students’ and parents’ digital literacy, and (d) availability of technology resources for online teaching and learning.

Nature and Quality of Interpersonal Relationships Relationships that were characterized by trust, respect, and care provided a critical foundation from which school principals were able to engage the school community in responding collaboratively and constructively in addressing the learning needs of students during the uncertain times of the pandemic.

Trust School principals who had cultivated a school climate of trust long before the pandemic were able to mitigate the uncertainty and fear associated with COVID-19 more successfully than were school principals who had not yet earned the trust of the members of their school community. The importance of trust cannot be overstated with respect to facilitating school principals’ work with teachers, students, and parents during challenging times, such as the pandemic, when confusing directives at the macrolevel can undermine trust at the local level. As was true of the majority of people during the unprecedented pandemic, teachers and parents searched for certainty and reassurance that the policies and practices that were being enacted by their national and state governments would keep them safe and healthy. Since the information school principals received was initially reactive, delayed, and contradictory, school principals had to rely upon the guidance

20

B. Merchant et al.

provided by national and state authorities, whose information was sometimes at odds with policies and practices that were being advocated at the local district and community levels. In Kenya, for example, the social distance policy was untenable in practice, as noted by a focus group of teachers who expressed a lack of trust in the appropriateness of the government’s policies regarding social distancing in their classrooms: “The policy of social distancing in schools also has not worked so well because the government wants the school to keep social distance and yet the facility cannot stretch enough to be able to accommodate [this policy].” Given the unreliability and inconsistency of the information that was provided to them, school principals often appeared to their teachers, staff, and community members as ill-informed and indecisive. Although school principals were often unable to provide the clarity requested of them, those who were comparatively successful in navigating the uncertainty were able to offer encouragement while being transparent about their own confusion over the oftentimes conflicting and contradictory policies and procedures. School principals who acknowledged their own vulnerability while also communicating a sense of confidence and optimism were able to further strengthen the trust between themselves, the teachers, and the families served by their schools. A school principal in one of the Kenyan schools expressed the sense of trust that evolved between the school staff, students, and their families, as they worked together to implement some of the health policies, such as handwashing: It also brought us together because like teachers, there was the use of the hand washing. We were to wash together then the students didn’t have that idea of washing hands, especially in those schools which are day schools like ours. So, this one brought us together, that this is a point that we have to take care of this facility that has been brought to school. We have to mind it, the water. We have to take care of the water so that it will not deplete. So, this one brought us together really and it brought the school community to realize that we can actually live together as brothers and sisters and we can actually take care of each other, that this disease we should not spread it to each other. So, it really made the school community to have to bond so that they cannot spread and they were very conscious of not spreading to the others. So, that is part of love.

District administrators who had not established a prior relationship of trust with the students and their families in their districts enacted policies during the pandemic that oftentimes eroded community support for principals at the local school level. For example, when the administrators of one of the districts in Texas were finally able to purchase new technology for families to use for their children’s school work during COVID-19, they failed to communicate this information to the schools because they did not trust the school principals, teachers, and families to make appropriate use of the equipment. Consequently, for several weeks, school principals and teachers in these schools were unaware that technology had actually become available for them to distribute. A second example from Illinois illustrates a lack of trust at the school building level that severely restricted students’ access to resources which were essential to their learning during the pandemic. Despite the large number of families living in poverty in his school community who did not have access to the technology required for online learning, the school principal instructed his teachers not to distribute the

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

21

district-provided laptops to families unless they asked. His actions revealed a profound lack of trust in the families his school was supposed to serve, as well as a flagrant disregard for the educational needs of their children. Similar sentiments were expressed in one of the teacher focus groups in Kenya: I think more about the relationship between the school and the community. So you find that a school is being run by three stones. We have the administration and then on the administration we have all the class representatives and the board of management, you have teachers and you have parents and teachers/students then parents. So you find that even some schools that did this year the KCSE, you find that their performance has gone low because you find that the board of management even are not being allowed to come to school or the class representative was not being allowed to come to school at least to plan because this administration cannot plan on its own. It also needs the backbone of these other members for it to move along well.

Our research also revealed another aspect of trust that was related to the very technology that was used to enable teacher-student interactions during COVID-19, as described by a teacher from Greece: Many of the students had no equipment, most of them were participating using their cell phones or their parents’. Some of them didn’t have the chance to participate at all. And the main problem was because we had no image, because if we turn the camera on, then the connection couldn’t… We couldn't have the lesson because of the Internet problems, so the camera was always off, so even the ones who were participating, you couldn't be sure that they were listening to you. So, sometimes I would ask them something and I had no answer and they were “sorry I couldn’t hear you”. It could be a lie or not. No one can know. This was a problem with the cameras, they were always off.

In the Kenyan context, the lack of trust on the part of teachers came in terms of their hesitation in using technology to promote teaching and learning in the schools in their low-income neighborhoods. As one of the teachers noted: My perception on the issue of government trying to compel us to go this other way of remote learning whereby you’ll interact with a learner through the internet--– I am seeing the impossibilities in the current society, where we are teaching currently right now. That one can only be applicable in schools like the Breaburn and those schools up there whom have rich parents.

Beyond teachers’ inability to determine whether or not students were actually present and listening to their online lessons, they were confronted with a more ominous challenge associated with online instruction, as one of the Greek teachers explained: Another concern at first was that there was no security. You couldn't know who was participating. Because everyone who had the link could participate in your lesson. He could give a name, any name he wanted. For example, there was an incident at first. One of the many that I have heard of. In one of my lessons, I had a student who didn't participate in most of the digital lessons. So, I saw his name. I let him in. And it was another person and he cursed during the lesson and then, okay, he left. But I couldn't know because I saw his name and I thought it was him. He told me “good morning”, okay. It was a voice. Because everyone, literally everyone could participate, there was no identification. Just for the teachers. There was a number, our room number, but anyone who had this number… So, I suppose it was another student, from another class maybe, who had my room number. And he gave the name of a person he knew he wouldn't participate and… We all felt that there was no privacy. Not for us or for our students.

22

B. Merchant et al.

Respect and Care School principals who had not created a caring climate in their schools had difficulty securing the support of their school community in their efforts to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. Teachers described such school principals as neither respecting nor valuing their time, as indicated by the unrealistic expectations that were placed upon them. These teachers remarked on their school principals’ apparent lack of caring and the insufficiency of information and resources for equipping them to provide online instruction, all of which left them to figure things out on their own and added to their stress. Such school principals were insensitive to the challenges facing teachers who had children at home during the pandemic, as well as to the difficulties that parents themselves were experiencing in having all their children at home, even though some of them had jobs that required them to work outside of their homes. The negative effects of an absence of caring on the part of such school principals accrued not only to teachers but to students as well. In the Kenya context, the school principals and teachers felt it was their obligation to nurture their learners, and they often saw themselves as being “better” caregivers than the parents of the learners. For example, one of the teachers said that: They learned a lot of the weaknesses of the parents. When schools reopened, the parents and teachers started throwing blame to each other. The teachers told parents, ‘We gave you children when they were okay. See now you have brought for us many of them [who]are expectant [pregnant]. See now you are not able to take care of your children.’

Familiarity with the Community School principals’ knowledge about, and understanding of, the communities they served was critical to the development of respect, caring, and trust between themselves, the students, and their families. This, in turn, was essential to school principals’ ability to coordinate the shift from in-person learning to virtual instruction, which necessitated an alignment between home and school resources. Technology provided school principals and teachers with the opportunity to literally see into the students’ homes and obtain a better understanding of the physical environment in which they lived. Some children lived in cramped quarters, alternated between different homes, or functioned as surrogate parents to younger siblings when their parents went to work. This information was helpful in deepening teachers’ and school principals’ understanding about the needs of the children and families they were serving. In Kenya, the socioeconomic divide was clearly evident. In one school organization, a school principal noted: But otherwise for the learners who came from maybe a bit poor family, we understood that learning was not going on.

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

23

Another school leader in Kenya noted that: Ιt was difficult to gauge if learners are learning back at home, but from the few reports, the enlightened parents were talking about the radio programmes and EDU TV that was offering some lessons to some learners.

In contrast, it became painfully clear during the pandemic that some school principals neither recognized the assets of the communities they served nor attempted to understand the living conditions and working demands of the parents or caregivers of the children in their schools. These school principals’ lack of empathy toward teachers and parents was evidenced in such practices as scheduling meetings for parents of children with special needs at times when the parents were working, rather than adjusting these meeting times to accommodate their schedules.

Effective Communication School principals who were able to operate from a level of trust which had been established prior to the onset of COVID-19 took particular care to maintain this trust, utilizing technology to hold weekly online meetings with their teachers, provide information updates, maintain a sense of cohesiveness, and to afford a much-­ needed opportunity for social interaction and reflection. These meetings were sensitive to teachers’ time and stress levels, and intentionally planned to avoid information overload with respect to district directives about online instruction and student assessment. Teachers described school principals’ effective communication as proactive, frequent, collaborative, flexible, accurate, and transparent. In contrast, ineffective school principals’ communications were depicted as reactive, delayed, contradictory, and insensitive to teachers and parents. In the Kenyan context, school principals kept teachers updated on directives from the Ministry of Education. Some teachers indicated that they received psychosocial support from the Ministry of Education, as one teacher reported:“…they also sent us encouraging messages on our phones.” Effective school principals moved beyond email to multiple modes of communications to maintain accessibility to their staff and community. Although previous school policies may have discouraged the use of social media, COVID-19 made the use of social media platforms a necessity for reaching wider audiences. An additional benefit of school principals’ and teachers’ use of social media was that it allowed parents to view and interact with administrators and teachers in a less formal manner than was otherwise the case with traditional modes of school-home communications. Furthermore, effective school principals established clear guidelines for school-­ to-­home communication, including who would be responsible for calling parents and how often, with the understanding that these calls were to focus on student

24

B. Merchant et al.

wellness rather than academics. School principals who established these clear expectations for teacher-parent communication were able to maintain a positive relationship with families in their community while also significantly lowering teachers’ stress levels about staying in touch with parents. There was a great drive in Kenya to ensure that students learned at all costs. Thus, in spite of the Government’s closure of schools, school principals and their teachers devised innovative ways to ensure learning continued to take place, even if at a very minimal level. At the onset of the school closures, the teachers prepared learning packets for students and provided them with textbooks. However, no one knew how long the closures would last. As schools waited in limbo for the reopening of schools, the school principals started organizing their teachers to form WhatsApp groups and invited parents. These platforms were then used to share assignments with the students. Teachers from several schools in a particular zone also organized face-to-face meetings where they would then put assignments together and share with their students, as described by one teacher: …and apart from that, the teachers within the zone also came up together and they formed platforms where they could share with their pupils while they were at home.

In contrast, rather than establishing a procedure for clear and timely communication between themselves and parents, ineffective school principals left it up to teachers to reach out to students and their families every week during the pandemic. The demand for constant communication suddenly monopolized teachers’ already dwindling amount of personal and family time. The unrealistic expectations were aggravated by a lack of empathy from their administrators who, it seemed to teachers, were not dealing with similar expectations of around-the-clock communication with students and parents. These school principals’ demands for teacher-parent contact failed to take into consideration the wide range of families and their response to a sudden bombardment of phone calls and texts. Families were struggling to balance their own quickly shifting lives in the chaos of the pandemic. In the midst of seemingly insensitive calls from teachers regarding their children’s lack of participation online, they were dealing with everything from a potential job loss due to the pandemic, as well as having their children isolated at home as a result of school closure. As such, these communications became a double-edged sword: that is, teachers and parents were actually feeling less connected as a community, as the sheer volume of district messages morphed into an unwanted, SPAM-filled intrusion into their lives. By the end of the school year, in the case of Texas, for example, many of the parents had become so frustrated with the constant phone calls from teachers and administrators, they simply “blocked” all school calls or changed their phone numbers altogether.

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

25

 echnical Challenges Associated with the Transition T to Online Learning School Principals’ Digital Literacy School principals’ ability to support teachers in effectively using digital technologies to respond to the educational needs of students during COVID-19 was related to the extent of their own digital literacy and their teachers’ digital capacity, as well as the availability of appropriate hardware, software, and Internet connectivity. In Kenya, some of the school principals interviewed expressed their challenges with technology: You also need to be technologically enhanced or savvy because, I realized some of us had a challenge. When everything had gone online, some of us were not even able to interact with some of the circulars that were being sent online because even TSC and the ministry, everything was sent to us through our phones– so that’s one thing I also realized that we need to advance in technology.

Teachers’ Digital Literacy With the overnight changes districts had to make, it became obvious that some districts had neither provided opportunities for teachers to learn how to incorporate technology into their classrooms nor invested proactively in purchasing computers and instructional software for instruction. As these district administrators were hastily creating their technology plan, the classroom teachers had to prepare paper learning packets that were handed out by grade level to each student. Creating even more confusion was the discovery in Texas (mostly by parents) that not all of the instructional programs that students were supposed to use could actually be run on the devices that were given to them. The absence of technology planning on the part of some districts also meant that students in Texas and Illinois had to go to multiple online classrooms, each with multiple assignments per teacher, rather than being able to use a single platform that held all of their teachers’ assignments in one place. In Kenya, for example, one of the Kenyan teachers noted the confusion she faced when the school closures were announced: First, I was totally confused on how now I am going to connect with the students, because I didn’t know which way to help them. Then I had to think of the best way now to maybe coordinate with their parents through the phone calls so that we can try to connect, and now  have online classes. At first it was such a big problem because not every other parent here has a smartphone. So, the girls could tell me they had to hang around with their friends so that they could be connected. So, it was a total confusion actually at the beginning.

26

B. Merchant et al.

Students’ and Parents’ Digital Literacy Schools that had more resources and could provide some level of technology, nonetheless, experienced challenges with some students lacking the skills to use them. In Kenya, while there was goodwill in embracing technology, the reality in the schools was quite different, as one teacher observed: We had other pupils who they were not very much conversant with the gadgets--that is, computers and phones. So, they were really passing through a lot of problems, unless there was somebody who could aid them to do so.

Availability of Technology for Online Teaching and Learning In low-income districts in particular, school principals were acutely aware that the digital divide that had existed previously with respect to the quantity and quality of technology resources available to students in their schools was rapidly increasing during the pandemic. Such school principals advocated vigorously for the resources their students needed, oftentimes battling with the very district administrators whose responsibility it was to ensure that these resources were equitably distributed to the schools. School principals who were able to draw upon the strong relationships that already existed between themselves and members of the community they served were supported in their efforts to provide the best quality of digital instruction to students under the circumstances, while still advocating for the additional resources that were needed. A secondary school teacher in Greece stressed: Many, many students had no infrastructure or had a bad connection on the Internet, or in their families there were four persons who needed the connection in order to have the lessons, because there were two parents that were teachers and had to give lessons and there were two kids that were students. So, we had four persons in the family that needed the connection. The connection was not enough for all of them, and this was a problem. Or they didn't have four laptops or four PCs and this was a problem.

As one principal in Kenya observed, students from low-income families were unable to engage in online learning due to the  lack technological gadgets, e.g., laptops, tablets, or smartphones: There is an app we have called Zeraki, that we had also told them – we gave them a way of getting in, signing up in that app for e-learning. But it was a challenge to those who did not have smartphones. Those who had smartphones benefitted.

 ow Principals Addressed Teacher Accountability for Student H Learning During COVID Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, teacher accountability for student learning was measured largely in quantitative terms (e.g., student scores on state-mandated achievement tests) and letter or numerical grades on report cards). The pandemic challenged

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

27

educators to find alternative approaches to these accountability measures. Teachers characterized the accountability policies and practices of effective school principals during this time as flexible, supportive, monitored, realistic, definitive, and accommodating. In contrast, they described the accountability policies and practices of ineffective principals as inflexible, unsupportive, unrealistic, punitive, controlling, and vague. During the unprecedented and unsettling months of the pandemic, school principals in our study who had not developed a relationship of trust with teachers imposed policies that reflected their skepticism about teachers’ ability to follow through on their instructional duties while working from home. Such school principals were inflexible and unrealistic during the first few weeks of online instruction. This was exemplified by several school principals in Texas who required teachers to make their virtual classroom schedules reflect as closely as possible, the “normal” institutional routines and practices, such as requiring them to submit timesheets and checklists of their activities to account for the time they spent at home. Teachers, who were already feeling a lack of support from their school principals, viewed these checklists as punitive and as evidence that their school principals didn’t trust them to carry out their responsibilities. The tendency of some administrators to micromanage was frustrating and provoked anger in their teachers. As a result, it made teachers reluctant to agree to suggestions that their principals proposed to them, as well as skeptical about their school principal’s motives. In Kenya, the Ministry of Education introduced the community-based learning approach in which learning would be provided at a center for a particular zone and all public school teachers were then required to go and teach the students present there. This imposition was met with a lot of resistance by teachers. They would ensure they reported to the centers and would watch over the class, but not teach. One teacher expressed that: It did not [help their] well-being that teachers were also afraid of interacting with pupils from different families which might be having the Corona.

Another school principal from Kenya illustrated the inequities associated with holding teachers accountable for the learning of poor students in remote areas during COVID-19, who don’t have access to the technology resources of their wealthier, urban counterparts: Now, we cannot take care of these learners who are in the remote areas in the interior. Actually, that one I’ve seen—it’s very challenging. I’m seeing it almost being impossible, and the perception about also putting us as equal, you know we are handling leaners from different societies. So, you have different levels of society. You cannot take a child from Turkana, a child from where we are in the remote and they have challenges that you know pass into study and you want to put them at the same level, you want me to fill in the tipper that I have achieved or you will want to victimize me as my employer or the ministry, that maybe I have not achieved to the level that you expected me to offer to the learners. Actually, there are different levels-- actually.

In contrast, school principals who were sensitive to and knowledgeable about the teachers, students, and their families understood that the transition from classroom-­ based teaching to online instruction would be difficult for many. They also

28

B. Merchant et al.

understood the anxiety, stress, and financial hardship that many families were experiencing in the midst of the pandemic, so they made a genuine effort to generate policies that were both realistic and accommodating. For example, although these school principals continued to ask teachers to hold students accountable for completing assignments, they also asked them to be empathetic and flexible with students. Teachers were responsible for planning, creating, and delivering online lessons and for providing clear, concise, and immediate feedback to the students, rather than numeric grades. Technology teams began handing out devices to teachers and students on a daily basis. These teams supported teachers by suggesting alternative approaches for monitoring students’ learning such as allowing students to email or text pictures of completed assignments to them, calling students and asking them to respond verbally to questions on assignments, or if necessary, going to students’ homes and working with them in the front yard, while wearing masks and maintaining the required social distance. The flexibility and support of these school principals made it possible for teachers to maintain their relationships with students, while also developing closer and meaningful relationships with parents.

Discussion Social Justice Issues When students were required to learn remotely, there were extensive problems with the technology in all countries, particularly in rural areas and low-income and minoritized neighborhoods in urban areas. The pandemic highlighted the inequities that already existed in schools with respect to the nature and extent of resources, racial and ethnic disparities, and socioeconomic status of communities. Many students from low-income families, refugee students, and those with special learning needs struggled with online instruction during the pandemic. Our research highlighted the particular challenges that teachers of students with special needs experienced in trying to adapt their teaching to online instruction. In the worst cases, they were not provided with additional time or support from their school principals for the difficult work of designing online instruction to accommodate the academic and social needs of these students. In the case of Texas, they were also being held responsible for modifying all of the assignments that the students received from their other classroom teachers, sometimes with only a few hours to do so. In the Kenya scenario, students with special needs faced exceptional challenges in the learning process. One school principal noted that: Our institution’s use of masks was not very okay with our students. As you know, we use sign language and they would watch your lips. So, when you put on the mask, even up to now, the communication is hampered. We tried to get the transparent masks where they

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

29

could see the lips but still it was not working. The students felt you’re still shielding your face and therefore the communication. There was communication breakdown actually. Sometimes you’ll teach a lesson and the students seem like they cannot understand. You keep on writing on the blackboard, using the projector for them to see the words on the board. It really took a lot of our time.

District-level administrators often demonstrated little to no concern for teachers who not only had to respond to the expectations of the teachers of their own children but also had to implement online instruction for the students who were assigned to their classroom. As a high school teacher in Greece explained: For all the Greek schools this period was very difficult, but in our school, it was more difficult than other schools, because our students did not have the equipment, they had no laptops, they had no Internet, they did not have their personal space to do their lessons and they lived with many people together, many children together in the same place and (that happened) for many months. So, they had psychological problems, they did not feel well. Moreover, many of them had important economic problems. They didn’t have houses, food, so the problems were bigger for our students and they could not…come to... They tried to come to online lessons more for communication than for education. They needed to feel that there was someone there to help them, to listen to them. For these children school is not only a place to learn the language or to learn the subject that we teach. It's a place to find help, to find something more. So closed school for them is like closing the door to Greek society. Because school is one of the most important connections with Greek society.

The Multiple Functions of Schools Although schools have historically been designated as the societal institutions that are responsible for educating their nation’s citizens, COVID-19 revealed that schools provide a number of other critical services to their communities. These include the provision of meals, childcare, counseling, and violence and substance abuse prevention (Kober & Rentner, 2020). Schools are still performing these functions, post-pandemic, but receiving less attention and support with respect to providing these functions. Given the dwindling political support for social safety nets in all of the countries in our study, schools are likely to continue to be called upon to provide the kinds of services that were rendered more visible during the pandemic. Rather than ignoring the broader social contributions that schools make to the members of their communities, political leaders should be acknowledging the expanded role of schools and connecting them with other social service support agencies to more effectively respond to the needs of the community. In addition, there should be greater advocacy for stronger public-private partnerships, with corporations and local organizations increasingly called upon to play a more active role in supporting schools within their localities.

30

B. Merchant et al.

 he Social-Ecological Framework as a Lens for Interpreting T Our Findings We find it useful to draw upon Bronfenbrenner’s social-ecological framework for understanding the ways in which the actions of school principals in our study reflected the interdependence of schools with other social subsystems and levels within the broader social context, during COVID-19. We utilize the framework to examine the implications of our findings for enhancing school principals’ capacity to make effective and equitable use of digital technologies in their schools. As a global phenomenon, COVID-19 “infected” countries around the world at the macrosystem level, demanding a quick response from political leaders, public health personnel, social service workers, and educators at the microsystem level. The policies and practices that were generated within the macrosystem were hastily created, often contradictory, and constantly changing, which contributed to a great deal of confusion and uncertainty within the other subsystems that were subjected to these policies and practices. School principals had no real input into the decisions that were made at the macrosystem level and, as such, were placed in a reactive position with respect to these directives. Nonetheless, the school principals in our study who had established trusting relationships between themselves, their teachers, the students, and their families at the microlevel, well before the onset of the pandemic, were more likely to maintain the support of their school community during the crisis than were their counterparts who had not developed similar trusting relationships. The macrosystems of the three countries in our study differed significantly, yet all school principals, regardless of their individual circumstances, were expected to find ways to continue educating their students during the global health crisis, whether in-person or online. The widely held social and cultural beliefs about the importance of education were apparent in the societal recognition that was initially afforded to school principals, with respect to their critical role in ensuring the continuity of the educational process. This was reflected in the widespread characterization of educators at the macrolevel as “heroes” and “first responders” in addressing the teaching and learning challenges associated with the COVID-19 crisis. The ecosystem in which school principals worked during the pandemic consisted, in part, of the various institutions that were charged with the responsibility of ensuring the education, physical and mental health, and safety of the children and youth in their respective countries (whether at the national, state, or local levels). The components of the school principals’ exosystem included community agencies, religious institutions, mass media, businesses, and corporations. As mentioned throughout this chapter, school principals’ success in creating effective processes to facilitate the digital transformation necessitated by the pandemic was strongly related to the extent to which they had established trust between themselves, their staff, and community members (Hoy & Tschannen-Moran, 1999) prior to the pandemic, at the microsystem level.

