Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Do You Call People With Visions? The Role of Vision, Mission and Goals in School Leadership and Improvement

  • Chapter
Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE,volume 8))

Abstract

In this section we begin the process of unpacking the conceptual foundations of these related terms. We assert that until scholars distinguish more clearly among these terms and their underlying assumptions, it will be difficult to craft appropriate strategies for either empirical study or practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 599.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Andrews, R., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal instructional leadership and school achievement. Educational Leadership, 44, 9–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamburg, J., & Andrews, R. (1990). School goals, principals and achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2(3), 175–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of an executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, R. (1990). Improving schools from within. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1996). Leading with soul. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1992a). Leading and managing: Effects of context, culture, and gender. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22, 314–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1992b). Reframing organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, D. (1993). Principals and student outcomes: Evidence from U.S. high schools. Economics of Education Review, 12(4), 281–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookover, W., Beamer, L., Efthim, H., Hathaway, D., Lezotte, L., Miller, S., Passalacqua, J., & Tarnatzky, L. (1982). Creating effective schools: An inservice program for enhancing school learning climate and achievement. Holmes Beach FL: Learning Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookover, W., & Lezotte, L. (1979). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookover, W., Schweitzer, J., Schneider, J., Beady, C, Flood, P., & Wisenbaker, A. (1978). Elementary school climate and school achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 301–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A., & Raudenbusch, S. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, S., & Tosi, H. (1973). Management by objective: Applications and research. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. (1968). Motivational processes in groups: Introduction. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics (pp. ). New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y.C. (1991a). Leadership style of principals and organizational process in secondary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 29(2), 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y.C. (1991). Organizational environment in schools: Commitment, control, disengagement, and headless. Educational Administration Quarterly 27(4), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y.C. (1994). Principal’s leadership as a critical factor for school performance: Evidence from multilevels of primary schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, D., Eiseman, J., & Louis, K.S. (1986). Strategie planning issues that bear on the success of school improvement efforts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(3), 21–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, B. (1994). The effective classroom. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cressey, D. (1958). Achievement of an unstated organizational goal. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 43–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crown, D., & Rosse, J. (1995). Yours, mine, and ours: Facilitating group productivity through the integration of individual and group goals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 64(2), 138–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (1984a, April 24). The sham of school reform: Sleight of hand with numbers. San Jose Mercury, lc, 2c.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (1984b). Transforming the frog into a prince: Effective schools research, policy, and practice at the district level. Harvard Educational Review, 54, 129–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M., & Stackhouse, A. (1977). The importance offormal appearances. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Pacific Sociological Association, Sacramento.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal, T., & Celotti, L. (1977). “Loose coupling” and the school administrator: Some recent research finding. Stanford University: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal, T., & Peterson, K. (1990). The principal’s role in shaping school culture. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate cultures. Reading MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deniston, O., Rosenstock, I., & Getting, V. (1968). Evaluation of program effectiveness. Public Health Reports, 83, 325–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dent, A. (1959). Organizational correlates of the goals of business management. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12, 365–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillard, C. (1995). Leading with her life: An African American feminist (re)interpretation of leadership for an urban high school principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 539–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dornbusch, S., & Scott, W. (1975). Evaluation and the exercise of authority. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. (1995). Managing in a time of great change. New York: Talley House, Dutton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberts, R., & Stone, J. (1988). Student achievement in public schools: Do principals make a difference? Economics of Education Review, 7(3), 291–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37, 15–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, R. (1982). Programs of school improvement: An overview. Educational Leadership, 40, 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, R., & Frederiksen, J. (1978). Searchfor effective schools: The Identification and analysis of schools that instructionally effective for poor children. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Center for Urban Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frese, M., Stewart, J., & Hannover, B. (1987). Goal orientation and planfulness: Action styles as personality concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1182–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander, F, & Pickle, H. (1968). Components of effectiveness in small organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13, 292–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1992). What’s worth fighting for? Working together for your school. Andover, MA: Regional Lab for Educational Improvement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gable, R., & Manning, M. (1999). The role of teacher collaboration in school reform. Childhood Education, 74(4), 182–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgopoulos, B., & Tannenbaum, A. (1957). A study of organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 22, 534–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Given, B. (1994). Operation breakthrough for continuous self-systems improvement. Intervention in School & Clinic, 30(1), 38–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N., & Fuller, J. (1992). Assessing the decision-making patterns of school principals. The International Journal of Educational Management, 6(3), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N., & Heek, R. (1992). The changing leadership role of the principal: Implications for principal assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldring E., & Pasternak, R. (1994). Principals’ coordinating strategies and school effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. (1959). Organizational analysis. In R. Merton et al., (Eds.), Sociology today (pp. ). New York: Basic Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Grusky, O. (1959). Organizational goals and the behavior of informal leaders. American Journal of Sociology, 65, 59–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulick, L. (1948). Administrative reflections from World War II. