Distributed Leadership as a Driving Force to the Teaching of Social Studies as an Integrated Subject in Federal Colleges of Education in Nigeria
Abstract
The involvement of more than one subject approaches to social studies teaching are well in order and started from the complicated way of social studies challenges and the integrated problem-solving responses they demand. These approaches require academic teachers to come together across disciplines to integrate because the subject itself is integrated with virtually all the social sciences courses. Yet the divisions typical of colleges of education impedes collaborative teaching practice. This paper reports on the outcomes of a distributed leadership project in four Nigerian Colleges of Education aimed at enhancing the use of more than one subject approach in social studies teaching. Communities of teaching practice were created in four Nigerian Colleges of Education with participants drawn from a wide range of disciplines. The establishment and operation of these communities relied on a distributed leadership methodology that facilitates acts of initiative, innovation, vision and courage through group interaction rather than through designated hierarchical roles. Each community of practice found the distributed leadership approach overcame barriers to interdisciplinary social studies teaching. Cultivating distributed leadership enabled community members to engage in peer-led professional learning, collaborative curriculum and pedagogical development; and to facilitate wider institutional change. The detailed outcomes achieved by each community were tailored to their specific institutional context. They included the transformation of social studies curriculum, professional development in interdisciplinary pedagogy, innovation in student-led learning activities, and participation in institutional decision-making related to curriculum reform. This paper demonstrates that the distributed leadership model for sustainability education reported here is effective in building capacity for interdisciplinary social studies teaching within disciplines. The model is flexible enough for a variety of institutional ceilings.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O. and Weber, T.J. (2009), “Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 421-49.
Bennett, N., Wise, C., and Woods P, (2003), Distributed Leadership, Open University National College for School Leadership, London.
Bolden, R., Petrov, G. and Gosling, J. (2009), “Distributed leadership in higher education: rhetoric and reality”, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, Vol. 37, pp. 257-277.
Burandt, S. and Barth, M. (2010), “Learning settings to face climate change”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 18, pp. 659-665.
Chalmers, D. (2011), “Progress and challenges _ , the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education”, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 30, pp. 25- 38.
Cox, M.D. (2001), “Faculty learning communities: change agents for transforming institutions”, To Improve the Academy, Vol. 19, pp. 63-93.
Davison, A., Pharo, E., Warr, K., with contributions from Ahuodha, P., Boyd, D.,
Brown, P., Devereux, P., Egan A., Hart, G., McGregor, H., Rooney, M. and Terkes, S. (2012), Demonstrating Distributed Leadership Through Cross-Disciplinary Peer Networks: Responding to Climate Change Complexity, Final Report, Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Sydney.
De la Harpe, B. and Thomas, I. (2009), “Curriculum change in universities: conditions that facilitate education for sustainable development”, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 75-85..
Dobson, H.E. and Tomkinson, C.B. (2012), “Creating sustainable development change agents through problem based learning: Designing appropriate student PBL projects”, International Journal of sustainability in Higher Education, Vol 13 Iss. 3, pp. 263-278.
'Gronn, P. (2002), “Distributed Leadership”, in Leithwdod, K., Hallinger, P., Seashore-Louis, K., Furman-Brown, G., Gronn, P., Mulford, W. and Riley, K. (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 653-696.
Harris, A. (2003), “Teacher leadership as distributed leadership: heresy, fantasy or possibility?”,School Leadership and Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 313-324.
Jacobs, J.A. (2004), “Overworked faculty: Job stresses and family demands”, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 596, pp. 104129.
Lefoe, G., Parish, D., Hart. G., Smigiel, H. and Pannan, L. (2008), The Green Report: The Development of Leadership Capacity in Higher Education, CEDIR, University of Wollongong, Wollongong.
Pepper, C. and Wildy, H. (2008) Leading for sustainability? Is surface understanding enough? Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 613-629.
Pharo, E., Bridle, K. (2012), Does interdisciplinary exist behind the facade of traditional disciplines? A study of natural resource management teaching. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 65-80.
Readings, B. (1996).The University in Ruins, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. Tilbury, D. (2011), “Higher education for sustainability: a global overview of commitment and progress”, in Higher Education in the Woriu 4 Higher Education ’s Commitment to Sustainability: From Understanding to Action. GUNI, Barcelona, pp. 18-27.
UNCSD, (2012) Commitment to Sustainable Practices of Higher Education Institutions on the Occasion of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio 2012, United Nations.
Wenger, E. (2000). “Communities of practice and social learning systems”, /Organization, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 225-246
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.