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

31

Our findings indicate that the scope and severity of the pandemic required superintendents/county directors and school principals to interact within and between a broader range of (sometimes unfamiliar) social systems, nested within one another (mesosystems) in responding to the academic, social, and physical well-being of students and staff. These included national and regional health agencies and numerous volunteer groups that were created (oftentimes, hastily) to respond to various groups within the community, whose basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter were exacerbated by new health requirements that were put in place at the macrolevel to reduce the transmission of COVID-19. Facilitating the transition from in-­ person to digital teaching and learning required school principals to be aggressive in reaching out to their superintendents/county directors of education for the resources they needed. Accomplishing the transition required school principals to work with a broad range of community agencies at the mesosystem level to create a network of services that would help them address not only the educational needs of students but also their social-emotional needs during an extremely stressful time in which many of them were experiencing the life-threatening illness and loss of loved ones resulting from COVID-19. School principals’ ability to negotiate the various microsystems related to increasing the digital teaching and learning capacity of teachers and students was essential to their success, as was their proficiency in recognizing and working with the interconnectedness of the various microsystems. School principals, who were particularly conscious that the digital divide between their students and those in more affluent neighborhoods was increasing rapidly during this time, focused their efforts on securing the necessary technology resources by seeking the assistance of community nonprofits, donors, local businesses, public health providers, religious organizations, and social service agencies. The qualities that were essential to school principals’ efforts in this regard included a thorough knowledge and understanding of the assets and resources of their local communities and trusting relationships between themselves and the members of their communities at the microsystem level. Although school principals still had to address the fear, frustration, and stress among the children and the adults with whom they worked, their strong relationships allowed them to maintain their efforts to acquire the digital resources and provide teachers with the training needed to educate their students through the medium of online instruction.

 ecommendations to School Principals for Leading Their R Schools in the New Digital Ecosystem Although we identified themes that were consistent across all of our national contexts, we acknowledge that the social, educational, economic, and political contexts differed substantially among the three countries in this study. The schools’ lack of preparedness with respect to providing students with online instruction during COVID, as well as the learning disruptions that occurred as a

32

B. Merchant et al.

result of the abrupt shift from in-person to virtual learning, was evident in our research, however. The variations that we found in the nature, extent, and quality of online learning experiences at the local school level depended, in part, upon (a) the ability of the school principal to provide the technology required to support online teaching and learning, (b) teacher knowledge and skill level regarding the use of online instructional tools, (c) children’s access to computer hardware and software, (d) the ability of parents to support their children’s learning through online platforms, and (e) the availability and consistency of Internet connections. We acknowledge that, in addition to the hardware and software that students need for participating in online learning activities, it is important that they can access their lessons in an environment that is structured to facilitate their learning. In the absence of this, school principals and teachers struggled to provide online instruction to students amid the cacophony of ongoing family activities and the sounds of radio, television, and street noise in the background. During COVID-19, it became clear that conducive learning environments were almost impossible to find for many poor and minoritized students. Because of the fear of COVID-19, libraries and other public places were unable to provide these spaces. In some of the countries of this study, attempts to avail public school teachers to provide community learning did not bear fruit, and such efforts were quickly abandoned. As such, we believe that school principals would be well-advised to be proactive in securing the resources needed for online teaching and learning. School-­ community-­home partnerships can be critical in moving resources directly into the schools. Another preemptive action we suggest is that school principals start identifying potential spaces within the neighborhood of the school that could, on short notice, if necessary, provide the structured and safe learning environments students need, particularly when engaging in virtual learning. Healthy schoolcommunity relationships create a symbiosis in which the community protects the school and the school in turn blossoms and returns transformative students back to the community. Additionally, we believe that it’s important for school principals to assume responsibility for assuring the reliability and security of the hardware and software that teachers and students use for online instruction. Although some schools have technology specialists who are accountable for doing these things, school principals should nonetheless be fully informed about these and related issues, rather than being content to relegate the responsibility of these matters to others. One of the issues confronting school principals in regard to digital instruction is the fact that everything related to technology has a time limit of sorts, becoming obsolete within a relatively few years after being purchased. On the one hand, this requires school principals to decide between the relative benefits of accumulating

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

33

a reserve of money in anticipation of a time when these resources will be needed, and on the other hand, the possibility that when they do need the equipment, they may not be able to get it for any number of reasons, including supply chain issues, sharp increase in cost, and the incompatibility of new software with existing hardware. It should be noted that teachers who were experiencing a delay in securing the resources they needed for online instruction in the first few months of the pandemic were able to provide online instruction to students who had cell phones. Although this response worked in the short term, the limited time use provided by cell phone carriers made this an impractical solution for school principals to rely upon in the long term. Healthy school-community relationships create a symbiosis in which the community protects the school and the school in turn blossoms and returns transformative students back to the community. Schools produce citizens who enter the workforce and produce for the economy. Therefore, schools, school districts/ministries of education, and the county governments should engage with these entities/corporations that provide phone and Internet services to provide subsidized rates in order to enhance teaching and learning. For instance, in Kenya, the leading phone and Internet carrier provided subsidized rates for students and teachers during school closures. This was a laudable effort even though it was not sustained after schools reopened. In making the following list of recommendations for school principals, we focus on the two ecological systems in Bronfenbrenner’s theoretical framework in which they are most likely to function and have the most impact (the mesosystem and microsystem). We subdivide our recommendations for each of these systems into two categories relational and technical.

Mesosystem Relational • Obtain timely and accurate information from the district, state, and national levels to share with teachers and parents. • Interrogate taken-for-granted policies and practices for their intended and unintended consequences for student learning. • Critique digital/online instructional programs/resources by applying the social justice principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion. • Network with community partners to ensure access to online learning opportunities. • Collaborate with teachers, counsellors, parents, and mental health professionals for the purpose of understanding the impact of technologies and digital services on students’ mental, physical, social, and emotional health.

34

B. Merchant et al.

Technical • Collaborate with relevant stakeholders (e.g., teachers, parents, and educational technology specialists) to learn how to purchase appropriate digital learning technologies and instructional materials that coordinate with the school’s curriculum. • Collaborate with teachers, technology specialists, and professional grant writers to apply for funding to help eradicate the digital divide between students in poor, marginalized communities and their counterparts in more affluent communities.

Microsystem Relational • Know your school community, its assets and strengths, as well as its needs, to create a flexible disaster plan that responds to unpredictable events and is based on a thorough understanding of, and consideration for, all members of the school community. • Develop authentic, trusting relationships with teachers, students, and parents; they help everyone to feel heard, appreciated, less anxious, and less alone. • Maintain consistency in educational policies and practices (continually changing educational policies in the 2021–2022 school year contributed to a great deal of confusion, anger, and students “giving up” on attending classes, whether online or in-person). • Develop a transparent, understandable, and accessible digital communication plan regardless of specific issues that need to be addressed—to serve as a vehicle to link people together, particularly in times of crisis.

Technical • Model and increase your personal digital literacy—don’t just rely on teachers or technology teams to inform you about the use of digital resources for teaching and learning. • Commit to an ongoing learning process in order to stay informed about the continuous emergence of new digital applications and updates. • Ensure that the school has the technical and human resources and capabilities that are necessary for supporting digital learning and development. • Become knowledgeable about identifying and understanding the positive as well as the potential negative aspects of digital learning activities and learn how to manage and control these digital technologies.

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

35

• Provide in-service training to teachers in digital learning and development to increase their ability to make effective and innovative use of technology for teaching and learning. • Utilize social media technology to communicate with parents and community members. • Offer free evening and/or weekend workshops to increase parents’ digital literacy skills.

 pilogue: Preliminary Results of Teachers’ Use of Technology, E Post-COVID in One Texas District In Spring 2023, we surveyed 30 public school teachers from a large urban district in southwest Texas about the extent and nature of their use of technology, post-­ COVID. We present the preliminary findings of the survey in this section. Since the beginning of the 2021–2022 school year, there has been a slow but consistent effort to return to “normal” despite continuing concerns about the socio-­emotional health issues evident in the sharp increase in student discipline problems and educator turnover. Although school principals and teachers agree with the need to address students’ social and emotional learning, they have not received sufficient training in how to do this. Rather than seize the opportunity to take advantage of the lessons learned during COVID-19 to reimagine schooling itself, or to improve students’ well-being, districts have begun to focus more narrowly on standardized testing. In the school year 2021–2022, school principals and teachers became deluged with demands to return as quickly as possible to the emphasis on high-stakes testing, despite the obvious inequalities associated with this approach to assessing student learning. The 2022–2023 academic year, now in its closing weeks, has demoralized equity-minded teachers and administrators, many of whom have decided to leave the field when the semester ends because they feel unable to influence the socio-political context. They report being shocked at seeing their district leaders “bow to the pressure of the testing industry and the political ‘leaders of the state’, rather than fostering an equitable school culture.” This has engendered a feeling of hopelessness in school leaders about their power to take the lessons learned during COVID-19 to reconceptualize education, through school and community collaboration and equity-based decision-making. Interestingly, the majority of respondents indicated that they were still using most of the technologies they had employed during the pandemic (many of which were new to them at the time). The reasons they cited for this included the convenience of the various instructional programs and the flexibility and creativity that these technologies provided to students as they learned the subject matter and responded to assignments. Teachers also indicated that they were still using some technologies simply because they were required to operate district-purchased digital materials.

36

B. Merchant et al.

Although the majority of younger teachers were more enthusiastic than their veteran counterparts about integrating technology into their classrooms, those who worked with younger children tended to prefer hands-on instruction. An unexpected finding was that several of the teachers with more than 10 years of experience, who reported having had to negotiate a steep learning curve with respect to the use of technology during the pandemic, also reported that they were still using these technologies, post-COVID. One of the complaints that teachers had about incorporating digital technologies into the teaching and learning process was that it consumed a disproportionate amount of time for them to learn and then explain to students. They framed this as contributing to a loss of learning time. Many teachers mentioned that virtual meeting platforms like Zoom provided them with an easy and time-saving way to meet with parents, which strengthened their relationships with the families of their students. Similarly, about 25 percent of the teachers reported that they were continuing to use various social media and/or district-provided software for maintaining communication with their students, conducting wellness checks, and clarifying assignments. Several teachers highlighted the advantages of technology with respect to providing a variety of ways in which students could communicate their understanding of a particular topic, rather than being limited to pencil and paper. Most of the teachers reported experiencing roadblocks in their efforts to provide digital instruction to students. These included the shortage of computers and other devices, a lack of teacher training opportunities, the unreliability of the Internet connection, and the mismatch between the software and hardware that was provided to teachers and students. Other roadblocks related to the difficulties associated with maintaining computers and other instructional hardware and the loss or breakage of computers that had been distributed to students. One of the teacher’s responses provided an interesting example of the impact of the macrosystem (i.e., the Texas Education Agency) on the principal’s support for technology in the classroom (microsystem), post-COVID. Shortly after directing the teachers to “get back to pencil and paper” the principal learned that the state accountability tests were all going to be taken on the computer, which required children in grades three and above to have the digital skills necessary for doing this. Not surprisingly, this principal revoked the directive shortly thereafter. For the most part, teachers were using technology in their classrooms for about 10 percent of their instructional time before COVID-19, whereas during COVID-19, understandably, the technology use increased dramatically to almost 100 percent. Although the majority of teachers stated that their use of technology decreased significantly after the pandemic, more than half of them indicated that they were currently incorporating more technology into their instruction than had been the case prior to COVID-19.

2  Providing Continuity of Student Instruction During and After COVID-19…

37

Appendix: The Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Source: © The Psychology Notes Headquarters https://www.PsychologyNotesHQ.com

Chronosystem—emphasizes life transitions and individual changes through time Macrosystem—includes factors present in the larger culture such as beliefs, values, and ideologies Exosystem—comprises institutions and influences that are external to the individual and yet exert a decisive influence on their psychosocial development Mesosystem—represents the connections among two or more microsystems Microsystem—composed of institutions and influences closest to the individual, in their immediate environment

References Bronfenbrenner, U. (1975). Influences on human development. New York. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

38

B. Merchant et al.

Hoy, W.  K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9(3), 184–208. https://doi. org/10.1177/105268469900900301 Kober, N., & Rentner, D. S. (2020). History and evolution of public education in the US. Center on Education Policy. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED606970.pdf

Chapter 3

Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools Through the Pandemic Crisis David Gurr

, Campbell McKay, and Christopher Reed

Abstract  There is much that is known about school responses to the pandemic, and whilst these responses are of interest as the consequences of the pandemic continue, of more interest are the implications for educational change beyond the pandemic. In many jurisdictions, technology has been an important tool in maintaining schooling for the majority of students and for enhancing the school experience of some students. In moving through and beyond the pandemic, there are opportunities for creating more inclusive and student-centred schools, and current and new technologies will be an important part of this. This chapter presents how technology has helped two school principals lead their schools successfully, and how it might help them to accelerate their path to creating more inclusive and student-centred schools. In particular, the chapter provides information on these two case studies and documents responses to the pandemic crisis, whilst it is forward-looking and will use a best and next practice framework to consider future use of technology in schools.

Introduction In this chapter, we describe how two school principals, in two successful primary schools, have navigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The schools are quality and equitable schools in so far as they have student learning performance at D. Gurr (*) The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] C. McKay Mount Waverly Primary School and the University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] C. Reed Mother Teresa Catholic Primary School and the University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_3

39

40

D. Gurr et al.

or beyond expectations (taking into their degree of educational advantage), and they are a quality school for all children in the school, with no inappropriate exclusion of students (see Gurr, in press, for an extended discussion of these ideas). The chapter is written by an academic, David Gurr, and two practicing school principals, Campbell McKay and Christopher Reed. Occasionally, we use quotes, and these come from interviews Gurr held with McKay and Reed as part of a leadership project for the International School Leadership Network (www.isldn.com). The interested reader can follow more about Reed’s work as a school principal in these publications: Drysdale et al. (2021) and Gurr et al. (2021). Campbell McKay is the school principal of Mount Waverley Primary School (MWPS: https://www.mountwaverleyps.vic.edu.au). This is a high-performing government school serving an educationally advantaged community in an established middle suburb of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Campbell began as the acting principal of the school in July of 2021 (semester 2 of the school year) before gaining a substantial appointment later in the year. In 2022, the school had 782 students and 72 staff. The school is well above the Australian average in terms of educational advantage, but which has a culturally diverse community with 70% of students from families with a language background other than English. The school is well resourced and is in high demand for enrolment places. Prior to this, Mckay had been a Senior Education Improvement Leader for several months in Bendigo and responsible for overseeing more than 20 schools, and the principal of Swan Hill North Primary School for more than a decade. Swan Hill North Primary School serves the small rural community of Swan Hill, located north of Melbourne on the border between the states of Victoria and New South Wales. For this chapter, most of the commentary from Campbell will refer to his work at MWPS as this is the school he is leading as the pandemic recedes. Christopher Reed is the school principal of Mother Teresa Catholic Primary School (MTCPS: www.motherteresa.catholic.edu.au). Chris is the founding school principal and has led the creation of a recontextualizing Catholic primary school over a 12-year period. The school was opened in 2009 to meet the needs of a growing outer-suburban area of Melbourne, and in 2022, it had over 455 students and over 40 staff. Student learning outcomes are at or above expectations. The school serves a community that is close to the Australian average in terms of educational advantage, but which is culturally diverse with 45% of students having families with a language background other than English, and in which many families have limited disposable income. The school consists of permanent buildings which have open-­ plan collaborative learning spaces and extensively developed passive and active recreational spaces. Prior to this school, Reed had been a school principal of suburban Catholic primary school in an established but challenging area. David Gurr is a Professor of Educational Leadership at the University of Melbourne and is particularly interested in successful school leadership, middle and teacher leadership, and school improvement. Reed and McKay are completing doctorates under Gurr’s supervision – Reed on the leadership and development of his primary school and McKay on the use of videos in primary classes.

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

41

The Context As a result of the pandemic, schools in Victoria, Australia, and its capital city, Melbourne, have experienced multiple lockdowns (six in Melbourne) and border closures limiting interstate and overseas student movement. Between March 2020 and October 2021, remote schooling has been provided for more than 40% of the available school days. With more than 8 months of lockdown in an 18-month period, Melbourne had some of the longest community and school lockdowns of any city in the world. After 3  years of the pandemic, complexity and uncertainty continue for our society broadly and for education. We are writing this chapter whilst the Russian invasion of Ukraine continues to wreak havoc in the Ukraine and unsettle the world, Australia is negotiating a referendum to give constitutional voice to Indigenous peoples, and interest rates continue their seemingly relentless and damaging rise. For Victorian schools, whilst lockdowns are now a distant memory, effects of the pandemic are continuing in 2023, and one effect has been chronic staff shortages due to forced retirements of unvaccinated teachers, absences due to COVID and other illnesses, and teachers resigning to pursue other work in a period of full employment as the economy recovers. Many schools were struggling to find staff at the beginning of 2023 or to replace staff who were sick during the year. This is true across all sectors and in a wide range of geographical areas. Some schools began the year with 10–25% staff vacancies and with no prospect of filling these in time for the start of the year all school leaders, specialist staff, and teachers were needed to be classroom teachers – principal, school principals, specialist staff (Reed’s school was one of these, with eight staff needed for teaching staff of about 32). In June 2023, as this chapter was in final preparation, we heard of schools having 30% or more of staff absent due to illnesses such as flu and COVID-19. In addition, technological advances continue to influence schools, and the seemingly sudden impact of artificial intelligence (AI) software has caused much discussion. The launch of ChatGPT in late 2022 was the moment when many teachers became aware of the future directions of AI in education – artificial intelligence tools that may be as helpful to writing and thinking as the scientific calculator was to mathematics. Some school systems, such as the Victorian government school system, have quickly forbidden the use of services like ChatGPT in schools.

Leading Through the Pandemic with the Help of Technology This section provides reports on Reed’s and McKay’s experiences in leading their school organizations through the pandemic, with a focus on how technology has supported their work.

42

D. Gurr et al.

 ampbell McKay: School Principal of Mount Waverley Primary C School (MWPS) COVID-19 meant staff at MWPS needed to work in different ways due to the need to work remotely. In many ways whilst the same work needed to be done, it needed to be done differently. For example, staff meetings had to be interpreted and run differently – with more telling and presenting, rather than interacting. Through a lot of continuous and rapid learning, the school discovered that significant engagement could be part of these meetings (e.g. through breakout rooms in the virtual spaces). Keeping things going was important, and this was a balancing act between being aware of the demands and pressures that staff faced, whilst still wanting the school’s improvement journey to continue. At MWPS, staff meetings and professional learning continued during remote learning, albeit in flexible forms that changed as knowledge of what was possible through remote meetings increased. Campbell commented: We discovered a lot of tech skills, as we worked in breakout rooms and entered feedback on to online documents that could be shared with all staff throughout discussions.

One of the major innovations was developing processes for online teaching, including lesson planning, teaching expectations, and an explicit structure to the online days. As part of the move to online lesson planning, the school adopted a process in which a member of the leadership team was part of all meetings. This was new territory for staff and the online environment seemed to soften this intrusive leadership approach, with it possibly being less intimidating online than in person. The school initially set some “guidelines” for teaching online, but discovered fairly quickly that there needed to be “mandated expectations”. When these daily expectations were not explicit, some staff had whole days where they didn’t connect with students or teach. When Campbell first came to the school in June of 2021, he was made aware of this concern (and these inconsistencies) through parent emails. As such, he made sure the school was really explicit with staff about the daily teaching expectations, which included four, one-hour teaching sessions per day, at a set time. –– –– –– ––

Session 1: Check-in & well-being Session 2: Reading Session 3: Writing Session 4: Maths

In all sessions, staff were expected to have some explicit instruction and an associated task to complete. After the online instruction was done, students could log out, but the teacher had to stay online for the entire hour (video off), responding to any student questions about the tasks. Campbell, and other members of the leadership team, used technology to help collect teacher feedback. Jamboard (­https://edu.google.com/intl/ALL_au/ jamboard/) was used often. This is software where staff can stick notes (online) to a

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

43

discussion board (or Excel spreadsheets) to provide staff a voice to respond to questions, prompts, provocations, etc. Importantly, this feedback can be easily saved and the data reconfigured, “reviewed by ‘whoever’ and responded to as required”, and all as part of a transparent process. It has allowed the leadership team to be more responsive to the needs of teachers and for teachers to have a stronger voice. It has promoted trust and integrity through the transparent and reciprocal nature of the process. With the return to on-site programs, the school has continued meeting as a staff once a week on WebEx (an online meeting platform). This approach allows for a short staff briefing on a Friday morning where all staff come together wherever they are for a quick briefing. Most teachers are already in their classrooms so they can welcome students into their grades after the briefing. This approach has proved to be convenient, and it seems like this will become a normal way of doing things. During the involvement of the leadership team with staff planning over remote learning, it became apparent that staff needed considerable support with their teaching and planning. As mentioned, a member of the leadership team attended every staff planning meeting across the week. Campbell personally worked across three teams, with this involving him in 9 hours of meetings per week. Campbell reflected on the importance of this initiative: I have seen that many teachers need greater support than I have ever understood. This primarily relates to planning, assessment and skilled instruction. My work in teams has seen us go back to the basics, which has seen us looking at: –– –– –– ––

What is your lesson goal? Why is this your lesson goal? How will you build upon this goal(s) across the week to scaffold the learning? How can you differentiate this goal / task to meet the varying abilities of the students?

Even ‘experienced’ teachers have needed support in this space. For example, I have noticed that many were teaching one-off lessons, rather than building upon the previous learning. Developing staff is important if we want to continue being a successful school.

Whilst the school organization has supported teachers with professional learning through the planning meetings, Campbell noted that many schools during remote learning had dropped professional learning completely, because it was difficult to do or to protect staff from further demands in an already demanding environment. Personally, I have experienced fewer day to day pressures at school during remote learning. The work on some days was much less reactionary. As such I had more time to chat with my leaders and continue to build agreement around where we were taking the school.

Professionally, the pandemic didn’t have a large impact on Campbell. Although he changed roles during the pandemic from working in a rural primary school to working across schools to support principals and then returning to the principalship with his appointment to MWPS, given his extensive principal and leadership experience, he was able to adapt quickly. He noted that technology was a help and made many complex tasks possible, such as “getting to know you” chats with all 72 staff at the MWPS in term three of 2021.

44

D. Gurr et al.

As a school principal, Campbell is now more acutely aware of the role schools play in society and the positive impact they have, especially the opportunity for students to build connections and relationships. Many students, from single child families, didn’t see other children for months. Although we don’t know much about the impact of this, the faces of students when they returned to school – and saw their friends – was priceless.

A positive outcome from remote learning has been observing how the home/school partnership can be nurtured better, by sharing more with families – what students are learning, how they might help their child, and sharing the students’ successes using various applications – and how technology can support this. Staffing has become a major and creative challenge with increased staff and student absences due to COVID-19 now being allowed to progress through society, the flu becoming more dominant, and staff shortages due to forced retirements for unvaccinated staff and a general movement by workers away from education work. In a school with over seventy staff, during the first half of 2022 we are struggling to have enough staff onboard each day to safely support our 800 students. For example, in one week in May 2022, there were fourteen staff away on Monday and the same number, although many different staff, away on Tuesday. Equally, employing staff is very difficult, with few suitable people available. Whereas we would normally get twenty teacher applicants for a position at our school, I have recently had to lure a teacher across with a significant financial enticement, who was one of two applicants for a position; the other applicant was unsuitable.

With the intensification of work, and with the significant staffing issues occupying a lot of time, there is a significant reduction in the number of professional contacts with school principal colleagues and DET (Department of Education and Training) staff. This was slightly frustrating for Campbell in 2021 as a new principal in the area and knowing few local colleagues. For the technical aspects of work, support from established connections with colleagues in the principalship and the system have been of great benefit for Campbell – as it was before the pandemic. Supporting staff has been very important during the pandemic, especially when working from home. The more unstructured remote learning environment became very difficult to navigate for many teachers. To help, the school organized discussions with the whole staff about the challenges and opportunities. There were opportunities for the staff to share good practices, such as how they were structuring their day. On a practical level to support staff well-being, Campbell revealed how he often had to say to teachers to take a break and go for a walk. At one point he needed to ban staff from emailing after 4.40 p.m. if parents were contacting them – many teachers felt obliged to respond, all evening. A significant role has been the almost ‘life coaching’ type role that I have had to play with staff. I note this because of the similar experience across two schools during the pandemic. On many occasions I spoke with either the whole staff or individual staff about how to manage their time and organise their day. Including, literally, spelling out when they would turn their phone off; go for a walk; when they needed to stop communicating with parents – in a couple of cases explicitly saying that this is a ‘directive’, not an option.

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

45

The leadership team had a phone tree in which they called staff on a weekly rotation to check-in on them. Staff knew the purpose of these calls and openly chatted about their concerns and successes. Many leadership colleagues didn’t know where to draw the line with staff support. Campbell uses the following statement, to guide his practice: “I am responsible ‘TO’ staff but not ‘FOR’ staff”. He explains: If staff come to me with a mental health issue, I listen, check I have understood and direct them to appropriate supports etc. In this way I am responsible ‘to’ them, but not ‘for’ them. I believe a lot of principals have become overwhelmed by feeling responsible ‘for’ staff. When we are responsible ‘for’ staff, we take this weight home.

Since the return to on-site schooling late in 2021, technology use at MWPS has been much less than pre-COVID. The response by many staff following COVID-19 was to use technology sparingly (almost avoiding it), given the COVID-19 overload of technology usage through online learning. In 2023, things seem to be returning to pre-COVID normal technology use. For example, the “Digi-Tech” team (a cross-­ school team that oversees the driving of tech school-wide) has been pushing for a greater breadth of technology use, especially in the areas of coding and robotics, areas that have been forgotten. As part of the school’s long-term technology strategy, staff have responded positively to the shift in the devices the school uses. iPads were particularly useful in remote learning, and when the school decided (at the end of 2022) to transition from laptops to iPads (phasing out laptops), there was full support by staff. Staff surveys supported this strategic shift, stating that the use of iPads was far easier for staff and students and their functionality far better. For example, younger students can take a photo (on an iPad), add the photo into a movie, and add music in minutes, or a student can retell their understanding of learning and record it as a video (uploading to a website for teacher review) in minutes – whereas laptops have so many steps and complexities to complete such a task. Notably though, staff have been encouraged by the leadership to only use technology where it can improve regular teaching (teaching without technology). As such, staff use the SAMR (substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition – Blundell et al., 2022) of technology use model to guide this approach. This model encourages the use of technologies only when it improves the quality of task, and through this, staff have become more discerning in their choice and use of technology. Videos are popular again, and one team has taken to exploring the potential of video, mostly in maths. The team are making short (two-minute) videos and using these as a tool to increase their instructional consistency – including the strategies, language, and examples they are using to teach a concept. Importantly though, this sits beneath a challenge for staff (from the leadership team) to consider why (and when) they should use a video instead of teaching themselves. This has forced staff to justify and think about when and why they use video as part of their instruction. The school has continued to use WebEx (video conferencing) as a tool to run the weekly staff briefings. This has proved to be a fast way to share larger amounts of

46

D. Gurr et al.

information in a short amount of time, and at the same time free up the weekly staff meeting for professional learning – not administration or organizational tasks. The weekly staff briefings are recorded, and the video recording and the presentation are made available on a staff-accessible share site. This recording has been beneficial to staff who are absent or those who don’t work on that day. Notably, very little in-­ class use of WebEx (to connect with external providers or other students) has been noted. This has been surprising given the significant skill set staff developed during remote learning. Interestingly, WebEx has become a popular option for parent/ teacher interviews, with approximately half of the families opting for this approach. Post-remote learning, the school has increased videoing staff teaching and sharing these recordings at staff meetings for reflection and training purposes. Using video to critique the teachers’ efforts to implement the school’s instructional model has been particularly valuable. In recent times, the school has been encouraging the exploration of ChatGPT by staff  – at this stage, the system has mandated that primary-aged students are not allowed to use ChatGPT at school. The leadership team has shared resources and ideas to support the use of ChatGPT and similar technologies. This is helping teachers explore these new and evolving technologies and already teachers have used these to help with curriculum planning and assessment.

 hristopher Reed: School Principal of Mother Teresa Catholic C Primary School (MTCPS) COVID-19 presented several challenges in relation to Reed’s leadership of MTCPS during the six school closure periods across 2020 and 2021, and later as the school emerged from lockdowns in November 2021 and continued with on-site learning in 2022. Working with and supporting staff was challenging as nearly all staff were working from home. Communication was mostly through Microsoft Teams (MT) and mobile phones. Whilst this was adequate, Chris commented that it was never the same as being able to walk through the school to see how things were going and to engage informally with students and staff. In a school where staff are constantly reflecting on practice and trying to help each other to improve, the ability to maintain a focus on whole school improvement was challenging, although not impossible. Lockdowns and the switch to remote learning meant that the daily learning routines had to change. Teachers had to shift much of their work to contacting families and making time to engage with the children online. This meant it was hard for the school principals to interact with teachers as much as they would normally do. In terms of keeping the school going, a question was how to maintain the accountabilities required to ensure all are on board during this time. The school has a strong professional learning community ethos, and this meant that agreements were made as a whole staff as to how they might undertake daily tasks within the context of

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

47

remote learning. This included agreements about contact with children each morning and afternoon via the Microsoft Teams (MT) platform. It saw agreements made regarding the distribution of learning tasks (i.e., via email at 5 p.m. each night) and the facilitation of small teacher focus groups (via MT). It also involved an agreement to contact families via phone at least once a week to see how they were going. Each classroom teacher (except for team leaders due to limited staff numbers) was allocated a specialist team member to assist with this task. Specialist teachers in curriculum areas such as Japanese, the Arts, Physical Education, Sustainability, and STEM were therefore supporting the daily contact of students and weekly phone calls. They were also facilitating specialist focus groups at various times. The school’s three cultural aids, who normally assist with small teaching groups, parent translation and generally assisting new arrivals families, and those with English as an Additional Language, were also in high demand, not only supporting a number of new arrival families but also providing families with translations or learning tasks. The translations in Arabic, Chaldean, and Assyrian were provided in writing, via phone calls or through MT. The school’s learning diversity leader assisted with facilitating access to the cultural aids. The learning diversity leader also made regular contact with children with additional needs capturing a range of academic and social-emotional needs. Over time, these processes worked well and provided support for these children and families. A typical day of remote learning proceeded with children meeting a teacher online who checked in through a morning greeting, reading a story, and dialoguing about a current inquiry or strategies to maintain positive well-being. The clarification about the learning tasks forwarded the night before also took place, and children were set to begin numerous learning tasks. Teachers then attempted to contact children who did not attend the morning check-in. During the day, children were allocated specific focus groups timetabled on MT. These focus groups mirrored, as much as possible, the differentiated learning groups that occur during on-site learning. Using MT, teachers provided learning opportunities and tasks to consolidate learning. At times, teachers also caught up with parents through MT to offer help regarding the next steps in the learning. Access to online learning supported the emotional needs of the children. The school also accessed workshops facilitated by Kids Helpline and Jess Sanders, a children’s author and positive mental health advocate. These workshops provided additional opportunities to address student well-­ being, and they were an avenue to explore the range of feelings and experiences brought about by the lockdowns in Melbourne. These workshops also assisted staff as they engaged daily with children and considered the strategies provided by Kids Helpline and Jess Sanders. Teacher professional learning continued as the school has always been focused on helping teachers to develop and improve. What worked very well during the first two of Melbourne’s numerous lockdowns was the provision of online professional learning opportunities. Kath Murdoch, an educational consultant known for her work on inquiry learning, had been working with the school for many years. During the first two lockdowns, the school engaged her to work with the teachers so

48

D. Gurr et al.

they could continue the inquiry-based approach to learning despite moving to an online platform. Staff were provided with team planning sessions, input sessions from Kath, and opportunities to share their successes and challenges. In the initial lockdown periods, this was most successful. An unanticipated benefit of this was that it became an educative process for the parents who began to engage with their children through an inquiry lens. The focus as a Recontextualizing Dialogue School was also enhanced by the Religious Education Leader’s preparation of learning tasks for faith and life inquiry in collaboration with learning space teachers. The dialogue and written reflections that emerged from these faith and life inquiry learning opportunities revealed the engagement with topics about faith that children and parents were engaged in. This further evidenced an inquiry mindset and an openness to expressing faith and faith understandings through a hermeneutical approach. Engagement with the school’s mathematics consultant also supported the professional learning of staff and ultimately student learning. Through facilitated planning and individual planning sessions, teacher capacity in teaching mathematics continued to be enhanced. These opportunities continued through the numerous lockdowns experienced in Melbourne. Whilst some access to Kath Murdoch was possible during further lockdown periods, this became more challenging as the demands of preparing and facilitating learning each day took its toll. Whilst the inquiry approach to learning and the differentiated focused learning groups continued, families and staff began to fatigue from remote learning. Kath’s work with staff did continue, albeit not as regularly. The focus was on providing opportunities for specialist staff to consider their inquiry mindset and Kath’s ten practices of an inquiry teacher. Many children were also provided with opportunities to dialogue about their personal inquiries (iTime) with Kath and their teachers through numerous workshops. Kath in partnership with staff promoted and supported these children’s iTime inquiries enhancing the children’s capacity to be independent and motivated inquirers. Chris commented: As a leader I continue to be grateful for the partnerships that the school community has built and nurtured over time. They have supported the school vision, built teacher capacity and enhanced student learning and as evidenced through the pandemic continued to impact on the community’s ability to enact its learning and teaching approach.

There is no doubt that during the ongoing lockdown periods, the demands for planning an inquiry approach and planning generally, for managing individual classes and student learning, supervision of some children on-site, and a focus on maintaining the school’s professional learning community (PLC) became more challenging. Alongside this, the personal circumstances of staff related to their family, individual health issues and the uncertainty surrounding a pandemic became evident. Also, Chris commented that the impact of the pandemic was still present in April 2022. Whilst the use of online platforms for various school meetings, particularly program support group meetings with parents and allied health professionals, will likely continue, Chris was not sure how much of the lockdown strategies will remain:

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

49

I am not sure of other things I am doing differently as a result of COVD-19. In a sense I am not sure I am at the point of thinking it is over! The management of the day-to-day school life is done differently but I am not sure this will continue.

Chris noted one ongoing change in his work: “I am perhaps more accepting of the things that I have no control over”. As a school principal, Chris has found it challenging to make contact and connect with all staff and families. Even upon returning to on-site learning in late 2021, the initial restrictions on using common spaces meant that Chris didn’t see everyone at school as he may have in the past. Whilst Chris did attend online planning sessions with level teams, this was a different connection to that of being on-site. Staff absences due to COVID (through things like staff having COVID, having to isolate as a close contact, and often caring for family who are ill) have also been high and impacted the ability to see people. It has been a challenge up until about March in 2022 to gather for whole school functions and professional learning activities. This impacts the school’s ability to continue the focus on school improvement as a whole school – the whole PLC coming together. Whilst the PLC can be seen as important at various levels of the school, it is most effective in the gathering of the whole PLC to share and affirm the whole school approach to school improvement. Maintaining the whole school focus whilst trying to cover the day-to-day teaching and learning during lockdowns was hard. Chris highlighted how this impacted his sense of achievement and satisfaction. There was also a heightened awareness of what he was asking people to do and the challenges, both personal and professional, that some staff were experiencing. Chris missed the daily opportunities for meeting families through normal daily interactions. During lockdowns, it had been challenging to keep contact with families, and whilst various mediums for communication were available, personal contact with others through daily interaction was far more effective. The use of technologies during the pandemic required new skills in communication and the facilitation of learning. As the school returned to on-site learning, the use of technology was broadened. Throughout lockdowns, parent contact was made through phone calls and MT. MT continues to be used for some program support group (PSG) meetings and contact with many allied health professionals. This enables PSG members the opportunity to easily attend the PSG, reducing travel time and allowing greater flexibility to meet. The capacity to meet online is also evident from a system perspective with principal briefings on a number of occasions available through MT or WebEx. Currently, whilst MT is not used to meet with children, the use of this medium has seen student learning groups connect with experts to assist with inquiries the children are undertaking. A recent example saw the Year 5/6 group contact a business owner in New Zealand, who shared his experience of running an ethical and sustainable clothing company. There is also a greater use of online teaching resources such as PMeCollection (https://app.pmecollection.com.au) for reading and access to short, child-friendly, YouTube clips that support the introduction or consolidation of learning.

50

D. Gurr et al.

Conclusions Striepe and Cunningham (2022) did a review of literature between 2010 and 2020 that focused on crisis leadership. They described six leadership characteristics: 1 . Providing crisis pastoral care to all community members 2. Adapting roles and responsibilities to ongoing and additional challenges 3. Ensuring collaboration between internal and external stakeholders, sharing decision-­making and distributing leadership 4. Using multidimensional communication including formal letters, online forums like learning management systems, and landline and mobile networks 5. Using complex decision-making that includes responding quickly but with consideration/reflection and making risky but allowable decisions 6. Understanding existing and emerging contextual influences Whilst this list is not focused on technology use in crisis situations, it does provide a connection with recent research literature on crisis leadership. As we consider the work of McKay and Reed, we will use these to illustrate the connections with Striepe and Cunningham’s (2022) findings. The experiences of McKay and Reed highlight the ability of principals to be adaptable, responsive, and creative in the leadership of schools (2, 3, 5) and illustrate how technologies around remote learning supported this work (3, 4). Both school principals showed an ability to meet efficiently and effectively all the government mandates related to health and education (1, 2, 3, 5, 6); these added considerably to the workload of the principal and leadership team (2, 3). Whilst there were many of these mandates through six lockdowns and other restrictions, there was a sense of getting on with it and doing what was required. Beyond this, there was care shown to make sure that people were looked after – that students were still able to be part of a substantial learning program when at home, that teachers were supported as they moved in and out of remote learning, and that parents were heard and supported (1, 2, 3, 4). Reed’s account described with some clarity how the school was able to continue a worthwhile learning program for students (2). Whilst it was hard to keep some things going, such as the amount of collaboration amongst teachers in their professional learning communities, there were worthwhile attempts to maintain the work (3, 4, 5). For example, it is noteworthy that the school’s extensive professional learning programs were able to continue in a modified form. The welfare of students and staff was important (1), and Chris also described how his family and networks helped him to cope during what has been an intense period. The nature of the school, which is very collaborative and supportive across students, parents, and staff, helped the school to cope during the past 3 years (1). Communication was key to this, and several programs to connect people were described (3, 4). For Campbell, there were several areas of leadership complexity. Teachers and other staff needed protection from too many demands (1), yet the school needed to still progress (2, 3). Teachers needed to respond to their students’ needs (1), yet the

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

51

school needed to impose a structure to the technology-mediated remote school day so that a quality learning experience could be assured (2, 3, 4). This remote school day structure covered core curriculum areas and provided connection and social support for students (1, 3, 4). The use of members of the leadership team in teacher planning meetings helped to ensure alignment with school goals and provided support for teachers (1, 2, 3, 4). The potential of technology to connect members of the school community was a positive feature, yet people could still become somewhat isolated, so procedures needed to be implemented to ensure this didn’t happen (1, 2, 4). Workload intensification was, and remains, an important issue for both school leaders, and there was an increased need to provide support for staff (1, 2, 3, 6), but at the same time not let this overwhelm their work as school leaders (2). As noted above, during 2022 and into the first half of 2023, the pandemic has not stopped impacting Victorian schools. Despite schools being fully open and there being no masks or other restrictions, staff absences due to illness are impacting school programs as there is not a readily available supply of replacement teachers, and this means that schools and school leaders continue to have to be resourceful (2) and caring (1) and use all their communication (4), decision-making (5) skills, and networks (3,6) to navigate their schools through turbulent waters. It can be seen from this brief analysis that the work of McKay and Reed fits well with conceptions of crisis leadership. For the pandemic and the extensive use of remote schooling in Victoria, another important aspect is the equitable provision of learning programs during remote schooling. In the next two paragraphs, McKay and Reed describe the type of support given to families. These are important commentaries as they show how schools have tried to ensure that families are not disadvantaged by a lack of technology resources or expertise. During remote learning, families at MWPS were supported in numerous ways with technology. In McKay’s previous, highly disadvantaged, school, the department gave the school approximately 30 laptops to support families without technology, even though the school was already a 1:1 iPad school. Similar levels of technology were available to families at MWPS school. Where families didn’t have Internet access, the school was able to provide families with USB toggles to provide Internet connectivity. At the start of the pandemic in 2020 at McKay’s previous school, which is in rural setting and a long way from major regional centres or capital cities like Melbourne, Internet connectivity was impossible in some locations. To ensure the continuity of the learning program, the staff hand delivered physical copies of student work to these families and collected completed work, weekly. Many of the school’s Indigenous families did not want the use of technologies in their home – stating the invasive nature of this as their main concern as it exposed their homes and privacy. So again, hard copies of student work were delivered weekly. In certain cases, families who were struggling to use technology received home visits to support their efforts. Equally, we ran some sessions for families (in the initial stages of remote learning in 2020) to support their use of technologies for online learning.

52

D. Gurr et al.

To support families during remote schooling, MTCPS provided laptops for those who did not have access to technology. The Catholic school system provided Internet dongles to families without Internet connection, and these were distributed by the school. During the first lockdown in 2020, families needing additional support to use the technology were assisted by staff through phone calls and instruction sheets. A database was created to ensure families who needed laptops had them readily available when lockdowns were announced. At an ongoing level, through close personal connections with families, the school continues to ensure that technology access is not an inhibitor to a students’ learning and provides support as needed (provision of equipment, training, and so forth). To end this chapter, we want to consider the future and consider the progress of these schools through a futures perspective. Gurr has described several futures frameworks (e.g. Gurr, 2022, in press), and his most recent view is shown in Fig. 3.1. Current practices will have been influenced by past practices through such aspects as culture and tradition, and current practices often come under pressure to change as new ideas form and become best practices. There are also practices that schools may not be aware of but have the potential for major change  – the next practices. To help their schools progress, school leaders increasingly need to have a futures orientation, and this means understanding how to get from the current to the future. Valerie Hannon and Tony Mckay (2021) urged school leaders to think about futures that are possible, plausible, probable, or preferred. These four future orientations can challenge and force school leaders to address the question of whether they are pushing hard enough for desirable change or succumbing to the typical change inertia seen in education.

Fig. 3.1  A conceptual model to guide thinking from the present to the future

3  Leadership and Technology Supporting Quality and Equitable Schools…

53

Considering the work of McKay and Reed, they quickly had to find best practice solutions to remote learning as their current practices were upended with the need for a rapid mandated switch to remote schooling. Through relying on the skills of their teachers and helping them to learn new skills, talking with principal colleagues about what they were doing and getting system support, they were able to use their current technology and best practice ideas to implement remote learning programs. Both schools were fortunate that their systems already had in place high-quality Internet connections, learning management systems and collaborate software like MT that allowed remote learning to occur. At the family level, most families also had sufficient technology to engage with their schools, and they were able to supervise their children at home. Where families didn’t have support, the schools were able to help, as noted above. Whilst the switch to remote learning was not without problems (the lack of resources for some families, the student and teacher fatigue noted by Reed, and the need to develop and monitor proper teaching and learning programs noted by McKay), the schools seem to have coped well. What is interesting is that the lessons learnt haven’t led to ongoing radical change. Whilst McKay noted the benefits in holding some staff meetings virtually and students, teachers, and parents have got used to new hardware and software, the essential structure and routines of the school haven’t changed, and this is also true for MTCPS. There has been no evidence of next practice ideas leading to radical change. The emergence of ChatGPT and the ensuing interest in AI and its impact on schools is a next practice idea that is starting to impact the schools. However, it is perhaps too early at this stage to be sure of how these new technologies will change schools like MWPS and MTCPS, and especially so given the state school system has, for the time being, banned the use of ChatGPT for students. In conclusion, we think these stories provide examples of thoughtful, responsive, and caring leadership of schools concerned to ensure that quality and equitable schooling continued during extensive periods of lockdown and remote learning. These are stories that showcase the quality work of educators in times of crisis, and when we consider how these stories are multiplied many times through our own contexts and in many contexts across the world, they provide a sense of the importance of schools to individuals and for society.

References Blundell, C. N., Mukherjee, M., & Nykvist, S. (2022). A scoping review of the application of the SAMR model in research. Computers and Education Open, 3, article 100093, 12 p. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100093 Drysdale, L., Goode, H., Gurr, D., Reed, C., & Sedundary, P. (2021). Leading a learning community  – A multi-layered approach. International Studies in Educational Administration, 49(3), 7–26. Gurr, D. (2022). Leadership of schools in the future. In A. Nir (Ed.), School leadership in the 21st century: Challenges and strategies (pp. 227–309). Nova Publishers.

54

D. Gurr et al.

Gurr, D. (in press). Creating high quality and equitable schools. In: O. Johansson, & N. Rönnström (Eds) Att rekonstruera (omdana) skolor med stöd i forskning: Om vägar till likvärdiga skolor [Reconstructing (transforming) schools with support in research: On paths to equivalent schools]. Natur och Kultur. Gurr, D., Longmuir, F., & Reed, C. (2021). Creating successful and unique schools: Leadership, context and systems thinking perspectives. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(1), 59–76. Hannon, V., & Mckay, A. (2021, August). The future of educational leadership. Five signposts, CSE leading education series. Striepe, M., & Cunningham, C. (2022). Understanding educational leadership during times of crises: A scoping review. Journal of Educational Administration, 60(2), 133–147.

Chapter 4

School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections from Cyprus Georgia Pashiardis, Stefan Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz and Antonios Kafa

, Petros Pashiardis,

Abstract  This chapter offers insights into educational leadership in relation to school principals, who play an important role as leaders in this new digital environment, during the global pandemic COVID-19. Based on the five leadership styles of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework, as the theoretical background of this research study, a successful primary school principal’s actions and practices in leading the school community during times of uncertainty is presented, thus, providing an opportunity to consider lessons to be learned. In order to reveal how school leadership in Cyprus was enacted during the COVID-19 crisis, the qualitative research paradigm was selected. In particular, through the five leadership styles of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework which was utilized as the theoretical foundation of this study, a case study of a primary school principal in Cyprus was selected. The school principal successfully addressed the urgency of the pandemic crisis, referring to the digitalization of the teaching and learning process, together with addressing the obstacles and challenges that occurred during the timeframe of the pandemic crisis.

G. Pashiardis Ministry of Education, Sprorts and Youth, Nicosia, Cyprus e-mail: [email protected] S. Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz Alpen-Adria-Universität, Klagenfurt, Austria e-mail: [email protected] P. Pashiardis (*) · A. Kafa Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_4

55

56

G. Pashiardis et al.

Introduction: Leading in Times of Uncertainty Many people might agree with the statement that even during the initial phase of the pandemic the focus of the political discourse on schools and their respective leaders has shifted several times. While the initial focus was on restrictions on face-to-face teaching, it was followed by the subsequent and gradual opening of schools, which led to the discussion dominated by the provision of vaccinations for different age cohorts among students and staff (OECD/European Union, 2022; Thorn & Vincent-­ Lancrin, 2021). School principals, during the pandemic and potentially post-pandemic conditions, fell into a perpetual risk management mode that influenced the making and shaping of leadership decisions (Pashiardis & Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, 2022). Quite frequently, the received information from the educational policymakers was partly incomplete and nontransparent, and school principals could not fall back on existing structures nested in their respective educational administration infrastructure in order to find new solutions to new problems under immense pressure. Consequently, they had to accept the task of weighing and evaluating conflicting information and its (possibly) differing interpretations as a vital part of their leadership repertoire. According to a number of authors (Netolicky, 2020; Harris, 2020; Azorìn, 2020; Harris & Jones, 2022), a key challenge for school leadership in times of crises is to bundle, prepare, and make accessible the amount and variety of existing information in such a way so that different pedagogical actors outside as well as inside the school with different purposes can access and (re)use it. Although the information is of outstanding importance for administrative decision-­making both at the system and at the individual school level in times of crisis, many considerable obstacles could be observed about the availability, quality, accessibility, shareability, and usability of information for the making and shaping of leadership decisions on the ground (Bush, 2021). In many areas of the education system, we had to observe the lack of important information and an insufficient depth and differentiation of the same for a crisis-related situation and appropriate leadership response. One can assume that what worked well pre-pandemic, at least from an effective leadership perspective, might have also worked during the pandemic. However, cultural and structural deficits may also have reinforced bad leadership. Additionally, new paths that have been trodden could possibly retain their pioneering function in parts. In this respect, it remains to be seen how much of this drive for innovation would remain as part of the future normality in school leaders’ daily routines (Sahlberg, 2020). Exceptional times have always been times for a greater degree of opportunities, for better or for worse. Those who experience change at multiple levels in series can be much more confident in launching creative leadership offensives and act proactively as opportunity seekers (Pashiardis et al., 2018). However, this calls for a different mindset: more dynamism, the will to take the lead as a change agent and the

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

57

courage to recognize that, sometimes, even unconventional solutions can lead to success. In order to meet the demands of this unanticipated situation, school organizations during the pandemic crisis were asked to modify their educational materials and teaching approaches by moving their teaching practice into a distance/online setting. Although technology has been used in education since 1989 (U.S. Department of Education, 1996) as a means for emergency remote instruction, this unanticipated health crisis caused a further large increase in the utilization of technology by all educational organizations around the world. Tulowitzki et al. (2022) underlined the significant importance of school leaders as essential drivers of innovation on themes related to technology and therefore the importance of leading, organizing, and facilitating their school organizations in this new era of digital educational development. Having said that, this chapter offers insights into educational leadership in relation to school principals who play an important role as leaders in this new digital environment, during the global pandemic COVID-19. Based on the five leadership styles of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework, as the theoretical background of this research study, we present a successful primary school principal’s actions and practices in leading the school community during times of uncertainty, thus providing an opportunity to consider lessons to be learned. Following, we present the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework and the five leadership styles in detail.

 heoretical Framework for the Study – T The Pashiardis-­Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework We currently know from international research studies on school leadership that there is a measurable, primarily indirect impact on student learning in our schools. However, based on the findings reported so far, we are not certain that the required high quality in student achievement will automatically occur because of the leadership impact on learning. Rather, the findings emphasize the influence of the school-­ specific leadership situation and individual dispositions for action on the normative requirements to be met by leaders. Thus, an objectively quantifiable description of the school environment (e.g., based on economic and social data) could be contrasted with the perception of the school leader (Schwarz & Brauckmann, 2015). Thus, the multidimensionality of school leadership, as a context- and situation-­ sensitive interpretation process, should be emphasized. This kind of leadership takes place inside as well as outside the school, as those effective leadership styles are being carried out by school principals with different personal characteristics and might, therefore, show formal as well as informal determinants of action (Pashiardis & Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, 2022).

58

G. Pashiardis et al.

Against that background, our conceptual starting point for the development of what would later become known as the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework (Pashiardis & Brauckmann, 2008) was that further systemic school leadership–related problem analysis should be undertaken. To us, this became the driver through which we could highlight how contextual variables affect combinations of leadership approaches employed by leaders (Hallinger, 2018; Pashiardis et al., 2018). The Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework which looked at educational and school leadership from a holistic perspective included five effective leadership styles (1) instructional/pedagogical style, (2) structuring style, (3) participative style, (4) entrepreneurial, and (5) personnel development style (please see Fig. 4.1). Each leadership style consists of specific behaviors, actions, or practices that school principals are likely to utilize when they operate as school leaders during their course of action. However, in reality, there are not just five leadership styles, but rather hundreds or thousands of them, since the various leadership styles partially overlap with each other and create more “hybrid” styles, depending on the context in which school principals operate as well as the people who are involved at the school site and their abilities and readiness for action (Pashiardis, 2014). This totality of school leadership and its variants is what we came to call the “leadership cocktail mix” (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). When examining in more depth the five leadership styles, we understand that the instructional/pedagogical leadership style focuses on improving the quality of teaching and learning. In this style, school principals promote practices with the central aim of aligning teaching and learning activities based on predefined goals and objectives. In addition, within this leadership style, effective leaders develop a

Fig. 4.1  The Holistic Pashiardis-Brauckmann Leadership Model (2008)

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

59

climate of high expectations for teaching and learning and engage in monitoring and evaluation activities as they strive to introduce pedagogical innovations into the school environment. Within the structuring leadership style, the behaviors and practices of school principals relate to the characteristics of creating the school’s vision, and especially to providing the right direction and coordination in order to achieve this. In addition, behaviors and practices revolve around the implementation of specific processes, tasks, responsibilities, and routines, as well as the establishment of clear rules in order to ensure safety and a feeling of social justice in schools. Moreover, through the structuring leadership style there is clarity about the roles and responsibilities of all actors in the school so that everyone knows what is expected of them and thus, there is enhanced commitment to the school. In the participative leadership style, effective leaders organize their management activities through others in many different ways, according to their preferences and the personalities of the people with whom they work. In addition, the active participation of all in the decision-making process, whenever needed, and the formation of teams are practices of this leadership style. It does not mean that everybody should be included in everything; however, it does mean consultation when needed. Then, in the entrepreneurial leadership style, collaborations and networks are created with various external factors such as the students’ parents, local community, places of worship, police, various businesses, NGOs, etc., in order to help and support the school. These partnerships are likely to provide the necessary and sufficient external strategic resources for school activities, while generally facilitating the implementation of the school’s mission. This leadership style helps school principals understand that they are not operating in a vacuum, but within a specific socioeconomic context that can be used creatively. Finally, in the personnel development style, the teaching staff is recognized and rewarded in combination with the provision of training and professional development opportunities. This is the style through which school leaders provide many opportunities for further discussions and growth both professionally and personally with all staff, including themselves. In conclusion, we must realize that effective leadership lies in the choice of those practices, from the five leadership styles that an effective leader will choose depending on the general context and the educational system in which the school operates and depending on the socioeconomic composition of the student population of the area where the school is situated. In short, every school principal should find a mix of leadership styles that is different each time, but effective, as it meets the needs of the specific school. Thus, school principals need to discover their own “leadership cocktail mix,” as mentioned previously. Connected with this, we found that there is a general trend for school leaders to utilize mostly the entrepreneurial leadership (Pashiardis & Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, 2022) style in most of the countries where the framework has been validated (for example, Cyprus, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Hungary, and the Netherlands). Before moving on to the methodological approach and the main findings of this study, it seemed appropriate to present some information about the Cyprus educational context in order to set the framework within which school principals acted during the pandemic crisis and by transforming their teaching practice into a

60

G. Pashiardis et al.

distance or online environment in order to address the demands of this unknown situation.

The Cyprus Educational Context The island of Cyprus is the third largest island in the Mediterranean Sea. Specifically, it is situated in the northeastern part, 380 kilometers north of Egypt, 105 kilometers west of Syria, 75 kilometers south of Turkey, and 380 kilometers east of the nearest Greek island, Rhodes. In 1960, Cyprus gained its independence and became an independent state. The constitution of Cyprus recognizes Greek and Turkish as the two official languages. Cyprus is classified as a middle-income country, depending mainly on its tourism, which may be regarded as the major economic activity. As of May 2004, Cyprus is a full member of the European Union. Furthermore, since January 1, 2008, Cyprus has been a member of the Euro zone, replacing the Cyprus pound with the Euro currency. The island’s estimated population is about 1.2 million, and the majority of the population is Greek Cypriots. The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports is responsible for the implementation of education policy in Cyprus. As mentioned by Pashiardis and Tsiakkiros (2015), the Minister has the highest authority, followed by the Permanent Secretary, who is the highest civil servant of the ministry. Education is provided through the three main divisions of the ministry: primary, secondary, and technical education. It is generally accepted that the Cyprus education system is highly centralized and each school has to follow all the guidelines and directives provided by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. The Ministry is responsible for the policymaking and administrative issues of the governance of education. In addition, the Ministry regulates and supervises all the institutions under its jurisdiction and is responsible for the implementation of educational laws and the preparation of new legislation (Pashiardis & Tsiakkiros, 2015). In fact, autonomy is very limited at the school level, because of centralization in education governance (Eurydice, 2019). An example of centralization in education is the treatment of Cypriot schools as identical school organizations with identical characteristics and needs and ignoring the local school culture. In short, education policy at the school level, which means administering, monitoring, and evaluating the quality of education as well as shaping school curriculum, is the responsibility of the Ministry (Pashiardis & Kafa, 2021). However, this situation creates a distance from the requirements of the local community and each school organization’s culture. Overall, power within the education system of Cyprus emanates mainly from the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. The Ministry mostly exercises personnel and administrative management, curriculum issues, as well as money allocations. Therefore, most of the decentralized approaches can be found within the school classrooms (Eurydice, 2019). For instance, schoolteachers in Cyprus enjoy some

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

61

autonomy in regard to the teaching methods and approaches they use during their teaching process. Up until now, no major efforts towards decentralization have been made. Consequently, school leaders are obliged to obey without really questioning the system. Despite this situation, the role of school leaders is critical in promoting and sustaining school improvement. In fact, school leaders can act as key factors in shaping their own “internal” educational policy within their school and address the specific challenges and needs of the school, based on the local community and the students’ socioeconomic status.

Methodological Approach In order to reveal how school leadership in Cyprus was enacted during the COVID-19 crisis, the qualitative research paradigm was selected. The qualitative approach was deemed appropriate since it enables individuals to share their stories and to have their voices heard (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In addition, Cohen et al. (2018) stated that the decision of a research design approach must be in accordance with its “fitness for purpose” and act as the guiding principle. As mentioned above, through the five leadership styles of the Pashiardis-­ Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework (Pashiardis, 2014; Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011) which was utilized as the theoretical foundation of this study, a case study of a primary school principal in Cyprus was selected. According to Murray Thomas (2003), a case study usually consists of a description of the actions of an entity, and in this particular case, through the eyes of a school principal in a school organization. A case study also allows one to study a specific aspect of a topic in depth in a short amount of time (Bell, 1999). In addition, the case study perspective provides a unique example of real people in real situations, allowing for the multifarious phenomena of a situation (Cohen et al., 2018). In general, case studies as a qualitative research strategy involve an empirical investigation of multiple sources of evidence (Robson, 2007), as in this case, based on the following presentation of the research tools, the shadowing, the interview, and the study of archives. Yet, an important limitation of the case study approach concerns the findings’ generalizability. Another important aspect to be taken into consideration is that the design and type of research concern a critical stage of the overall process, referring to the transformation of the study’s objectives into a planned data collection process (Robson, 2007). However, performing research during the COVID-19 crisis was quite challenging. Yet, rapid qualitative research methods have been utilized, at least since 2003, to guide response activities in the context of infectious epidemics and natural disasters despite these limits and possible difficulties (Vindrola-Padros et al., 2020). In addition to that, Teti et  al. (2020) have emphasized the value of qualitative research, contending that this method can shed light on aspects of behavior and perceptions that are frequently neglected in research because it enables us to “focus not just on ‘what,’ but on ‘how.’“ Finally, the methodology perspective of this

62

G. Pashiardis et al.

research study was generally influenced by the assumption that conducting research during the COVID-19 pandemic requires adaptation while maintaining research quality, as well as the fact that managing high-quality qualitative research is difficult because quality standards depend on the paradigm on which the inquiry is based (Tremblay et al., 2021).

Sampling For the purposes of this study, a convenience sampling of a successful school principal was selected. According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), in convenience sampling, researchers select participants because they are ready and available to be studied. This was important as the pandemic crisis affected the way research was conducted in school organizations and beyond. Two main challenges associated with the development of qualitative approaches in capturing deeper understandings of a topic during the COVID-19 pandemic were “time constraints” and “physical distancing” (Tremblay et al., 2021). In addition, the qualitative paradigm allows people to express themselves and share their unique and complex experiences, including during the pandemic. In light of these ascertainments, the selection of a successful school principal from a primary school in Cyprus was selected as the case study. The school principal successfully addressed the urgency of the pandemic crisis, referring to the digitalization of the teaching and learning process, together with addressing the obstacles and challenges that occurred during the timeframe of the pandemic crisis. The selected school principal was a female with a doctorate in Educational Leadership. The body of inspectors responsible for the school provided us with information about her success in leading the school during these difficult and uncertain times.

Research Tools In order to elicit information about the actions and behaviors of the school principal through the qualitative paradigm, three different research techniques were chosen and applied. These research techniques operated as the means through which three of the five leadership styles of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework (Pashiardis, 2014; Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011) were promoted by the school principal during the COVID-19 crisis in her own school. In particular, (1) an interview was conducted with the school principal, (2) an in-depth shadowing was performed, and finally (3) archival research study was conducted. The interview method was considered appropriate in order to elicit information on (a) how the school principal prioritizes her actions and behaviors in various topics related to her school leadership; (b) what kind of challenges and problems she faced during the crisis; (c) what key leadership strategies she utilized most during

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

63

this period; and (d) what kind of directions or support she expected and received. This face-to-face conversation between the researchers and the participant involved a transfer of information to the interviewer (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) about the role of the school principal during the pandemic crisis. As the interview was conducted during the first phase of the pandemic crisis (2020–2021) where the research and engagement of the scientific field of educational leadership mainly included the theoretical and conceptual perspective on topics related to the pandemic crisis, the interview protocol was created entirely from scratch by the authors (see Appendix). In addition, the school principal was shadowed for a period of 5 weeks to gain a better understanding of her leadership practice during the pandemic crisis. Shadowing is considered a research technique that involves a researcher closely following a member of an organization over an extended period of time (McDonald, 2005). The basis of the shadowing, for identifying the school principal’s actions and behaviors together with the main obstacles and challenges, was the Pashiardis-­ Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework (Pashiardis, 2014; Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011) with the five different leadership styles, but primarily concentrating on the three of the styles for which the school leaders opted, under the circumstances. Specifically, the shadowing addressed the school principal’s possible leadership perspective through the (1) instructional/pedagogical style (strong focus on the improvement of the quality of the digital teaching and learning process during the COVID-19 crisis), the (2) structuring style (aspects of providing direction and coordination to the school during the COVID-19 crisis), and finally the (3) personnel development style (providing professional growth opportunities in areas related to the digital and technological aspect during the COVID-19 crisis). Finally, the third research technique included the study of the archives of the school during the COVID-19 crisis. The archival research method includes a broad range of activities applied to facilitate the investigation of various documents and textual materials of the organization where the research is conducted. As mentioned in the previous section of this chapter, school principals’ lack of autonomy because of the centralized education system in Cyprus, affected their leadership practice. In fact, numerous circulars were sent on a daily basis when the pandemic hit the island, and school leaders were forced to follow the announcements and information provided in these circulars (Kafa, 2022). This particular practice led to confusion because it seemed as if a “straight-jacket” was imposed on everybody, irrespective of local circumstances (Kafa & Pashiardis, 2020). In addition, school leaders had to deal with the differentiation or conflicting information of previous circulars that had already been provided and were supposedly implemented within the own school (Kafa, 2022). Here are two headings of circulars that were distributed to school leaders as examples: • “To inform the teachers that the main goal of the online teaching was the repetition and consolidation of the teaching material that was taught until March 10, 2020” (March 23, 2020). • “To notify teachers that they should proceed to the teaching of their course based on the curriculum” (March 24, 2020).

64

G. Pashiardis et al.

Therefore, the study of the archives that included the various circulars and other documents provided insight into the main challenges or opportunities that the school principal faced and dealt with during the pandemic crisis in her school.

Data Analysis Concerning the data analysis of the collected information from the various research techniques that included interviewing, shadowing, and the archival study of documents, the following steps were taken into consideration. First, the transcription of the interview was performed and coded into themes and patterns based on the study’s main objective. In addition, the data from the interview were specifically analyzed using an open coding analysis followed by a detailed coding analysis. In particular, tables were created by presenting information. Furthermore, based on the collected evidence from the shadowing of the school principal, three different tables were created, representing the three different leadership styles of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework (Pashiardis, 2014; Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011) which were utilized by the school principal. In each case, the collected information was provided and gave answers to the study’s main objective. Additionally, the study of archival documents and circulars provided a more holistic view of the promoted school principal’s practices and strategies and further supported the main challenges and obstacles that the school principal faced during the pandemic crisis. Finally, through the constant comparative method, an explanation of differences and similarities between the analyzed evidence in each of the aforementioned three research techniques revealed the school principal’s leadership practices during the COVID-19 crisis.

 chool Leadership in Times of the Pandemic: S The Local Reality School Profile The primary school is located in the central area of Nicosia, the capital of Cyprus. The school was opened for the first time almost 20 years ago. The school complex is built according to European standards and with a modern design. It has comfortable classrooms on the ground floor and on the first floor; it also includes special rooms, i.e., computer, music, art, library, health education, and science) on the ground floor. Furthermore, in the west wing of the school, there is an assembly hall.

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

65

The school principal and four deputy principals constituted the management team of the school. The teaching staff consists of 18 primary school teachers. The majority work on a full-time basis and a few others work part-time teaching specialized subjects (such as Music and Physics). Moreover, in this school, there is a group of teachers (special education teachers, and speech therapists) who support the education of students with disabilities. The majority of the teaching staff has a permanent civil servant status within the Cyprus educational system; most of them have between 12–18 years of teaching experience. Additionally, a large group of teaching staff holds a postgraduate degree. The school has been developing a remarkable, multifaceted action plan since the first year of its establishment, in all aspects of education based on its vision and mission. It stands out for its high academic level, the continuous involvement of its students in a variety of actions and programs, and takes great pride in the achievements that successfully have been accomplished through the years.

School Population As described by the school principal, during the year 2019–2020, almost 300 students were enrolled in grades first to sixth. The sudden closure of schools in March 2020 was a major and unexpected change in everyday life, an uncertain and unsettling challenge in a turbulent environment for all of humanity. Furthermore, she stressed that the leadership of each school was called to cope with a new reality following a different course of action and an unknown journey into uncharted waters. School principals were faced with different challenges; they had to adapt quickly to rapidly changing conditions, and through different adaptive practices, they had to respond to complexity. They demonstrated a remarkable sense of commitment to education and education continuity in their schools. During the interview, the school principal reminded us that the Pashiardis-­ Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Model was utilized as the theoretical driver and organizer in addressing the challenges and the new reality of her school due to the pandemic. As previously presented, the model consists of five main leadership styles, and each one consists of specific behaviors and actions or practices that leaders are likely to exhibit. She continued by stressing that, in times of crises, leaders are expected to serve as a role model and to rely on their personal leadership resources in new ways and varying degrees. First and foremost, she stressed that leaders must be calm; no one wants to feel that leaders are panicking; they need to show empathy and genuine interest from everyone towards everyone. Emotional intelligence is essential for empathy, especially in difficult and unpredictable times such as these. They must demonstrate the necessary mental resilience, to take on new roles and responsibilities and to make decisions and find solutions to new and complex problems. As the school leader sought to inspire and motivate the school community for the best possible outcomes, she acted in a rapid pace in setting priorities and in

66

G. Pashiardis et al.

designing what is significant and worthwhile for her school. Her personal initiatives, actions, behaviors, and leadership strategies are related to the following three styles of the model: (a) the structuring leadership style, (b) the pedagogical leadership style, and the (c) personnel development style. This was done by choice and after reflecting on all five leadership styles of the model and based on the situation she was faced with.

The Structuring Leadership Style The structuring style of leadership provides direction to the school organization. The suspension and closure of the schools due to the pandemic forced the school principal to redirect the school’s priorities in order to create resilience and set a new action plan and, at the same time, remain focused on the best possible outcomes for their students and the whole school community during these difficult times. For that purpose, the Cyprus Ministry of Education, Sports and Youth provided all schools with circulars and announcements to guide them on their new tasks. These messages from the external environment were utilized and helped school principals to decide the new policies to be followed by teachers, students, and their parents in order to move forward and to give direction internally. At that time, the primary concern of the school principal was safety of all members of the school community and the re-creation of a sense of belonging to it, which was very urgent. The school principal sought to determine new roles and responsibilities for everyone. The school principal shares some of her initial thoughts as follows: One of the most important things was to empower others and to give them the opportunity to undertake new responsibilities that will help the school. For example, twice a week, a teacher was responsible to gather, via e-mail, teaching materials from her colleagues and to upload them on the school’s website, to be used asynchronously by the students in different grade levels as well as different announcements.

Additionally, the establishment of digital communication patterns and collaboration interactions among all members of the school community is closely related to the structuring style. The school principal emphasized the importance of communication, and her effort was to foster cooperation and keep the communication lines open so that everyone was informed, to ensure coherence, and to increase participatory actions. The following is a characteristic quote: In my school we have established a positive school climate. Communication and collaboration have been the core values to guide our everyday work and even during the pandemic, we kept open our communication lines. Sending messages, e-mails, making phone calls or using different communication platforms and applications such as skype, we were able to communicate frequently, be in touch with our students and their parents, have fruitful dialogues with all and to collaborate. In this way a new framework of communication was established that provided updates, gathered feedback, and conveyed information.

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

67

At the same time, addressing the new needs, because of the pandemic and the ambiguous situations that were created, school principals considered the development of an action plan as necessary. An action plan, regarding the technical difficulties that this crisis brought with it for online teaching and learning, with new objectives to be achieved and new approaches to be implemented, provided the big picture and a clear mission for the school organization. The new conditions, the available opportunities as well as the instructions of the Ministry were studied and guided us during the development of a new action plan which emphasized distant learning procedures. The new e-learning environment, synchronous and ­asynchronous, became an important priority at that time and its organization needed to take into consideration certain preconditions related to the available, if any, technological equipment for teachers and students, the internet connections, etc.

The Pedagogical Leadership Style The pedagogical leadership style focuses on the quality of teaching and learning and includes a series of actions that promote the effectiveness of teaching and learning, the cooperation of teachers, and their continuous professional learning. During the suspension of the school’s operation, the change of course in matters of teaching methods, timetable, and syllabus was not the question; it became an absolute necessity. School principals’ main concern was short- and long-term planning of teaching and learning in a clear and flexible way. They turned their focus on teachers’ discussing different adaptive approaches based on the school curriculum that would be adapted to the new circumstances. This is how she described her first pedagogical action: A few days after the school closure, we held a meeting to prioritize the learning priorities of the school unit. We had to redesign learning and teaching and provide students the best opportunities possible to learn under the circumstances. Therefore, teachers were asked to re-teach content that had already been taught in the classrooms … teaching new content was not considered as an option because we thought that the re-opening of the schools was coming soon.

Based on this guideline, teachers had to decide the sequence of steps to follow as they prepared the content. Even though, the content and the accompanying activities and exercises are accessible and highly organized in textbooks, workbooks, and other curriculum guides, teachers had to decide how to overcome the main obstacle since they knew that their students could not have access to their textbooks. The school principal coached, collaborated, and discussed with the teachers the possible ways to forward work to students, and the most appropriate way at the time was to use parents’ email addresses, thus, utilizing a digital communication strategy that was first used within the school so that there is direct communication with the parents. Teachers had to follow different strategies for organizing and structuring the content in a meaningful way for their students who were at home. The materials

68

G. Pashiardis et al.

were offered in small portions, consistent with the previous knowledge, ability level and experience level of the students. Moreover, detailed instructions and explanations were given. Characteristically, the school principal mentioned that: We could not follow the same routines in teaching as we were used to. We prepared many worksheets for them to practice prior knowledge and we always determined the expected amount of time and work that should be required. We forwarded the worksheets every other day, and we encouraged the parents to monitor students’ work, so that they could provide feedback during phone calls that were scheduled twice a week.

The school principal’s role in providing guidance, promoting a positive, collaborative atmosphere, empowering teachers to become the main agents of change and offering opportunities for continuous support is closely related to the personnel development style of the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework, which follows.

Personnel Development Style Developing school personnel constitutes another major area of leadership. Several researchers pointed out that school principals shaped opportunities for teachers to learn in communities of practice. When schools were closed, school principals’ main concern was to assist teachers to teach remotely. As the Cyprus school principal stressed: As a school leader I had to find ways to engage the teachers of my school in multiple modalities of collaboration and professional development using technology…I encouraged and supported them because they had no choice.

Many teachers needed to increase their competencies in technology due to the pandemic crisis, as the digital education landscape was developing rapidly. Accessibility to hardware and software and network infrastructure were just a few of the barriers that were reported and needed to be overcome. School principals played a vital role within their school organization in finding ways to improve teachers’ technological knowledge. Specifically, attending webinars and online seminars that took place over the Internet from various providers and exchanging good practices among colleagues aimed to provide not only the theoretical information but also the practical aspect of technology and its application in everyday teaching. Characteristically, she said: Follow-up activities were organized after webinars, to ensure the transfer of learning in our work and to improve our technological performance, so that we could be more efficient and effective.

One aspect of the personnel development style is the mentoring of teachers during the new learning process that they were experiencing. Opportunities to reflect upon the new knowledge help individuals to address their needs and to get meaningful

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

Structuring Leadership Style

Pedagogical Leadership Style

Personnel Development Style

69

•An update of the school's website with announcements, useful teaching material •Digital communication using e-mails and applications (e.g. Skype) •Find ways to support the technological infrastructure of the school •Restructuring the organization to bring stability and a new digitalized direction

•Preparing the digital teaching material •Utilizing a digital communication strategy with students and parents •Incorporating teaching and learning through digital approaches and techniques

•Supporting and promoting teachers' technological capacities by inviting them to attend online seminars and webinars •Developing and improving teachers' technological capacities and digital knowledge

Fig. 4.2  School principal’s actions and practices as seen through the lenses of establishing digital capacity

support. A mutual support within the school empowers teachers’ capacity and leads towards effective teamwork. As the school principal stated: In my school we have embraced a team approach…teachers that are well versed in the technology were sharing knowledge by mentoring their colleagues.

According to the evidence provided, the successful school principal in this particular case study widely utilized three leadership styles from the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework, particularly the structuring leadership style, the personnel development style, and finally the pedagogical leadership style. More precisely, through her own technological expertise and knowledge, this successful school principal promoted these particular leadership styles and further supported her school organization. Figure 4.2 presents an overview of the promoted leadership styles through digital capacity building in her school organization.

Concluding Remarks: Leading in Times of Uncertainty The findings of the case study suggest that there is an incongruence of problem situations between knowledge brokers on the one hand and actual problem situations at local schools on the other. The findings indicate that the contextual development of certain forms of school leadership affects the relationship between school principals’ expanded authority to act and the leadership authority they exercise (Kaul et al., 2020).

70

G. Pashiardis et al.

At the same time, the findings of the case study point to a flexible handling of various leadership instruments and styles. Similarly, based on the findings reported here, it must be doubted whether there can be a “Best Way” of leadership action. Rather, the findings emphasize the influence of the school-specific leadership situation on the leadership requirements to be met. The prediction of leadership success by means of the use of certain leadership styles is hardly feasible from a scientific perspective, since no consistent correlations between certain leadership styles and school performance could be shown (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Rather, certain leadership instruments appear to be dispensable in view of the individual schools’ contextual conditions, since organizational requirements act as leadership substitutes. Rather, there seems to be a continuous reassessment and reflection of the school practical benefits and relevance of systemic or institutional factors against the background of individual school problems, which in turn require complementary monitoring. Evidence for increased personnel development opportunities through an optimal combination of available knowledge and problem-oriented as well as development-­related school management can also be found throughout our case study. The findings also indicate that, at best, internal evaluation and creative leeway are perceived as interdependent. The school principal apparently remains the decision-­maker and is predominantly confident in dealing with the new challenges. However, a largely unanswered question is how the school principal and the school as a whole can learn and grow in a productive interrelationship (Spillane et  al., 2009). This must remain unanswered for now. Concepts that emphasize autonomous leadership in schools in times of great uncertainty necessitate new forms of cooperation and cohabitation between the regional, municipal, and central levels of educational administration, especially with regard to a more service-­ oriented support in the development of leadership-oriented school leadership. Increasingly, school principals have to realign their working relationships institutionally and organizationally and bring them into a new balance. Moreover, school principals must bear in mind that it is partly competing not only formal goals but also informal or problematic situations resulting from the school environment that can challenge or guide the strategic thinking and actions of school leaders. In some instances, the findings show that the principal acted exclusively in a school-specific and problem-oriented manner. Consequently, a search can begin, both within and outside the school, for factors that have led to this (now) more recognized problem. Oftentimes, school principals have been faced with the task of reconciling challenges from ever-changing contexts stemming from the inside and the outside. They seem to be more concerned with what is going on within their organization than with what is going on outside their organization. At the same time, it becomes increasingly evident that trust, communication, and collaboration with internal as well as external stakeholders are extremely important aspects that educational and business leaders must have in mind when making decisions under crisis and uncertainty (Beauchamp et  al., 2021; Teo et  al., 2017; Thornton, 2021). It is equally evident that educational leaders lack the training in issue/problem sense making and formulation as well as aspects of behavioral

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

71

decision-­making processes in order to reach the best possible decisions, under the circumstances. Thus, the issue of training and further education in this particular area seems to be especially important and should be promoted and enhanced. Such a contextual embedding of the initial situation (preconditions for action, requirements for action, and conditions for action) shapes not only the observation, evaluation, and assessment of a school principal but also the resulting actions. Consequently, limitations of leadership actions are identified, which are caused by internal and external partners and/or are conditioned by organizational requirements. It becomes apparent that the expansion of the individual school’s scope of action with regard to the use and implementation process of the gained scope of action causes highly divergent or contradictory ideas among the actors involved in the school. When this happens, school principals express the need to be able to communicate more strongly than before with the outside world in order to contribute to the formation and stabilization of positive and consistent expectations regarding the development of schools (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011; Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2016 ). The findings also point to the increase in the importance of a school principal’s entrepreneurial leadership skills through the internal leadership practice of promoting the structuring, pedagogical, and personnel development leadership style. This relates in particular to building digital coalitions with partners inside and outside the school and across multiple hierarchical levels. In this context, providing orientation with regard to a common development task is primarily a communication task for the school principal in the sense of strategic management (Longmuir, 2021). An educational entrepreneur is one who achieves collaboration with a wide range of potential school stakeholders and acquires different resources so that the school organization operates and runs smoothly (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011; Pashiardis & Brauckmann, 2019). This is deemed more important than ever during times of uncertainty. Therefore, a new sense and decision-making approach require the skill of balancing, at first sight, seemingly contradictory or incompatible challenges. Understanding (in a proactive way) the needs and interests of various groups inside and outside the school secures a better school climate of trust and strengthens the school community over time. The challenge of transferring research knowledge in times of uncertainty into educational leadership practice and making it fruitful within this domain has become even more important as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This is even truer because in times of general societal uncertainty caused by COVID-19, it was largely descriptive knowledge that was imparted rather than explanatory or diagnostic knowledge. This highly fluctuating descriptive knowledge, in turn, had to be processed into action knowledge by the school leader by means of thoughtful but also partly pragmatic decision processes. Thus, it became apparent in the case study that knowledge subject to a short half-life was apparently transformed rather than transferred. Thus, re-contextualization work and negotiation processes become particularly significant in the job profile of school leadership dealing with a great level of uncertainty. Consequently, it seems to be necessary to adapt and process the knowledge transfer offers in view of the respective specific characteristics and needs in the

72

G. Pashiardis et al.

application context of school leadership, since the knowledge acquisition and subsequent processes do not proceed in a straight line but are influenced by a multitude of contextual factors. This is especially true in complex social systems such as education, where there are multiple feedbacks between institutions and acting individuals, not only those between school principals and their schools  (Brauckmann, et al., 2020). In this context, the findings of the case study have once again made it clear that the problem situations and issues of schools and their administrators are the main drivers when it comes to the relevance of available knowledge bases. Thus, they need a solid knowledge base in order to be able to prepare and make decisions properly (Harris & Jones, 2022). It should be noted, however, that school principals often had little or no time for proper preparation, especially since little orientation and knowledge were imparted (Gurr & Drysdale, 2020). In addition, it was obviously not possible to set up a more participatory and dialogical process of negotiation and adaptation in which the knowledge offered was adapted, specified, or rejected against the background of the needs, competencies, resources, and structural conditions of the respective school and its management. This requires structures of cooperation as well as places for systematic encounters. Such cooperative strategies might require network structures and a coordinated, joint approach. Cooperation can be of varying intensities, ranging from selective cooperation to topic-related temporary cooperation, cooperation in joint projects, formal mutual involvement (e.g., school principals in school administration committees), or institutionalized partnerships (e.g., regional partnerships between universities and schools). If necessary, other partners and interest groups (e.g., business, foundations, and associations) can also be involved (Pashiardis & Brauckmann, 2019). A good example of such structures of cooperation could be that education systems can increasingly highlight the value of digital competence in school leaders by promoting them both as (1) digital coordinators and (2) digital instructional school leaders (Kafa, 2021). These two perspectives facilitate strong digital communication with various internal and external stakeholders in the school and promote fora and online discussion groups within and between school organizations. At the same time, it is important to support the efforts of school leaders to implement digital learning communities among teachers. These communities help teachers successfully integrate digital technology into their classrooms and further promote the teaching and learning process. Moreover, the right budget allocation along with the right education policies are essential to enhance the digital competence of school principals. This concerns in particular the technical infrastructure that should be integrated into the school system, as well as cooperation with various organizations and companies with digital competencies that support the professional training and development of school principals. The findings of this study further revealed that the school principal was a digital coordinator by utilizing the two leadership styles (structuring leadership style and personnel development leadership style), as well as a digital instructional school leader by utilizing the pedagogical leadership style and supporting the overall digital teaching and learning process.

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

73

Overall, this aspect of digital managing can be understood in the form of an administrative assumption of responsibility as a control tool, which, in an extended perspective, satisfies the information needs of the persons cooperating in the achievement of the goals and measures the degree of achievement of self-imposed goals. Leadership, understood as the setting and prioritization of goals, and management, understood as their organization, are therefore not contradictory, but rather mutually dependent. Since the fragmentation into a multitude of activities makes the systematic pursuit of a goal more difficult, an effective school leader would have to consider with which combination and integration of activities several goals can be pursued simultaneously, but also monitored. In conclusion, we have to acknowledge that, depending on a school’s state of development and given structures, school principals’ degrees of freedom to make connections across and between contexts may differ. At the same time, school principals need to learn to act faster with clearer and constant communication during times of crises and uncertainty, by utilizing the technology/digital aspect and to envision what is to come next week, next month, and even next year, thus establishing an ‘Edupreneurial Mindset’ (Pashiardis & Brauckmann, 2019).

Appendix: The Interview Protocol Interview with a Primary School Principal 1. During this crisis, how did you prioritize your actions and behaviors in order to ensure: • The safety and security of everybody within the school community? • That there is a sense of belonging within the school community? • That the Senior Management Team (SMT) worked amicably in order to produce the best possible results, under the circumstances, such as introducing new distance modes of teaching and learning? • How did you manage to offer the necessary capacity building for your staff, in order for them to be able to function under the new reality (distance learning)? • The right and necessary amount of communication and coordination? • How decisions were made in order to ensure rationality and transparency during the process? • That relationships were kept “alive,” and emotional support was provided as needed (teachers-teachers, teachers-students, teachers-parents, and SMT-teachers). • That you have “outside-the-school” help and from whom (such as parents, Ministry officials, and others)? • That teachers provided more support (teaching and emotional) as needed, even after “normal” school operating hours?

74

G. Pashiardis et al.

• That there is Internet access, laptops, and other necessary equipment for all, especially those who did have any or belong to lower Socio-Economic Status (SES) within the school community? 2. For you, as a leader, what were the main challenges/problems in ensuring all of the above? 3. How did you really cope with these challenges? What are the key leadership strategies which you utilized most during this period? 4. Where did you get most support in all this (internally/personal knowledge and values; externally/drive to do good)? 5. From whom would you have expected directions and/or support during COVID-19? In what way have your expectations been met by those stakeholders? 6. What was the most unexpected help/support you received during COVID-19? 7. In general, how do you see your role in relation to the many stakeholders at your school? 8. When was the last time you were confronted with a disruptive change which challenged you as a leader of your school in particular? What kind of leadership strategies did you use back then? 9. Looking back on COVID-19, what is your most precious COVID leadership lesson? 10. Anything else you want to add/tell us?

References Azorìn, C. (2020). Beyond COVID-19 supernova. Is another education coming? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 381–390. Beauchamp, G., Hulme, M., Clarke, L., Hamilton, L., & Harvey, J. (2021). ‘People miss people’: A study of school leadership and management in the four nations of the United Kingdom in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 375–392. Bell, J. (1999). Doing your own research: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science. Berkshire, England: Open University Press. Brauckmann, S., & Pashiardis, P. (2011). A validation study of the leadership styles of a holistic leadership theoretical framework. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(2), 11–32. Brauckmann, S., & Pashiardis, P. (2016). Practicing successful and effective school leadership: European perspectives. In P. Pashiardis & O. Johansson (Eds.), Successful school leadership: International perspectives (pp. 179–192). Bloomsbury. Brauckmann, S., Pashiardis, P., & Ärlestig, H. (2020). Bringing context and educational leadership together: Fostering the professional development of school principals. Professional Development in Education, 49, 4. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1747105 Bush, T. (2021). Leading through COVID-19: Managing a crisis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 373–374. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. Creswell, J., & Creswell, D. (2018). Research design (5th ed.). Sage.

4  School Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: A School Principal’s Reflections…

75

Eurydice. (2019). Key features of the education system: Cyprus. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/ national-­policies/eurydice/content/cyprus_en Gurr, D., & Drysdale, L. (2020). Leadership for challenging times. International Studies in Educational Administration, 48(1), 24–30. Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 5–24. Harris, A. (2020). COVID-19 – School leadership in crisis? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 321–326. Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2022). Leading during a pandemic – What the evidence tells us. School Leadership & Management, 42(2), 105–109. Kafa, A. (2021, September 1). Enhancing School Leaders’ Digital Capacity in an Era of Change. ECER- BLOG. https://blog.eera-­ecer.de/school-­leaders-­digital/?fbclid=IwAR0g4qeO6aB0V_ 9SnzAom7Ewl7y9yEVf9o82SDeiPpwtnoEvnMKFS3mZXgU Kafa, A. (2022). Empowering school leaders as middle executives in the centralized education system of Cyprus in the midst of a crisis. In A. M. Wilmot & C. Thompson (Eds.), Handbook of research on activating middle executives’ agency to Lead and manage during times of crisis. IG-GLOBAL. Kafa, A., & Pashiardis, P. (2020). Coping with the global pandemic COVID-19 through the lenses of the Cyprus education system. International Studies in Educational Administration, 48(2), 42–48. Kaul, M., VanGronigen, B.  A., & Simon, N.  S. (2020). Calm during crisis: School principal approaches to crisis management during the COVID-19 pandemic. CPRE Briefs https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_policybriefs/89 Longmuir, F. (2021). Leading in  lockdown: Community, communication and compassion in response to the COVID-19 crisis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51, 1014. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211027634 McDonald, S. (2005). Studying actions in context: A qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 455–473. Murray Thomas, R. (2003). Blending qualitative & quantitative research methods in theses and dissertations. Sage. Netolicky, D. (2020). School leadership during a pandemic: Navigating tensions. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 391–395. OECD & European Union. (2022). Health at a glance: Europe 2022: State of health in the EU cycle. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/507433b0-­en Pashiardis, P. (Ed.). (2014). Modeling school leadership across Europe: In search of new frontiers. Springer. Pashiardis, P., & Brauckmann, S. (2008). Introduction to the LISA framework from a social system’s perspective. Paper presented during the LISA conference, November 13–15, 2008, Budapest, Hungary. Pashiardis, P., & Brauckmann, S. (2019). New public management in education: A call for the edupreneurial leader? Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18(3), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.108 0/15700763.2018.1475575 Pashiardis, P., & Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, S. (2022). The rise of the Edupreneur: Exploring school leadership through an evolutionary perspective. In A. Nir (Ed.), School leadership in the 21st century- challenges and coping strategies (pp. 47–68). Nova Science Publishers. Pashiardis, P., & Kafa, A. (2021). School leadership within a centralized education system: A success story from Cyprus through a decade of research. In D. Mifsud & P. Landri (Eds.), Enacting and conceptualizing educational leadership within the Mediterranean region (pp.  79–100). Brill Publications. Pashiardis, P., & Tsiakkiros, A. (2015). Cyprus. In W. Hörner, H. Döbert, L. Reuter, & B. von Kopp (Eds.), The education Systems of Europe (Global education systems) (pp. 173–186). Springer. Pashiardis, P., Brauckmann, S., & Kafa, A. (2018). Let the context become your ally: School principalship in two cases from low performing schools in Cyprus. School Leadership & Management, 38(5), 478–495.

76

G. Pashiardis et al.

Robson, C. (2007). Real world research. Gutenberg. Sahlberg, P. (2020). Will the pandemic change schools? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 359–365. Schwarz, A., & Brauckmann, S. (2015). Between facts and perceptions: The area close to school as a context factor in school leadership (SCHUMPETER DISCUSSION PAPERS 2015-003). Retrieved from http://elpub.bib.uni-­wuppertal.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/ Derivate-­4477/ sdp15003.pdf Spillane, J., Gomez, L., & Mesler, L. (2009). Notes on reframing the role of organizations in policy implementation from. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy. Research Routledge. Teo, W., Lee, M., & Lim, W.-S. (2017). The relational activation of resilience model: How leadership activates resilience in an organizational crisis. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 25, 136–147. Teti, M., Schatz, E., & Liebenberg, L. (2020). Methods in the time of COVID-19: The vital role of qualitative inquiries. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–5. Thorn, W., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2021). Schooling during a pandemic: The experience and outcomes of schoolchildren during the first round of COVID-19 lockdowns. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1c78681e-­en Thornton, K. (2021). Leading through COVID-19: New Zealand secondary principals describe their reality. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 49(3), 393–409. Tremblay, S., Castiglione, S., Audet, L.-A., Desmarais, M., Horace, M., & Peláez, S. (2021). Conducting qualitative research to respond to COVID-19 challenges: Reflections for the present and beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20. https://doi. org/10.1177/16094069211009679 Tulowitzki, P., Gerick, J., & Eickelmann, B. (2022). The role of ICT for school leadership and management activities: An international comparison. International Journal of Educational Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-­06-­2021-­0251 U.S.  Department of Education. (1996). Getting America’s students ready for the 21st century: Meeting the technology literacy challenge. A report to the nation on technology and education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED398899.pdf Vindrola-Padros, C., Chisnall, G., Cooper, S., et al. (2020). Carrying out rapid qualitative research during a pandemic: Emerging lessons from COVID-19. Qualitative Health Research, 30(14), 2192–2204.

Chapter 5

Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications, Challenges, and Solutions Ann-Marie Wilmot

Abstract  Given the pivotal role leadership plays in organizations, especially during a crisis, there is a need to learn more about how much school principals are able to utilize their digital capacities, if at all, for continued or increased effective functioning of teaching and learning and overall school governance. This examination is important, not only because the matter is not widely explored in jamaica, but also because in some institutions, school principals may possess the skills and disposition, and the physical infrastructure might be missing. On the converse, in others, such as rural communities, high levels of disadvantage exist, including deficits in both digital infrastructure and skills. This chapter pulls on a qualitative method and a semi-structured single  interview  design to explore and describe the digital capacity  experiences, during the COVID-19 pandemic,  of  ten school  principals of  rural schools, in Jamaica. To accomplish this aim, this research explored and presents findings on  some challenges they experienced, how they were able to resolve them, how these resolutions may extend beyond the period of crisis and, school principals’ reflections on their perception of the influence the process of navigating, leading, and managing their schools online may have had on their leadership. The findings also shape framework of recommendations  for advancing thinking about policies, practices and further research exploration of the subject matter.

Introduction In a general sense, digital transformation as an area prioritized for growth and development is increasing in many countries and regions around the world. One reason for its high priority attention is that countries that achieve success are poised for

A.-M. Wilmot (*) The University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston, Jamaica © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_5

77

78

A.-M. Wilmot

high economic and social gains (Avasant-Digital-Competitiveness-JamaicaWhitepaper), and this is true of Jamaica as in other countries. Another observation “Avasant-Digital-Competitiveness-­ Jamaica-Whitepaper” makes is that “Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) has generally lagged behind in adopting emerging trends but has been making positive strides toward building a regional digital ecosystem” (2019; p. 9). The education system, especially school leadership, is one of the avenues through which the Caribbean, Jamaica included, can gain some more traction by ensuring the development of the digital capabilities of its citizens to support their efforts. This introduces, at the micro level, school principals as inevitable players of invaluable roles in the related training implementation and monitoring exercises were this to become realizable. However, the fact of school principals’ presence is insufficient. If these initiatives are likely to bring their efficacy into question, and/or if they are unable to lead with conviction and an appreciable degree of competence, school principals will likely be slow to buy-in, fearing their inability to inspire success. At the macro level of the education sector, the Ministry of Education in Jamaica also has an important role to play in enacting mandates of the government, using school leadership as a conduit to closing the gaps that are causing it to lag behind, as the “Avasant-Digital-­ Competitiveness-Jamaica-Whitepaper” notes. Though there are several digital technology-related initiatives in Jamaica, they do not cohere to give a full and consistent image of the country’s digital direction, especially in education. Additionally, resources and necessary policy frameworks are insufficient to support school leaders’ non-negotiable engagement for participation in a digital revolution. This chapter contends that any digital revolution mission must consider the school as an integral functionary, with school principals at the helm. Therefore, it is important to explore school principals’ experiences with their digital capacities to understand what they know and consider strategies they can access to push digital technology in the schools they lead. It focuses on ten rural school principals’ experiences leading online, during the crisis, hence aligning with the focus of the text to gain insights from the field, to reimagine future directions. The case for focus on rural school principals is strong. Research has revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic has a much stronger impact on the education systems of less-developed regions as compared to developed regions (Aristovnik et al., 2020). Additionally, speaking to the Historical Inequities in the Jamaican Education System, the Caribbean Policy Research Institute (2021) (CAPRI) in Kingston, Jamaica, argued that when compared to urban schools, students in schools located in the rural and inner-city areas have a different experience from their urban counterparts, who are always at an advantage. The factors accounting for this difference, it claims are “poorer access to learning resources, higher levels of household deprivation, and greater difficulty accessing transportation to and from school, all directly affecting school attendance and participation” (p. 7). These observations reinforce that in most rural communities, a high level of disadvantage exists, including deficits in both digital infrastructure and skills. Additionally, whereas in some

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

79

institutions, school principals may possess the skills and disposition, the physical infrastructure might be underdeveloped or missing. The converse is also true where the physical infrastructure may exist, yet, the digital capacities of the principals contrast the available resources. The composite of reasons is a solid base to investigate their experiences with work online.

Digital Competence: Definitions and Parameters This section attempts to establish the working definitions of the chapter. Digital literacy that builds individuals’ digital capacity is not easily defined. Nascimbeni and Vosloo (2019) note that “as with any relatively new concept, definitions of digital literacy abound, going from rather prescriptive ones that focus on what a digitally literate individual should be able to do, to others that take a broader perspective focusing on what a digitally literate individual should be able to achieve” (p. 10). Albeit, scholars have made several definitions available. For instance, digital literacy is the awareness, attitude, and ability of individuals to appropriately use digital tools and facilities to identify, access, manage, integrate, evaluate, analyze, and synthesize digital resources, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others, in the context of specific life situations, in order to enable constructive social action and to reflect upon this process (Nascimbeni & Vosloo, 2019). This definition is sufficiently broad based for the context and the boundaries of this chapter. Yet, it is interesting to note that the perception of what digital competence is has not changed much from what was obtained a decade ago when Ilomäki et al. (2011) argued that digital competence is the most recent concept describing technology-­ related skills. They also noted that in terms of its description, there has been an evolution of terms used to “describe the skills and competence of using digital technologies, such as ICT skills, technology skills, information technology skills, 21st century skills, information literacy, digital literacy, and digital skills” (p. 1). While Ilomäki et  al. (2011) have broadened general descriptions, other scholars have attempted to outline what it involves. “Digital competence involves the confident, critical and responsible use of, and engagement with, digital technologies for learning, at work, and for participation in society. It is defined as a combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes” (European Commission Science Hub (n.d.) as quoted in Council Recommendation on Key Competences for Life- long Learning, 2018). These characteristics and abilities involved in digital competence are represented in five competences as follows: information and data literacy, communication and collaboration, digital content creation, safety, and problem solving, according to this same Council. Proficiency in these areas is further expanded to suggest the types of behaviors expected in the digital environment including articulating informational requirements, interacting, collaborating and communicating, creating and editing digital content, attending to issues of privacy and data

80

A.-M. Wilmot

protection, as well as identifying needs and difficulties with the intent to resolving them (Vuorikari et al., 2022). As it relates to educational institutions, Siina (2022), in UNICEF’s Educators’ Digital Competency Framework, captures the competencies for educators in five broad areas including knowledge development, knowledge application, knowledge sharing and knowledge and communication (p. 11). This range targets educators’ pedagogic competencies, learner competencies, professional engagement, and collaboration and organizational communication. Additionally, the UNESCO International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and training (n.d.) lists 29 digital competence frameworks for teachers, learners, and citizens, drawn from several countries, across multiple continents, thus reinforcing that this lifelong learning skill is of global importance to all citizens.

Background and Perspectives from the Literature  he Experience with Digital Capacities in Rural T Jamaican School One impact of the current crisis is that pre-pandemic disparities in education are exacerbated. This happens because it reduces existing educational opportunities for many, especially the most vulnerable “children, youth and adults” (p. 2) (The United Nations in Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and Beyond, 2022). In this same document, the UN describes the most vulnerable as “those living in poor or rural areas, girls, refugees, persons with disabilities and forcibly displaced persons” (p. 2). Those living in the rural poor areas are of special interest to this work because by virtue of their social and economic status, these students are less likely to have functional digital skills and the necessary supporting tools to develop them, a situation not foreign to Jamaica. For instance, Patterson (2020) reported that the then Minister of Education, Mr. Carl Samuda, pointed out: “31,000 children are unable to connect and participate in online lessons, as they lack internet coverage” (p.  4). Meanwhile, he also bemoans the fact that it is unacceptable that 30% of Jamaica’s students’ education are at risk on account of living in areas without Internet facility – rural areas. The irony of the situation of lack of device, Internet, or both to many children in rural Jamaica is stark, especially in light of Berkovich and Hassan’s (2022)) observation about school principals’ administrative and operational demands. They argue that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced education systems to pivot to remote schooling and online learning. In the face of this drastic change, the role of school principals has also shifted from face-to-face governance to digital operations. It follows, naturally, that if the students in these schools are at a disadvantage, other

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

81

stakeholders are also severely obstructed. School principals who will have to contend with the limitations of their personal capacities to generate solutions to the challenges that arise, coupled with a context of weak digital infrastructure are among those disadvantaged. The provision of leadership in this area of school administration and operation will be limited or nonexistent, hence weakening an already weak position. The evidence is unequivocal: “Most of the ‘digitally excluded’ live in rural areas. The digital have-nots faced daunting challenges. Among them are a lack of digital awareness and the skills required, poverty, illiteracy and limited access to electricity” (Barrett-Maitland, 2022, p. 5). At the level of schools, Maitland-Barrett, a Senior Lecturer at the School of Computing and Information Technology, University of Technology, Jamaica, also opined that some principals and other educational stakeholders had to traverse through gullies and allies and on bikes to ensure school learning materials were delivered to children during the pandemic. In the Western part of the island, for example, the experience is no different. In an interview, a school principal reported that approximately 40% of her students, in preparation for the primary exit profile are eliminated from teachers’ online efforts to heightened preparation, because of Internet and electricity-related issues (Miller, 2020). A year later, the foregoing problem was still a cause for concern. Daryl Vaz, the Minister of Science, Energy and Technology, shared that of the 980 government schools in Jamaica, in excess of 400 experience undesirable internet service while 220 are without access to the internet. Among the main reasons for this poor access to the internet is that the communities in which these schools are located lack the requisite communication infrastructure (Loop News, 2021); most of these schools are in rural areas. But the more frightening piece of information which the Minister shared was that “over 600 public schools or three-quarters of our student population, estimated to be more than 600,000 students, are impacted by poor quality or no internet service” (p. 5). Referencing prior research, it had done in Barbados, Antiqua and Barbuda, Trinidad and Tobago, and Jamaica on the subject matter CAPRI (2021) found that across these four Caribbean countries, the challenges to learning from home were worse for students in poor households than the more affluent. Of the challenges reported, the students in poor households experienced greater difficulties than nonpoor households (Insult to Injury: The Impact of COVID-19 on Vulnerable Persons and Businesses,” 2021). The extent to which these students from poor households are predominantly schooled in inner-city and rural schools will also call into scrutiny how much level of comfort school principals in these areas enjoy with how much digital leadership they are able to provide to students and teachers, alike. The foregoing set of circumstances, though not exhaustive, brings to the fore the reality that even if principals were at optimum regarding what they know about infusing digital technologies in the operational and administrative running of their schools, the level of their capacities would be insignificant because they neither had enough of the physical technological infrastructure nor the financial resources to operationalize them.

82

A.-M. Wilmot

 he Government of Jamaica Response to Digital Access T Dilemma in Rural Schools The government of Jamaica, through the Ministry of Education, Youth and Information, did respond to some of the digital challenges that schools faced, through training, increased digital infrastructure, and partnerships for funding digital initiatives, among others. Though the research did not yield any result making specific reference to rural schools as targets, it remains important to share some of them, with the understanding that rural schools also experienced some measure of benefits. The Ministry of Education shared information aimed at helping students and teachers, and among these are “Book Fusion, Edu-Focal, CHEETA, and Dropbox, which provided useful information and content to promote teaching and learning. In addition, printing services were also made available in each region to support the preparation of learning kits for students” (Blackman, 2022, p. 8). Blackman also disclosed that Internet access was supported through private-public partnerships in Barbados and Jamaica. To illustrate, in Jamaica, ReadyTV provided Internet access to 238 schools. At the same time, the Ministry of Education, Youth and Information ensured that 100 schools had Internet access in the parishes of Kingston, Manchester, St. James, and Trelawny (2022, para. 2). In addition to this roving Internet, hotspots were set up in the six education regions to facilitate emergency remote teaching. Apart from the initiatives Blackman outlined, above, the Ministry of Education also undertook other efforts to include partnerships with UNESCO, UNICEF, International Development Bank (IDB), and World Bank. Consequently, the Minister of Education in Jamaica highlighted that 2.2  billion has been spent on online/media platforms and other education-related resources (Haughton, 2022). Teachers and school principals received training in utilizing Google Suite learning management system (LMS), gift vouchers for tablets were made available for students, and loans for the purchase of laptop were made available to teachers. There were also partnerships with the two main Internet providers – Flow and Digicel to increase WiFi and other data used for access. Of interest is the fact that the Ministry of Education inked digital skills program deal with Microsoft to train over 150, 000 Jamaicans over a 5-year period. The training would be offered in four courses in order to make citizens job-ready (Agnus, 2021). Despite all these initiatives, there is no evidence from the reporting on the Government’s response that training specific to educational leadership and management tied to school principals’ digital leadership development has been a priority. This, even though the Ministry’s Upskilling and Reskilling for a Digital Society Initiative/position reinforces prioritizing developing citizens’ digital competencies “in support of quality education and as part of the National Strategic Plan, Vision 2030 [which] articulates the importance of having open access to ICTs and participation in a Knowledge-Based Society” (Reid, 2018; p. 9). A year after Agnus’ (2021) report, the ICT in Education Policy was developed in 2022 by the Ministry of Education, which represents a comprehensive national

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

83

trajectory. As part of its rationale, the Ministry purports that “the continued advances in the digital culture are creating steeper disadvantages for students and workers who are not digitally literate and can only be remedied with the full incorporation of ICTs at every level of the education system” (p. 11). In this light, “education through the use of ICT is central to preparing the population to meet the demands of this new and evolving environment, where knowledge and information are needed to navigate successfully” (p. 12). Successful implementation of the policy is expected to yield transformation in the teaching and learning process and development of the capacity for efficiency in the management and administration of the education system, among others. Goal number 3 is aimed at achieving the “efficient management and administration of the education system” (p. 24), which has as its main objective to “strengthen the management practices and procedures of the Ministry, its Agencies and the school system” (p. 24). This might account for the use of the word “training” 16 times; for example, “training for teacher-training institution” (p. 12), “industry specific training” (p. 20), “entrepreneurship training in ICT at all levels of the education system” (p. 25), and “reorientation curriculum training” (p. 50), which indicates some awareness of the need for training at the skill development level. Quite strikingly, the document demonstrates only tangential awareness of the pivotal role principals must play. None of the three strategies aimed at achieving goal number 3 addressed focus on training readiness for digital leadership for school leaders as an imperative. This is indicative of an underestimation of the integral role school leaders should play in these national initiatives, through empowerment for optimal function at the micro levels. A key manifestation of this would be their ability to provide implementing and monitoring leadership to navigate schools in the digital direction for the national impact the government desires. There were other initiatives as well, but the glaring absence of training opportunities for principals to develop and strengthen their digital capacities remains consistent. For instance, the National College of Educational Leadership (NCEL) through partnership with UNICEF developed a course in virtual instructional leadership, which could be easily characterized as the most far-reaching school leadership training initiative the country has undertaken, during this time. The course aimed to “help all public, private and independent school leaders of early childhood, primary and secondary institutions gain exposure to relevant technology and improve their knowledge of various tools, resources, platforms and practices of leading remotely” (para.1). In addition to the course material, NCEL also shared ideas through their digital series, of the same name. All these initiatives were geared at rural as well as other schools. From the discussion in this segment, there is no place for understating what Jamaica as a country has achieved with regards to trying to make more Internet available, providing devices and other material support, despite the huge gaps still existing. What has been persistently lacking is a clear position on the role school principals will play in the digital advancement of schools. The following segment rationalizes why this is a critical oversight.

84

A.-M. Wilmot

 heoretically Situating School Principals’ Leadership Role T in Digital Reimagination It is well established that within schools, in any kind of transformation that is to take place, stakeholders in and outside the school environment expect school principals and other members of their top leadership to be the compass. The present deficits in technology knowledge and dearth of leadership preparation associated with digital literateness for school environs can cause serious problems, as school leaders, parents, and wider social groups are now recognizing (Ribble & Miller, 2013). These scholars’ observation finds strong relevance in Jamaica’s education sector and leaves the question as to how such leadership may be achievable. Scholars like Aksal’s (2015) contend that they should turn to self-empowerment to be a compass and navigator for leading digital development in their school, making it cultural, especially relating to teaching and learning. While it is not unreasonable to expect school principals to engage in a certain amount of self-initiated professional development, this is not as easy. As Ruloff and Petko (2021) have argued, the road map on how to effect and maintain momentum in the change processes regarding school principals’ ability to integrate technology in education is unrefined, despite the unanimous consensus on the importance of them being able to do so notwithstanding the raft of policies and frameworks that are in existence. In delineating the boundaries of what this leadership should constitute, Ruloff and Petko (2021) explain that what leadership of digital transformation within schools involves extends far past mere integration of technologies, making the required adjustments to school curricula and the general culture of teaching and learning experiences aimed at preparing future generations for work and to function in society. Reflections on Vuorikari et al. (2022) and UNICEF’s Educators’ Digital Competency Framework Council Recommendations on Key Competences for life-­ long learning, developed by Siina (2022) reinforces Ruloff and Petko’s position. In addition, Cortellazzo et al. (2019) did a systematic review on the role of leadership in a digitalized world, and their conclusion reinforces the construct of digital leadership that Ruloff and Petko premised. Their position is that leaders need to invest in upskilling employees, in an effort to support and motivate them in the face of steep learning curves and highly cognitively demanding challenges, hence reinforcing school leaders as key actors in the role of nurturing a digital culture, as Ruloff and Petko (2021) imply. Cortellazzo et al. (2019) also added that the creation of relationships with numerous stakeholders with varying interests in different places, placing focus on processes that facilitate collaborations in multifaceted situations, while simultaneously ensuring ethical concerns remain unviolated, also is a crucial factor leaders must take into consideration as they lead digital transformation. The expectations of school leadership are conceivably similar since opportunities exist to incorporate all these elements in digital leadership. Together, these eight scholars highlight important administrative, leadership, and managerial functions and roles of school principals in digital transformation. Hence, the foregoing substantiates that reimagination of the digital landscape of educational institutions cannot be

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

85

successful if isolated from these institutions’ leadership. Therefore, school principals need to meet these requirements if they are to effectively lead the digitization of their schools. Given the considerable transformations that are expected in the nature of work resulting from fast-paced technological advances, it is essential that society pivot to augment available incentives even while it confronts and mitigates commensurate challenges (Rodriguez-Bustelo et  al., 2020). Rodriguez-Bustelo, Batista-Foguet, and Serlavós’ view is another reason any reconception of digital technology is intricately linked to schools and their leadership. Schools are a main socializing agent of society. The extent to which governments undertake certain types of transformation would require schools to be conduits for transformation to be sustainably engrained as a part of the way of life of current and future generations. It is not surprising, then, that this makes a strong case of reasons to elevate the call for school leadership to improve their digital capacities as part of their leading and management of educational institutions. Lessons learned by school principals and others in leadership positions who have had experiences transitioning the business of schools online, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, could be quite useful to this agenda. They could help us understand how much these stakeholders are able to utilize their digital capacities in leadership, for continued or increased effective functioning of teaching and learning, overall school governance, and national development.

 rief Overview of the National Effort Toward Developing B Jamaica’s Digital Competencies Though not much is in the formal literature about the evolution of Jamaica’s digital capacity as a nation, there is strong reference to the matter in the print and electronic media. This suggests that as a country, the importance of collective and individual digital capacities related to economic growth, personal development, source of income, and being digitally functionally literate is not lost on us. At the macro level, several initiatives are on the way, including partnership with International Development Bank (IDB) in 2018 to procure loans aimed at aimed at “putting digital transformation at the forefront of national development” (p. 8). The money the government borrowed would be used for the following purposes as the White Paper outlines: 1. “The security strengthening project  – designed to enhance the capacity of national security agencies by using data and technology to combat crime (valued at USD 20 million). 2. The national identification system (NIDS) – to provide a comprehensive and secure structure to capture and store personal identity information for citizens and residents, as well as help to streamline the implementation of new public policies while reducing the burdens of accessing public services for citizens (valued at USD 68 million).

86

A.-M. Wilmot

3. The strategic public-sector transformation program – a combination of critical digital transformation projects aimed at improving the overall efficiency and quality of public sector services (valued at USD160 million)” (Avasant-Digital-­ Competitiveness-Jamaica-Whitepaper, p. 7). There are other activities taking place at the national level, which help to define Jamaica’s position on digital competence of stakeholders. A case in point is the recent forum to celebrate World Telecommunication and Information Society Day where key stakeholders reaffirmed this position, citing different reasons. WiPay Jamaica Country Manager, Kibwe McGann, suggests data show that when Jamaica is compared to other Caribbean countries, pertaining to their digital readiness and digital acceptance rate, it is most advanced than other countries in the Caribbean (Piper, 2021). In advancing his push for the further development of digital capacities, Piper reported McGann’s contemplation that as a country, Jamaica has the need to deepen its focus beyond the theme of future readiness because citizens would be willing to learn and adapt as long as it can be proven that it is a new way of making money. In a context where the Caribbean and Latin America are lagging behind as noted earlier, Jamaica is making noticeable gains, but is it enough? While Piper (2021) reported that McGann situated Jamaica’s digital competence position in relation to the rest of the Caribbean and pushed it as a means of generating income, he also reported that Director of Regulatory Affairs at FLOW Jamaica, Charles Douglas reinforced its indispensability to our daily lives to include implications for doing business, normal operations, and functioning. Douglas, according to Piper (2021) related that the novel coronavirus pandemic has just sped up the direction in which Jamaica is headed because it does not have much of a choice. So, whether Jamaica is forced by evolving circumstances or a natural recognition of the need to improve its national digital capacities, it is facilitating creative thinking about it and taking some necessary steps and is making progress in this area.

Jamaica’s Progress: The Private Sector In June 2022, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade hosted a Jamaica 60 Diaspora Conference. Bartley (2022) reported that during that conference, Chief Digital Officer, Corporate Vice President and Microsoft US Global Technology Leader Jacky Wright praised Jamaica for advancing into a digital society. He named increased public WIFI access, more access to Internet, especially in rural communities, and the initiation of the NID process, referenced earlier as one of the three strategic focuses of the government, in justifying his praises. One month earlier, Smith (2022) shared that Dr. the Hon. Norman Dunn, Jamaica’s State Minister for Industry, Investment and Commerce, informed of a digital transformation program in partnership with European Union (EU) Delegation to Jamaica, and the Planning

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

87

Institute of Jamaica (PIOJ). The digital transformation support program, according to Dunn, has three core components  – “digitization to transition MSMEs from paper-based to electronic information, digitalization to transform MSME business processes from manual to electronic, and digital transformation to allow MSMEs to leverage technologies to build new business systems” (p. 2). The Prime Minister of Jamaica also added his voice to the chronicle of initiatives to widen the digital landscape, and during his speech at the Commonwealth Business Forum Heads of Government and Business Leaders’ Roundtable, he noted that “The Jamaican government is actively developing the human resource capacity in ICT. In collaborations with the private sector and international partners, we recently launched a coding academy and started the process of mainstreaming coding in the publicschool system. Despite this effort, the lack of technical skills remains prevalent and is an immediate constraint on our economic development” (para.10). While the segment is far from an exhaustive rendering of the state of digital competence and digital technology utilization, the foregoing creates reasonably perspectives of how the country is located. Nonetheless, there is still space for reflection on whether the achievements in the private sector are also evident in the public sector, especially in the education sector.

Jamaica’s Progress: The Educational Sector The intimation of the discussion so far is that schools will have a critical role to play in advancing the change narrative of the digital revolution by providing opportunities which facilitate the flourishing of requisite digital skills and competencies. This need brings school principals under close scrutiny. Undoubtedly, the need exists for them to be abreast of these ever-shifting technological demands as they seek to develop themselves and stakeholders for whom they have leadership responsibilities. This is to ensure that they expose them to the latest available advances and also to determine which is most contextually relevant. However, a pressing question is left unanswered, up to this point: How much of the impact of what is happening in the wider society translates to how school principals in Jamaica are shifting their practices to (1) accommodate their obligation to keep up with the rapidly evolving advances in information technology and (2) to determine the significance of the latest technological tools on the school communities? There is no denying that there is an uptick in activities in the private sector, and that this is inspiring a strong level of optimism. The Government of Jamaica crafted a Transforming Education Summit Commitment Statement (2022), which was a response to a summit convened by the United Nations. In the section titled “Track 4: Digital learning and transformation”, the Government of Jamaica made three important commitments, though not novel: 1. Ensuring higher levels of connectivity within schools and communities in both urban and rural areas to enable learning opportunities for all, significantly reducing the digital

88

A.-M. Wilmot divide and internet poverty, including the gender divide and fully incorporating children with disabilities. 2. Continuing to invest in the further expansion of the country’s national digital infrastructure and accelerating the digitization of all schools in both urban and rural areas. 3. Integrating information and communication technologies in education and practice for teachers and students (p. 2).

Despite the positive trends in the private sectors and the promises for the public sector, as reflected in the commitment above, particularly in education, there isn’t any strong indicator to demonstrate that similar efforts are being made to energize the education sector. This casts doubt on whether these current promises will be given serious thoughts by stakeholders. However, there are some noted improvements, as highlighted in the Reform of Education in Jamaica Report (2021). This report is the most recent comprehensive evaluation and analysis of the Jamaican education sector. Professor the Honourable Orlando Patterson chaired the committee which was commissioned by the Prime Minister of Jamaica, the Most Honourable Andrew Holness. Among the improvements the report notes were that according to research, Internet penetration in Jamaica shows that the majority of schools in the public education system have, since the COVID-19 pandemic, been given access to the Internet, with the Ministry of Education, Youth and Information (MOEYI) reporting that 997 of 1332 publicly funded infant, primary, and high schools have arrangements with at least one of the nation’s telecommunications providers. The report presents an acknowledgment of the importance of technology when it noted that “Educational facilities of the future must be built on a strong technological foundation to support asset management, student and teacher engagement and quality internet accessibility for all” (p. 37). However, it also notes that “the digital transformation of Jamaica’s education has been accelerated by the pandemic, with the sector being forced to leapfrog in adjusting to the new realities. Despite this pandemic induced jump, however, it has been clear from data on attendance, and assessments provided by the MoEYI, that thousands of students have been left behind” (p. 38). It is not far-fetched, then, to extrapolate that if the digital transformation was pushed because of the pandemic, and there being no specific comment from the Jamaican government, through the Ministry of Education Youth and Information about the progress of its promises, the pre-pandemic resolve regarding digital competencies in the education system might not have been that strong. This position is strengthened by the fact that the Commission also shared that it found that in terms of technology use in the education system and the digitization of processes, the Jamaican education system was lagging behind its peers, presumably in the Caribbean. This poses a stark contrast to the sorts of initiatives that are being implemented in the private sector and invites one to ponder regarding the unity of origins in terms of the guiding philosophy and planning intent for the country as a whole and how these will influence what will happen in the educational sector. This report, however, is not the only one to speak to the undesirable state of digital technology use. Seven years prior, a similar report, Task Force on Educational Reform, Jamaica, done in (2004), spoke to the need for schools to have increased

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

89

access to Internet as an urgent imperative. The report also emphasized other points related to digital technologies to plug existing deficits at that time. Among them are the use of technology to enhance the teaching-learning experiences of students, the exploration of technology for distance learning, and to equip students with ICT capabilities for entry into the world of work.

Methodology The project employed a qualitative research method and a semi-structured interview design to explore and describe the digital capacities of ten purposefully selected rural school principals in Jamaica. One central research question guided the data collection: How do rural school principals describe their digital capacities while working online? Six subsidiary questions emanated from this main question which facilitated a deeper probe of school principals’ understanding of the construct of digital technologies, their experiences using digital technology online, pre-pandemic and during the pandemic, the challenges they experienced online related to their digital capacities, how they solved these problems, their thoughts on the usefulness of the solutions for future, and how they perceived navigating the challenges online affect their leadership growth and development. Data for the interviews were collected using virtual sit-down interviews utilizing Zoom videoconferencing software, lasting 40–60  min. Each participant was assigned a pseudonym and assured that other confidentiality measures would be put in place to assure their anonymity, before the interview commenced. Interviews were subsequently recorded using Voice-recorder App, and then, each was subjected to a manual verbatim transcription generating thick, rich data in the ten transcript files more accessible for participants to conduct their validity checks. The subsidiary research questions guided the macro level of coding, as anticipated broad themes. These were later segmented into smaller units of information, representing the sub-themes, which facilitated deeper insights and more nuanced reporting of the findings. Because this was not a comparative study, school principals were drawn from a population of both primary and secondary schools from among the six school regions. The inclusion criteria required that the schools were located in any rural area, underfunded, and the principal had experience in school leadership prior to and during COVID-19 pandemic. They had a wealth of experience in school leadership ranging from a low of 5 years to a high of 20 years and were suitable positioned to speak to their experiences with digital technologies online.

90

A.-M. Wilmot

 indings: School Principals’ Experiences with Digital F Technologies – Understandings, Applications, Challenges, and Solutions  RQ1. Rural School Principals’ Understanding of Digital S Technologies and Digital Capacities Digital Technologies The findings revealed that school principals’ general conceptualization of digital technologies varied. Some saw it as those available resources used to enhance communication or to assist with ease of job functions. Few saw it in the broader context of increasing the overall output of educational achievements. Relating to the former position, Malique, for example, sees it as “Enhanced infrastructure that will facilitate communication remotely or otherwise.” Mark sees it as “Technological resources that are available to an educational institution to carry out its core functions.” This way he not only implicitly underscores the communicative value that Malique speaks to, but he extends to include all core functions, under which teaching and learning as the main function is subsumed. Some school principals offered a more focused rendition of their understanding of digital technology, which was specific to educational institutions. “Digital technology deals with various technological means of enhancing the delivery of overall improvement of teaching learning and administrative outputs in schools” (Paul). In extending his point beyond the immediate teaching learning environment, he cites these technologies  “as being able to assist in collecting and analyzing data to inform decision making for teaching and learning.” Others such as Fay support this understanding by sharing that digital technologies are “ICT related equipment and processes that allow the integration of cellphones, iPad, laptops, etc., into the teaching learning experiences to enhance them.” Digital Capacities On the other hand, digital capacities were mainly conceived of as what school principals could or should do with the available digital infrastructure and less about the digital skills and competencies the leaders, staff, and even students should possess to meaningfully impact teaching and learning experiences. Joseph shares his understanding of digital capacities to mean “Those tools and devices that you use to enhance your live as an individual… to carry out your roles and functions more effectively.” Marcus’ understanding was along similar lines: “Digital capacities is the digitizing process using computers and the software that are available, moving it away from an analogue way to make things [work tasks] flow easier.” So, their

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

91

understanding resonated with those technological resources that were tangible, rather than intangible. However, three of the ten school principals incorporated in their understanding the ability to utilize technology by referring to skills and competence as requisite factors, thus, with a stronger alignment to the intangible characteristics. In this light, Max sees digital capacities as “How much digital knowledge the school has or how prepared the school is to navigate what needs to be done using digital technology.” Mona’s response to this question supports Max’s. For her, digital capacities “Has to do with the ability to use the available technological resources in an educational institution to carry out its core functions.” Mary, though with no formal training in the area, unlike Max and Mona, seems to have offered the most comprehensive understanding of the concept. She described it as “The knowledge, skills and understanding of the usefulness of digital technologies and my ability to use it for my job functions.” This variation in understanding of digital technology and digital capacities was also mirrored in principals’ experiences using the technology.

 RQ2. Rural School Principals’ Experiences Utilizing Digital S Technologies Pre-pandemic School principals registered a gamut of pre-pandemic experiences related to their use of digital technologies, which ranged from “a major struggle,” “limited experience,” “just enough,” “well versed” to “being highly immersed.” Those who shared little to no involvement attributed their positions to a lack of digital infrastructure rather than a lack of desire. Except for four, all other principals reported using digital technologies for basic, routine work activities. However, the broad categories of utilization were for communication and administrative purposes, largely and for integration in instructional processes, minimally. Communication Communication was one of the popular ways in which school principals utilized digital technology, pre-pandemic, but this was done in fairly unsophisticated processes. Grace’s experiences were limited to mainly her telephone and her “Laptop to check and respond to Ministry’s email, because there was a WhatsApp group for the small number of parents.” Joseph also noted the use of Internet and intercom for “Communication purposes because learning platforms, etc., were not a part of the school structure.” Paul’s experiences resonated with Grace’s to the extent that he also “Used technology to communicate with parents in terms of sending out WhatsApp messages and invitations to different meetings.”

92

A.-M. Wilmot

Administrative Purposes Relating to administrative purposes, school principals differed in how they utilized the same. However, though all principals used it routinely to execute administrative functions such as “marking registers,” others, like Mark, had experiences that utilized more complex maneuvers. For instance, he was using “A school management system” and was “In the process of building out a more robust and comprehensive type prior to the pandemic.” Paul echoes the sentiments of “School management system, hosting a range of information for both teachers and students.” He elaborated that “Separate from biographic data and the generation of students’ reports, they also used the system to track students’ progress for data analysis.” The remaining school principals’ experiences were similar excepting, where Grace added her using it for “online banking” a use to which Marcus also admitted using but extending to “Other transactions with business places.” Fay was an anomaly in her pre-­ pandemic technology usage experiences because her experiences landed on the north and south of the technology use experience spectrum. She explains the following: I was coming from a private international Apple-based school where I was responsible for leading technological integration in another country. This included tech integration in the design of an international learning experience that would allow children to transition into and out of school in a more fluid way.

Having returned to Jamaica 2  years, prior to the pandemic, Fay describes her experiences: As a school leader in Jamaica, it feels as though I was stepping back in time. Integration of technology in education in Jamaica is so backwards, that I am bored to death. I am actually thinking of leaving the sector because I don’t feel challenged.

Malique has had formal training in educational technology and accordingly, it was not foreign to him. “It is something I utilize heavily,” he reflected, citing Microsoft programs, projectors, and mathematical software as examples of his experiences with using technology. Integration of Technology in Teaching and Learning An interesting theme emerged from the data that provided some insights about how school principals prioritized technological integration into teaching and learning, before the pandemic. Only two school principals made specific reference to integrating technology into teaching and learning processes. Malique recounted that his “Own engagement in facilitating discussions and teaching classes would have seen great integration of technology.” Fay shared the same enthusiasm noting that she walks “Around with a projector graphic in her handbag.” There were those who expressed the knowledge of the need and the desire to improve how they utilized digital technologies in their workspaces. Nonetheless, for various reasons, this did not materialize. Chief among those reasons that evolved from their conversation is

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

93

the limited or lack of physical digital infrastructure, because of the rural location or lack of human capacity on either the teachers’ or school principals, part.

 RQ3. Rural School Principals’ Experiences Utilizing Digital S Technologies During Pandemic and Their Capacity to Respond to Online Leadership Demands  evel of Preparedness to Utilize Technological Demands of Job During L COVID-19 Most schools in Jamaica have reengaged face-to-face teaching learning activities, including the ten schools that the school principals in this study lead. In this context, it was important to understand how their current work requires utilization of their digital capacities and whether what they know and can do is sufficient to respond to the online leadership demands of COVID-19. Eight of the ten school principals felt that their personal digital capacities were not enough to respond to the online leadership demands of COVID-19. Grace declared: “I was just not prepared at all in any way, shape or form. The fact that I am in the deep rural means that most of my communications was done personally. We did not have Wi-Fi and the most I did was emailing.” Paul and Mark described their position as one of insufficiency as well. For example, Mark explained: “No, what I know [about digital technology] was not sufficient; and, so, we had to jump in and for example tried to develop a SMS and learn along the way.” Mona describes her incapacity as “nerve racking” and causing her to feel “overwhelmed.” Nonetheless, some level of optimism and ownership emerged as she also expounded: “With continuous use, and trial and error I got better, not where I want to be but definitely better.” Joseph feels that his digital capacity was not enough but “It was an evolving thing” because as he progressed, he tried to apply what he learned. Some of the school principals expressed confidence in their personal capacities but lamented the lack of physical infrastructure which limited how much they were able to put to use their skills and competencies. Malique, for example, in response to the question asserted: “I can say for sure that based on the fact that technology was not new to me, as a school leader, it was not a problem moving into that level of engagement.” Mary was also confident in this regard by explaining: “I think that my capabilities in terms of knowledge and skills is sufficient as a leader because I am cognizant that anything more technical would require a lab tech or a Systems Administrator.” On the contrary, Fay’s explanation was diametrically opposed to all others since the level of demand for technological use is way below her expectations: What I am being asked to do right now is menial data entry on archaic spreadsheet, using archaic data processing tools that do not facilitate the kind of true technology integration I am used to. I am used to designing data bases that have dash boards where when you change one thing you see real live movement. When I send these things to the Ministry, I am being sent back an archaic spreadsheet where I have to manually be entering some of the data and it is just annoying.

94

A.-M. Wilmot

Online Technological Requirements of the Job During COVID-19 Regarding technological requirements of the current work environment, the school principals’ responses compared favorably to the three dominant themes that emerged from their responses to the probe of their pre-pandemic technological usage. These all fall under the operational and managerial functions of communication, administration, and integration in teaching and learning. For example, school principals noted they were now required to “Conduct meetings,” “Communicate with parents,” “Mark registers,” “Conduct online banking,” for those who had not done so prior, “Make classroom visits” and “Conduct evaluations.” There were some notable observations. Every school principal now utilized technology as part of their classroom experience mainly through Zoom or the government-­mandated Google Classroom; and, four school principals, apart from those who had them pre-pandemic, were now utilizing learning management systems. Another notable observation is that with the introduction of online learning and management systems, two school principals contemplated accountability-­ related challenges and sought further technological solutions to them. For example, Mark noted that “there were significant institutional cultural challenges that could negatively impact the implementation of these programs in the shortest possible times. For instance, teachers had major challenges with transitioning from manual registers to marking them online” so he had to work with the developer to implement a system which ensured accountability for that matter. Paul also faced a similar challenge for which he created a virtual register for teachers. Marcus’ views validate those of Mark and Paul when he explained the following: Some members of staff wanted the pandemic [so] if you did not monitor, they would take advantage of it to the detriment of the students. I got in touch with my SMS provider to ask him what was available because I know from working with him that there were some things [technologies] available so he told me that he had some LMS Learning Management System that was able to bring things together and so I started with that.

 RQ4. Online Personal Digital Capacity Challenges Principals S Encountered and They Resolved Them Personal Challenges and Solutions Several challenges emerged from the school principals’ responses which typically fell into two categories – those directly related to their personal digital capacities and those presented by little or lack of access to digital technologies or services that enable them. In respect to the former, unfamiliarity with the dominant medium of national instruction (Zoom or Google Suite, JAM Board, or learning management system – LMS) was among the most popular personal technological deficit. One school principal mentioned a coupling of her technological ineptitude with some degree of leadership incompetence resulting in what she describes as “Managerial Anxiety.” To manage this, she journaled and practiced self-affirming talks. Max was clear in her position of challenge: “I am digitally illiterate. I had never used Zoom.

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

95

It was so challenging, so, I was afraid to ask people for help for them to know that I am digitally backward.” Five of the ten school principals took the virtual instructional leadership course as a means of addressing their own deficiencies. Others collaborated with colleagues to assist, while others depended on teachers or support staff with high competencies. One anomaly was where a principal contacted Zoom South America to negotiate a two-week special personal intervention. Few had challenges with the strategies they would employ to ensure accountability. Paul expressed the need to ensure that “Teachers were teaching and students were learning” as a major challenge and developed a virtual register for teachers and “Flexi-modality requiring some teachers to work at schools and the more competent ones at home.” Another issue of accountability which Fay and one other principal shared was how to monitor teachers to ensure they were not connected to more than one device under unfavorable access conditions. “Creating a network system that allow vouchers to be created with an individual device as a voucher cannot be shared with another device so we can limit again how many are on the system with multiple devices, unconcerned with teaching and learning” was a solution Fay applied to solve this problem. Challenges with Access and Devices Based on the findings, there were very deep levels of frustration on account of a lack of access to WIFI or data and or little to no device for access. Though all school principals reported this, Fay and Malique were the most strident in expressing their concerns. They possess digital competencies but could not operationalize what they know because the physical infrastructure was “Archaic and stupid,” according to Fay. She recounted: “I don’t have fiber optic. I don’t have high speed internet. I don’t have sufficient working computers within the lab spaces.” Consequently, she reported “Spending heavily” to upgrade lab facilities and like others, sought partnerships with the private sector and Alumni Associations to get devices into the hands of students and teachers. Another solution to the challenges of access is the government of Jamaica’s partnerships with Internet service providers in some schools. There were also instances where the government provided e-books but no device on which to upload them for students’ use.

 RQ5. School Principals’ Perception of How the Solutions S to the Problem They Encountered May Be Applicable to the Future The research also sought to ascertain school principals’ thoughts on how the resolution to the problems they identified may be carried forward to future instances of similar or different occurrences. School principals, largely, felt that their personal digital capacities and physical infrastructure of different types needed the most urgent attention.

96

A.-M. Wilmot

Future Applicability of Personal Digital Capacities Relating Responding to the matter of personal digital capacities, Mark’s believe that “fundamentally, all school principals should be exposed to different aspects of crisis management, hereon” was unanimous among principals. Others felt that the crisis training should be augmented by more “Rigorous training in software and empowerment to write policies and implement them in their contexts.” This opinion found some validity in Max’s belief that “COVID-19 highlighted, in a significant way, the incompetence of some leaders with their use of technology, especially in teaching and learning.” Another point related to digital capacities has to do with insufficient knowledge of how to hold employees accountable in the digital space. Therefore, Mona issues the caution that “Central Administration needs to build the ability to hold staff more accountable.” But there was a sense that the principals themselves may also need to hold themselves accountable in some cases: “I need to keep abreast of new development and continue using them, even though we are back face to face.” Mary also reasoned: “Everything we used in Covid-19 is relevant, applicable and can be used in the future, so we should keep them all.” She commented that it was unfortunate that principals have abandoned some of the technological strategies they used, during the peak of COVID-19. Marcus’ perspective spotlights one reason for that unfortunate status: “We cannot fall back because I think other countries have moved ahead and are moving at a rapid pace.” Future Applicability of Physical Digital Capacities All study participants had issues with the physical infrastructure of their schools and felt that solutions that were implemented during the peak of the pandemic should remain and or be improved upon. The rurality of the schools aside, resources, unreliability of Internet when present or its total absence, and insufficient labs and devices were challenges they listed. Mark was very direct when noting the solutions he wants to be continued. He mentioned the following: The need exists to put more resources in the hands of underserved and Inner-city schools, because other crises will come. There is a need to bolster the technological capacities of these [rural] institutions that are lagging behind our traditional counterparts because of lack of resources.

Joseph underscored but identified who should undertake this task: “The Ministry of Education needs to ensure that they build on has been done for rural and other under-resourced schools.” Fay had a comparable response in saying that “Because we [Jamaicans] are lagging behind where other jurisdictions are, we are playing catchup, so all improvements should be kept and expanded on and others implemented as well.”

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

97

 RQ6. School Principals’ Navigation of Online Challenges S and Their Leadership Growth and Development The findings reveal that of the ten school principals, only two felt that the process of navigating the online challenges they face was not beneficial to their leadership growth and experience. Table 5.1 demonstrates the areas of perceived growth. As the table shows, there were a range of perspectives related to how school principals felt their leadership growth and development were affected by the process of navigating the online challenges they encountered. Many came out of the process experiencing confidence and optimism regarding their personal capacities, with only two reporting no improvement on account of the fact that the challenges did not push the boundaries of what they already knew or that physical digital infrastructural limitations imposed on what they could have done otherwise.

Discussion of Findings and Their Implications I was interested in understanding rural school principals’ experiences with their digital capacities before and during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The research questions served as the broad thematic frames, with sub-themes that emerged under each theme. These themes speak to their understanding of digital technologies, how school principals’ work required the use of digital technology, pre-pandemic and during-pandemic, the challenges they encountered online, attributable to their digital capacities, the strategies they utilized in solving these problems and how they felt their leadership work benefitted from the process of negotiating the challenges online. While some participants’ definitions of digital technologies were more inclusive than others, taken as a whole, the various definitions are not fully representative of the definitions provided by Nascimbeni and Vosloo (2019), suggesting that there is a deficit in the understanding of the fundamentals of the construct. Nevertheless, participants found a central commonality related to the function of digital technology and its role in communication, a position strongly reinforced in the literature (Siina, 2022; Vuorikari et  al., 2022). However, the absence of school principals’ reference to new knowledge construction, synthesis of digital resources and technology’s use as a reflective process, and that only few connected it as important to overall educational achievement further reinforce the existence of critical gaps in their collective understanding of the concept. This cannot sufficiently atone for the common understanding they share. This insufficiency in understanding of the concept  will no doubt pose a challenge to how they plan for and implement digital technology initiatives in their schools. Ilomäki et al. (2011) claim that the process is evolutionary and that the terms are sometimes used interchangeably. While this may be true, left as is, it would imply that the reimagination of technology in education nationally, and by extension in schools, must not require a basic reckoning with the

98

A.-M. Wilmot

Table 5.1  Areas of school principals’ growth and development School principals’ pseudonym Joseph

Mark

Malique

Paul

Marcus

Grace

Fay

Max

Areas of leadership growth and development Became a better listener, sharpened problem-solving skills, and provided greater collaborative opportunities Led to a reexamination of his leadership practices, developed a deeper appreciation for supervisees’ skills and talents, and the need for further personal development Deepened awareness of the technological requirements of a school principal, better leader in terms of flexibility

Sample supporting quotes “In terms of my competence as a leader, I would have grown a lot. I actually perused the virtual instructional course that gave me a much broader perspective on leading online.” “Certainly, it recognizes the need to build my capacities and tech abilities. I had to pivot to become more distributive in my leadership approach.”

“As a leader, I now understand that there is greater need for continuous training and development. This has taught me that principals must have a good grasp of technology to operate effectively now and moving forward.” “It helps me to communicate better and more Improvement in communication, pro-activeness, effectively with not only my team members, but parents, students and community members … and stakeholder relationship and it promotes a level of proactiveness.” Improvement in technological “It has impacted my own learning and and policy writing skills development because of the training I did in using some of the software. I have also developed in terms of my policy writing skills.” Perceives significant growth in “I no longer used delays tactics as a leader, to get people in the problem-solving mode because the area of personal with Covid you had to face things head-on.” I development and some came out of the experience stronger, being a technology usage better leader and knowing that I will never stop learning and that uncertainties will always be a part of life.” “I am not growing and that’s why I am thinking Experienced no growth and that she has been pushed back of leaving. As a professional, I have regressed so far coming back to lead a school in Jamaica in time that it is painful.” “I am now a pimp and hustler and not the instructional leader being able to truly utilize what technology can do for these children to create a 21st century classroom.” “My leadership growth and development has Better use of technology and better understanding of his and been influenced very greatly by the use of technology in the sense that it helps me to colleagues’ competencies understand better my own strengths and weaknesses and also the strengths and weaknesses of those I supervise as well as the parents and students.” (continued)

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

99

Table 5.1 (continued) School principals’ pseudonym Mona

Mary

Areas of leadership growth and development More technologically competent and confident and closer relations to principal colleagues

Nothing new added to growth and development

Sample supporting quotes “I was awarded a virtual instructional leadership certificate from NCEL and that has given me lots of confidence. I am also becoming more knowledgeable and able to network closely with other local and international principals to see their best practices.” “I see technology as a tool to increase my available resources so I would not say it has impacted my leadership ability.”

ontological and epistemological rendering of the basic concept. This need must be fulfilled so that local philosophies can be developed and refined. Pre-pandemic, school principals’ utilization of digital technologies was located at all points of the digital competency continuum, and routine administrative roles and functions were the nexus of use. The intimation here is that prior to the pandemic, rural school principals were sufficiently aware of the need for technological integration into school activities, including teaching and learning, but usage was anemic. This gives credence, at the level of schools, to the claim in the Avasant-­ Digital-­Competitiveness-Jamaica White Paper (2019) that though the Caribbean is making some strides, it is lagging behind. With the exception of two, a lack of, or insufficient technological integration was dominant among those principals who claimed they had training in the field. Therefore, how much they know did not translate to much teaching and learning value. One may surmise, on this basis, an explicit suggestion that academic qualification in and of itself does not guarantee the application of digital principles. The pre-pandemic dereliction of responsibility to better incorporate digital technology to ensure students are kept abreast of technological changes runs in contradiction to Cortellazzo et al. (2019) admonition that school principals are key actors in nurturing a digital culture. Most rural school principals, at this time, are clearly unable to adapt, because available levels of competence will not facilitate communicating about such vision, activating human resources, provision of instructional leadership in the area, and prioritization of required resources, if available, without deep emersion in the discipline. Despite the limited personal capacities, evidenced by the eight teachers who declared their unpreparedness for the technological undertaking, during the pandemic, there was much more urgency to actualize the implementation of digital technologies in schools’ activities, especially as the main teaching and learning pathway. Before the pandemic, there were no mandatory requirements for instructional integration, unlike after where school principals were responding to a government mandate. This position of reactionary response mimics the national posture and seamlessly aligns with Piper’s (2021) report where Charles Douglas remarked that the pandemic has amplified the technological direction in which Jamaica is headed because it does not have any choice. Douglas’ pronouncement is striking for

100

A.-M. Wilmot

several reasons. Implicit in the statement is the rich reactiveness in approach, at least in this matter, at the national level, which seems historic. Ironically, such reactiveness shows that when governments are sufficiently intentional  and  invest the will and resources, the potential exists for significant gains. Driving technology from that macro vantage point should be no different. Relating to the declared unpreparedness, above, educational stakeholders are pressed to ponder that Jamaica’s ability to participate in any reimagination exercise is stymied and in need of swift attention. Consistent with Ruloff and Petko’s (2021) advice that digital transformation in schools requires much more than the integration of technology, a reimagination of technology requires a broad and solid foundation. From this foundation,  school principals can tailor a suite of contextualized instructions, which demonstrate sensitivity to differentiated factors in order to optimize learning and to keep affected employees interested and motivated. Like school principals in international and regional jurisdictions, these school principals encountered a raft of challenges, chief among which was their personal digital technology insufficiencies and lack of or limited digital infrastructure, reinforcing the related experiences accounted for in the literature (Barrett-Maitland, 2022; Miller, 2020 & Patterson, 2020). The fact that all school principals sought intervention to strengthen their skills was an act of personal agency on their part. It indicates that on a personal level, a certain amount of motivation and zeal exists on which institutions, such as the National College for Educational Leadership (NCEL), with training opportunities and/or responsibilities must capitalize. It also indicates that principals are willing to work where they are sufficiently convicted of the implications of the initiatives and cements one of the arguments in this paper that strong intentionality in training school principals to provide digital leadership is paramount. There is bolstered by their disposition of willingness to learn and to apply what is already known, though some have already expressed utter frustrations with the various limitations. Weak planning, implementation, and management on the part of the Ministry of Education can derail this enthusiasm and exacerbate existing frustrations. Nonetheless, any contemplation of capitalizing on the existing state of readiness to learn and implement of school principals must be accompanied by provision of the requisite digital infrastructure to augment targeted digital leadership training support. These elements of the support mechanism will optimize their abilities to confidently approach reimagination efforts in developing, applying, and sharing digital knowledge and communication (Siina, 2022) about it. The fact that school principals are supportive of keeping the digital technological gains and resulting instructional and administrative practices of the pandemic period for future application is an excellent practical and philosophical position to take. This, coupled with the fact that most of them have reported some sort of value added to their leadership and personal development could suggest that they are psychologically accessible to want to struggle for a cause they have tested and proven. The two who felt they gained nothing from negotiating the online struggles the pandemic presented, and others like them in the system, are an interesting subset of resources to initiate or strengthen collaborative digital peer-training opportunities.

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

101

Notwithstanding, school principals’ new found feelings of confidence and improved use in technology, the Ministry of Education still has much work to do, since those are base layers of competencies and the need exists for school principals to be brought up to speed with both their digital awareness, digital competence, and leadership. Failure in this regard, especially in rural areas that are less economically progressive, will not favor the country catching up with, or pulling ahead of their more technologically advanced counterparts. Thus, thwarting any desire the country may have to further integrate technology in education and ensuring it becomes a more enduring pillar of Jamaica’s educational infrastructure.

 eliberating Reimagination of Technology in Educational D Leadership – Directions, Re-directions, and Conclusions There is no doubt that the ability of most of the participants in this study to effectively reimagine digitization of their schools and lead that charge is severely compromised, although not so without hope  and optimism. While there might be a compelling argument that principals have a responsibility to identify possible gaps in their technological leadership readiness and fix them, that cannot be reliably achieved without an understanding of the grand narrative of the national digital technology trajectory. Therefore, at  the Central Government level, Ministry of Education and Information must first offer principals an empowerment pathway. One highly recommended position is for the Ministry of Education and Information (MOE&I) to reflect on their inventory of digital leadership needs intervention and reposition principals to receive specialized training in digital leadership. Training is important for several reasons. Firstly, it is crucial to assist principals to secure the requisite mental shifts, acquire technical knowledge, navigate pedagogical refocus, evaluate needs assessments, and help all school principals make relevant contextual decisions. Ilomäki et al. (2011) advise that the key skills and competencies [school principals will need to develop] indicate the utilization of awareness, intellectual and real-world skills, as well as cultural and behavioral aspects. Secondly, it will ensure that the national goals are appropriately interpreted at the micro levels in schools, which demonstrates sensitivity to the needs of specific contexts. Thirdly, this training will, among other things, also assist in developing the culture of digital excellence the country requires for its citizens and its national development. This will be a difficult task to achieve without school leadership valuing and pushing this mission. Partner institution possibilities for this initiative could include the National College for Educational Leadership (NCEL), Jamaica Teaching Council (JTC), and the National Council on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (NCTVET). The recommended digital leadership training is  not the panacea to the digital challenges that Jamaica faces because the theoretical framework must have a practical underpinning for effectiveness. Rural, inner-city, and some schools in other

102

A.-M. Wilmot

categories are woefully ill-equipped with the needed physical infrastructure and so continue to wrestle with this kind of lack of support. Government should redirect some of its financial resources to outfit schools with broadband, high-speed Internet, appropriate computers, gadgets and other necessary material, implementation oversight, and monitoring support to amplify its national digitization efforts, including training for principals. In so doing, that will put school principals in a better position to execute their leadership and administrative functions for greater student outcomes in this regard. While the Central Ministry is expected to take a significant chunk of the financial and training burden of digitizing schools, there is tremendous value in aggressively pursuing partnership support for financial and physical resources to plug the digital divide, especially for school principals of rural schools. Wilmot (2021) earlier made the push for school/community partnerships in Jamaica and advanced the argument that educational institutions must look outside themselves and immediate stakeholders for support for their schools because, by themselves, it will be arduous to honor their various mandates to society. This way partnerships at both the level of schools and nationally could yield excellent combined rewards. There are existing policy and frameworks in Jamaica regarding the digitization of schools – to support teaching and learning – other public sectors, and the private sector. Notwithstanding, actualizing this initiative would also require that the MOE&I revisit their ICT in Education Policy (2022), Upskilling and Reskilling for a Digital Society (2018), the National Strategic Plan – Vision 2030, and other relevant policy initiatives, to reshape their policy positions. This re-shaping would consider greater articulation among all these policies. Greater articulation would assist in several ways, for example, centring the roles of schools and their leaders in the effort, clarifying terms of engagement for partners who will assist training efforts, and providing other types of support. Further research, through a national research agenda, would be necessary to ascertain what digital leadership needs exists, how principals feel they could be helped in this regard, and to better inform policy initiatives, already in existence or to develop new ones. School principals’ position in the national reimagination of technology in educational leadership does not have to remain a figment of Jamaica’s imagination. The lessons learned and insights gained from the exploration of school principals’ experiences with their digital capacities are potent. Jamaica educational sector has taken some critical steps and has reaped some positive gains which need to be expanded and nurtured, particularly in rural schools. This is important to improve equitable educational teaching learning experiences which privilege access and are affordable and sufficiently flexible to meet the needs of rural students as well as those in urban areas, while also helping the development of our national goals. The above implementation strategies, policy, and research directions are important to reimagining a relevant, reliable, and practical technological focus for the sector to align the reality of what is being said and done regarding digital technologies with the lived experiences of school leadership functionaries.

5  Rural School Leadership and Digital Technologies: Understandings, Applications…

103

References Agnus, G.  L. (2021, July 31). Over 150,000 Jamaicans to benefit from 5-year digital skills Programme. Jamaica Information Service. https://jis.gov.jm/over-­150000-­jamaicans-­to-­ benefit-­from-­5-­year-­digital-­skills-­programme/ Aksal, F. A. (2015). Are headmasters digital leaders in school culture? Education and Science, 40(182), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4534 Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič, N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective. Sustainability, 12(20), 8438. Barrett-Maitland, N. (2022, September 9). Development hinges on reducing digital divide. The Gleaner. https://jamaica-­gleaner.com/article/commentary/20220909/nadine-­barrett-­ maitland-­development-­hinges-­reducing-­digital-­divide Bartley, R. (2022, June 17). Jamaica Lauded For Progress In Digital Transformation. Jamaica Information Service. https://jis.gov.jm/jamaica-­lauded-­for-­progress-­in-­digital-­transformation/ Berkovich, I., & Hassan, T. (2022). Principals’ digital instructional leadership during the pandemic: Impact on teachers’ intrinsic motivation and students’ learning. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221113411 Blackman, S. N. J. (2022). The impact of Covid-19 on education equity: A view from Barbados and Jamaica. Prospects, 51, 611–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-­021-­09568-­4 Caribbean Policy Research Institute. (2021). TIME OUT The Impact of COVID-19 on Education. (CAPRI) Kingston, Jamaica. https://www.capricaribbean.org/sites/default/files/public/documents/report/time_out_the_impact_of_covid_on_education.pdf Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01938 European Commission. (n.d.). DigComp framework. The definition of digital competence. (EU Science Hub). https://joint-­research-­centre.ec.europa.eu/digcomp/digcomp-­framework_en Haughton, C. (April, 2022). Govt invested over $4b to deal with COVID-19 impact on education, Jamaica Observer. https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/latest-news/ govt-invested-over-4b-to-deal-with-covid-19-impact-on-education/ Ilomäki, L., Kantosalo, A., & Lakkala, M. (2011). What is digital competence? Linked portal. European Schoolnet (EUN), 1–12. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/154423/ Ilom_ki_etal_2011_What_is_digital_competence.pdf Jamaica  – Forward to the Digital Age. (2019). Digital competitiveness radar view perspective. [White paper]. Global Equations. https://www.globalequations.com/wp-­content/ uploads/2019/11/Avasant-­Digital-­Competitiveness-­Jamaica-­Whitepaper.pdf Jamaica_National Statement of Commitment. (2022). We are championing the transformation of education to advance our Country’s sustainable development prospects (Transforming education summit: Commitment statement). Government of Jamaica Transforming Education Summit. https://transformingeducationsummit.sdg4education2030.org/system/files/2022-­09/ Jamaica_National%20Statement%20of%20Commitment.pdf Loop News. (2021, September 29). Nearly two-thirds of public schools are without reliable internet. The Loop News. https://jamaica.loopnews.com/content/nearly-­two-­thirds-­ public-­schools-­are-­without-­reliable-­internet Miller, B. (2020, April 24). Rural students not being treated equally  – Casserly calls for more internet access in rural Hanover. Jamaica Gleaner. https://jamaica-­gleaner.com/article/ news/20200424/rural-­students-­not-­being-­treated-­equally-­casserly-­calls-­more-­internet-­access Ministry of Education & Youth. (2022). ICT: Transforming lives, empowering citizens and enabling national development. (ICT in Education Policy). Government of Jamaica, Ministry of Education and Youth. https://moey.gov.jm/wp-­content/uploads/2022/07/ICT-­in-­Education-­ Policy-­Jamaica-­Ministry-­of-­Education-­and-­Youth-­2022.pdf

104

A.-M. Wilmot

Nascimbeni and Vosloo. (2019). Digital literacy for children: Exploring definitions and frameworks. UNICEF. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fabio-­Nascimbeni-­2/publication/344751370_Digital_literacy_for_children_exploring_definitions_and_frameworks/ links/5f8db53d458515b7cf8bb18e/Digital-­literacy-­for-­children-­exploring-­definitions-­and-­ frameworks.pdf Our Today. (2022). Andrew Holness | Building digital capacity is the way forward for middle-­ income Commonwealth states. https://our.today/andrew-­holness-­building-­digital-­capacity-­is-­ the-­way-­forward-­for-­middle-­income-­commonwealth-­states/ Patterson, C. (2020). 238 Schools in remote areas to be provided with internet access. Jamaica Information Service. https://jis.gov.jm/238-­schools-­in-­remote-­areas-­to-­be-­provided-­with-­internet-­access Piper, C. (2021, May 17). Jamaica on right path to digital transformation. Jamaica Observer. https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/jamaica-­on-­right-­path-­to-­digital-­transformation/ Reid, R. (2018). Upskilling and reskilling for a digital society. Ministry of Education Youth & Information. https://www.jncb.com/digitalsymposium/presentations/Upskilling%20and%20 Reskilling%20for%20a%20Digital%20Society%20-­Senator%20Ruel%20Reid.pdf Ribble, M., & Miller, T. N. (2013). Educational leadership in an online world: Connecting students to technology responsibility, safely, and ethically. Abstract. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(1), 137–145. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1011379.pdf Rodriguez-Bustelo, C., Batista-Foguet, J.  M., & Serlavós, R. (2020). Debating the future of work: The perception and reaction of the Spanish workforce to digitization and automation technologies. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ fpsyg.2020.01965/full. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01965 Ruloff, M., & Petko, D. (2021). School principals’ educational goals and leadership styles for digital transformation: Results from case studies in upper secondary schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2021.2014979 Smith, A.. (2022, May 19). Digital Transformation Coming For MSMEs. Jamaica Information Service. https://jis.gov.jm/digital-­transformation-­coming-­for-­msmes/. UNESCO International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training. (n.d.). Digital competence frameworks for teachers, learners and citizens. https://unevoc.unesco.org/ home/Digital+Competence+Frameworks UNICEF. (2021). UNICEF and National College for educational leadership (NCEL) partner to help school leaders deliver remote learning during the pandemic. (Case study: Virtual Instructional Leadership). https://www.unicef.org/jamaica/reports/ case-­study-­virtual-­instructional-­leadership UNICEF. (2022). Educators’ digital competency framework. UNICEF Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia. https://www.unicef.org/eca/media/24526/file/Educators'%20Digital%20 Competence%20Framework.pdf United Nations [UN]. (2022). Policy brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. https://www. un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-­content/uploads/sites/22/2020/08/sg_policy_brief_ covid­19_and_education_august_2020.pdf Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens – With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC128415 Wilmot, A.-M. (2021). University-school partnerships: Realities and possibilities in the Jamaican experience. In P. T. Chandler & L. Barron (Eds.), Rethinking school-university partnerships: A new way forward. Information Age Publishing.

Chapter 6

School Principals as Agents on the Path to the Digitization of Greek Schools: Lessons Learned from the Pandemic Angeliki Lazaridou

and Vasiliki Polymeropoulou

Abstract  Never before in education has there been such an abrupt and forceful change in the operation of schools around the globe. The embrace of digital technologies necessary for the continuation of teaching and learning was the only option during the pandemic crisis. Greek schools’ use of digital platforms to facilitate and continue the educational process took place within a matter of days and has since changed the way teaching and learning are perceived by teachers and students alike. The impact of these changes has had a lasting effect on all parties involved and has since sparked a number of studies. Among those, this chapter is sought to explore Greek school principals’ role in employing digital technologies to support instruction during the lockdown. Teachers and school principals shared their experiences and reflections on how school principals facilitated and supported instruction through the use of digital technologies during lockdown, how they perceive their newly established role as agents to the path of schools’ digital transformation, and how this experience has affected their leadership both during crisis and beyond.

Introduction When, more than 2 years ago, the world was shaken by the unprecedented coronavirus pandemic, school systems were among the first organizations to be deeply affected – primarily by the closures needed as the virus entered communities and countries. The World Bank (2020) and UNESCO (2020) have reported that during the COVID-19 crisis, over 190 countries were forced to close and, as a result, 90% of students and over 60 million teachers around the world had to switch to online

A. Lazaridou (*) · V. Polymeropoulou University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. Kafa, N. Eteokleous (eds.), The Power of Technology in School Leadership during COVID-19, Studies in Educational Leadership 26, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51575-0_6

105

106

A. Lazaridou and V. Polymeropoulou

learning (Gonzales et al., 2022). With these unusual circumstances, school constituents (teachers, students, and parents) looked to their school principals to quickly implement remote learning processes and to provide valuable support for all for a very long time. Bolman and Deal (2017) state that “crises are an acid test of leadership,” and school principals must be able to remain focused and make the best use they can of the things they can control (Prothero, 2021). It is particularly during crises that leadership becomes even more meaningful and critical. Harris (2020) has observed that “COVID-19 has dramatically changed conceptions of leadership and leadership practices. While principals are still leading their schools … they are leading from their laptop. They are now remote leaders” (p. 1). As school principals transitioned to remote schooling, their work hours went beyond the regular school schedule, and they struggled to keep up with the constantly changing information about health-related strategies and procedures for ensuring school safety. Despite the constant chaos and increasing demands, school principals were still required to ensure that the educational process carried out smoothly. Such challenges compelled much thought about how to reconceptualize schools and school leadership for a post-COVID-19 era (Zhao, 2020). Given this context, it is well worth investigating the role of school principals, in order to see if these unprecedented conditions led them to adjust their administrative and leadership skills in order to fit their new role as e-leaders.

 hallenges of the School Principalship During the COVID-19 C Crisis: Transitioning from Leadership to E-leadership What the Literature Says For many years, academic communities have been focusing on the role of school principals to find the leadership styles that best fit various circumstances (Leithwood et  al., 2020). Although their research has produced an abundance of leadership theories and models related to school contexts, the emergence of the pandemic COVID-19 crisis has altered the way school principals see their role, questioning, to a degree, the established conceptions of leadership and its implementation (Harris, 2020). Although the main mission of a school principal continued to be administration-­leadership, this function came to be done in a different way, that is, electronically and remotely. Clearly, the pandemic conditions required a rapid adaptation by the school principals, in particular, that they were forced to adopt new skills required by new challenges (Harris, 2020; Zhao, 2020). Research carried out during the pandemic showed that school principals had to address issues related to: (a) organizing and preparing for online education, (b) facilitating access to computers, the Internet, and digital resources (Chaseling et al., 2020), (c) procuring funds (Rasmitadila et al., 2020) to ensure easy accessibility for

6  School Principals as Agents on the Path to the Digitization of Greek Schools…

107

teachers and students, (d) guiding the learning process (Kaden, 2020), and (e) implementing health protocols to prevent the virus transmission. School principals were also pressed to ensure the well-being of all students and teachers (Thornton, 2021) through various means of communication and collaboration. An important dimension of the principal’s role that emerged from this line of research was safeguarding accessibility for “vulnerable” students (Reimers & Schleicher, 2020) including their participation in the online learning process. The massive switch to online teaching and learning exposed a serious deficiency in school systems around the globe: students limited or no access to technology to support their learning. As Giannini, UNESCO’s Assistant Director-General for Education, said, “Nearly 830 million learners globally do not have access to a computer, while more than 40% have no internet access at home” (Pittman et al., 2021). To address those challenges, school principals adopted a more distributed and collaborative leadership style (Azorìn, 2020; Beauchamp et  al., 2021; Thornton, 2021). This way of responding to extraordinary events has been shown to be particularly effective according to Harris (2020), who argues that although it was out of necessity rather than choice, school principals implemented this distributed and networked leadership style, and thus a new chapter in educational leadership has emerged. This way of leadership is mainly based on interactions among all parties that support the development of their capacities through their collective commitment and mobilization. In many cases, school principals did not realize (or had not had time to realize) that their leadership style had changed, but, as Harris (2020) points out, their practices were now different. As a result of this shift, communication networks were created by utilizing technology in a variety of ways and means, and collaboration networks with teachers, students, parents, and the wider community were established to help vulnerable students (Beauchamp et al., 2021; Chaseling et al., 2020; Harris, 2020; Moss et al., 2020; Reimers & Schleicher, 2020). School principals became more supportive and emotional, operating more with empathy as they had to manage sensitive personal data of students, teachers, and parents. Moreover, they had to overcome substantial technological problems so that schools could respond satisfactorily to the demands of remote teaching and learning. At the same time, they were confronted with a lack of digital skills on the part of teachers, which they sought to overcome by strengthening the cooperation between them and by providing them with continuous support and motivation to respond adequately to the new demands of teaching (Karakose et al., 2021). The extensive and mandatory exposure of school principals to technology turns them into e-leaders. The literature indicates that e-leaders are more flexible, adaptable, and willing to acquire new knowledge and skills (Karakose et al., 2021), which, in turn, have them acting as driving forces that influence others and bring about changes in school cultures (Sheninger, 2019). School principals who are immersed in a digital learning environment also view technology as a means to improving the life and working conditions of schools as a whole (Zhong, 2017).

108

A. Lazaridou and V. Polymeropoulou

What Our Greek Education Said The Greek educational system is a bureaucratic and centralized system in which the actions of school principals are largely determined at the central educational level. The pyramid structure of the Greek education system allows uniform implementation of educational policies at all levels in the system. Within this structure, school principals tend to be more transactional in their role, with fewer opportunities to take initiatives and introduce changes. During the lockdown, the Greek educational authorities mandated online teaching for all schools across the country, using both synchronous and asynchronous methods of delivering instruction. Also, digitized learning materials were created and distributed to teachers and students. Students from vulnerable social groups were supported through free access to online learning platforms using mobile phones, computers, and tablets. Initially, a large number of schools opted for the asynchronous modes as they lacked the resources and the training to use the various platforms that were being recommended. Despite the generous and quick response of the authorities to ensure continuation of the learning process, only half of the students had Internet access at the time, and among those students, a substantial number encountered difficulties in accessing classes due to failing connections, limited knowledge of how to use platforms, and lack of assistance from parents – especially among younger children (i.e., kindergarten and first grades of primary school). In the above context, school principals had to adjust their role to meet the new demands in schooling. It is therefore worth reexamining their role in terms of how they responded to the new challenges that the pandemic crisis brought. To this end, this study addressed the following questions: 1. What difficulties did Greek school principals face during online teaching? 2. How did Greek school principals overcome obstacles? 3. What skills did Greek school principals develop in order to adequately cope with their new role as e-leaders? 4. What type of leadership did Greek school principals exercise during this crisis?

Conceptual Framework We chose the Hersey-Blanchard theory of situational leadership as a theoretical context for our study. This theory is based on three critical factors that determine a school principal’s behavior: (a) the amount of direction a leader gives to followers, (b) the amount of support a leader shows, and (c) the level of “readiness” that followers demonstrate on a specific task (Hersey et al., 2008). The interplay among these three dimensions determines a leader’s success. A leader’s task, then, is to detect the level of readiness of their followers and to provide the necessary support. The core propositions or principles in the Hersey-Blanchard theory are that (1) a directive style of leadership is more likely to succeed with people who have low levels of readiness, (2) a combination of moderately directive and supportive

6  School Principals as Agents on the Path to the Digitization of Greek Schools…

109

leadership behavior is suitable for people with low to moderate levels of readiness, (3) a supportive style of leadership is more appropriate when dealing with people who have moderate to high levels of readiness, and (4) a leadership style that combines low direction and low support is more likely to be successful with people who have high task-relevant readiness. Although Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory has been around for many decades, recent research has shown that following its four principles leads to increased motivation (Pancasila et al., 2020) and, as well, can positively affect job satisfaction, trust, respect, and pride among people (Aslam et al., 2022). However, whether these findings still hold true is moot. The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply affected individuals, organizations, and societies around the globe and has impacted greatly people’s well-being, mental and psychological health, personal and job satisfaction, and motivation at work. Individuals and organizations are forced to adjust to a “new normal” (Mollenkopf et al., 2020) and to deal with the challenges the new reality presents. In this context, applying the situational leadership approach seems a suitable strategy for successfully addressing the new challenges in the work environment (Walls, 2019; Grint, 2011).

Method Study Sample The data for the study were the out-loud reflections of ten secondary school principals (three male school principals and seven female school principals) from urban, semi-urban, and rural areas in Central Greece. Table 6.1 presents the demographic information of the study sample. Table 6.1 Descriptive statistics for school principals’ demographics (n = 10)

Demographics Gender  Male  Female Age  Over 50 years  40–49 years Years as a principal  16–20 years  11–15 years  6–10 years