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunn, J., & Holdaway, E. (1986). Perceptions of effectiveness, influence, and satisfaction of senior high school principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Haberstroh, C. (1965). Organization design and systems analysis. In J. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. ). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P. (1996). Challenging and changing Primrose. Prime Focus, 2(4), 20–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., Bickman, L., & Davis, K. (1996). School context, principal leadership and student achievement. Elementary School Journal, 96(5), 498–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., & Heek, R. (1996a). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., & Heek, R. (1996b). The principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of methodological issues, 1980–95. In K. Leithwood et al. (Eds.), The International Handbook of Research in Educational Administration (pp. 723–784). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academie Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., & Heek, R. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness: 1980–1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., & Heek, R. (1999). Can leadership enhance school effectiveness? In Bush et al. (Eds.). Educational management: Redefining theory, policy, and practice (pp. 178–190). London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., Leithwood, K., & Murphy, J. (1993). Cognitive perspectives on educational leadership. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1986). The social context of effective schools. American Journal of Education, 94(3), 328–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, D. (1981). Discontinuities in educational goals. The Generator, 11, 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, C. (1994). The age of paradox. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R. (1992). Principal instructional leadership and the identification of high-and low-achieving schools: The application of discriminant techniques. Administrator’s Notebook, 34(7), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R. (1993). School context, principal leadership, and achievement: The case of secondary schools in Singapore. The Urban Review, 25(2), 151–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R. (2000). Estimating the impact of school quality on school outcomes and improvement: A value-added approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 513–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R., & Brandon, P. (1995). Teacher empowerment and the implementation of school-based reforms. Empowerment in Organizations: An International Journal, 3(4), 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R., Larsen, T., & Marcoulides, G. (1990). Principal instructional leadership and school achievement: Validation of a causal model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26, 94–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R., & Marcoulides, G. (1996). School culture and performance: Testing the invariance of an organizational model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(1), 76–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R., Marcoulides, G., & Lang, P. (1991). Principal instructional leadership and school achievement: The application of discriminant techniques. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2(2), 115–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heek, R., & Thomas, S. (2000). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • High, R., & Achilles, C. (1986). An analysis of influence-gaining behaviors of principals in schools of varying levels of instructional effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(1), 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, P., & Rowe, K. (1996). Multilevel modeling in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7,1, 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, B. (1984, May 6). School reform is working: What’s wrong with goal setting and measurement? San Jose Mercury, 1c, 2c.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, D., & Ainscow, M. (1993). Making sense of school improvement: An interim account of the IQEA project. Paper presented to the ESRC Seminar Series on School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Sheffeld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (1982). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice, second edition. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (1987). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice, third edition. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, W., Tarter, C, & Bliss, J. (1990). Organizational climate, school health, and effectiveness: A comparative analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 260–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huse, E., & Kay, E. (1964). Improving employee productivity through work planning. In J. Blood (Ed.), The personnel job in a changing world (pp. xx–xx). New York: American Management Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsson, C, & Pousette, A. (2001). Coordinating work in Swedish schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(2), 147–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jantzi, D., & Leithwood, K. (1993). Toward an explanation of variation in teachers’ perceptions of transformational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(4), 512–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimpston, R. (1982). Employing systematic procedures in goal setting: A matter of necessity, not choice. Planning and Changing, 13, 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirst, M. (1975). The rise and fall of PPBS in California. Phi Delta Kappan, 54, 534–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleine-Kracht, P. (1993). Indirect instructional leadership: An administrator’s choice. Educational Administration Quarterly, 29(2), 187–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krug, E (1986). The relationship between the instructional management behavior of elementary school principals and student achievement. University of San Francisco: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, ERIC Document No. 8722942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson-Knight, B. (2000). Leadership, culture and organizational learning. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Understanding schools as intelligent systems (pp. 125–140). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(4), 498–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., Begley, R, & Cousins, B. (1990). The nature, causes and consequences of principals’ practices: A agenda for future research. Journal of Educational Administration, 28(4), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., Begley, P., & Cousins, B. (1992). Developing expert leadership for future schools. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1990). Transformational leadership: How principals can help reform school cultures. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(1), 249–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., Silins, H., & Dart, B., (1993). Using the appraisal of school leaders as an instrument for school restructuring. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 85–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1998). Leadership and other conditions which foster organizational learning in schools. In K. Leithwood & K.S. Louis (Eds.), Organizational learning in schools (pp. 67–90). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1995). Expert problem solving. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lezotte, L., & Bancroft, B. (1984). Growing use of the effective schools model for school improvement. Educational Leadership, 42, 23–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Likert, R., & Seashore, S. (1963). Making cost controls work. Harvard Business Review, 41(6), 96–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1959). The science of “muddling through.” Public Administration Review, 19, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. (1969). The balance of control and autonomy in elementary school teaching. In A. Etzioni (Ed.), The semi-professions and their organization (pp. xx–xx). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K.S., Toole, J., & Hargreaves, A. (1999). Rethinking school improvement. In J. Murphy & K.S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration, second edition (pp. 251–276). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K.S., & Miles, M. (1990). Managing reform: Lessons from urban high schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2(2), 75–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maehr, M., Midgley, C, & Urdan, T. (1992). School leader as motivator. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(3), 410–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mali, P. (1975). How to manage by objectives: A short coursefor managers. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J., & Olsen, J. (1976) Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Bergen, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcoulides, G., & Heek, R. (1993). Organizational culture and performance: Proposing and testing a model. Organization Science, 4(3), 209–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, H., Louis, K.S., & Printy, S. (2000). The capacity for organizational learning: Implications for pedagogical quality and student achievement. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Understanding schools as intelligent systerns (pp. 239–266). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick-Larkin, M., & Kritek, W. (1982, December). Milwaukee’s project RISE. Educational Leadership, 40, 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited. Educational Researcher, 5, 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategie planning. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1998). Covert leadership: Notes on managing professionals. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 140–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, L. (1973). The concept of organizational goals. American Political Science Review, 4, 470–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 22(3), 376–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odiorne, G. (1965). Management by objectives: A system ofmanagerial leadership. New York: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa, R., & Bossert, S. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(2), 224–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa, R., Crowson, R., & Goldring, E. (1999). Enduring dilemmas of school organization. In J. Murphy & K. Louis (Eds.), The handbook of research in educational administration (pp.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, J. (1995). Leading change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouston, J. (1999). School effectiveness and school improvement: Critique of a movement. In T. Bush, L. Bell, R. Bolam, R. Glatter, & P. Ribbins (Eds.), Educational management: Redeflning theory, policy, and practice (pp. 166–177). London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pang, N.S. (1998). The binding forces that hold school organizations together. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(4), 314–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and process in modern society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1968). Organizational goals. In D. Sills (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of the social sciences (pp. 305–311). Country: Publisher?

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1961). The analysis of goals in complex organizations. American Sociological Review, 26, 854–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T, & Waterman, R. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pounder, D., Ogawa, R., & Adams, E. (1995). Leadership as an organization-wide phenomena: lts impact on school performance. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 564–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. (1968). Organizational effectiveness: An inventory of propositions. Homewood IL: Richard Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purkey, S., & Smith, M. (1985) Educational police and school effectiveness. The Elementary School Journal, 85, ??-??.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purkey, S., & Smith, M. (1983). Effective schools-a review. The Elementary School Journal, 83, 426–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raia, A. (1965). Goal setting and self-control. Journal of Management Studies, 2, 34–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S., & Sampson, R. (1999). Assessing direct and indirect effects in multilevel designs with latent variables. Sociological Methods and Research, 28(2), 123–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, V. (1956). Dysfunctional consequences of performance measurement. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 241–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenholtz, S. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, B., Raudenbush, S., & Kang, S. (1991). Organizational design in high schools: A multilevel analysis. American Journal of Education, 99(2), 238–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M., Maugham, B., Mortimore, R, Ouston, J., & Smith, A. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: secondary schools and their effects on children. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sammons, R, Nuttall, D., Cuttance, R, & Thomas, S. (1995). Continuity of school effects: A longitudinal analysis of primary and secondary school effects on GCSE performance. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 6(4), 285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schagen, I., & Weston, P. (1998). Insight into school effectiveness from analysis of OFSTED’s school inspection database. Oxford Review of Education, 24(3), 337–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (1996). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C, & Teddlie, C. (1987). Student, teacher, and principal academie expectations and attributed responsibility as predictors of student achievement: A causal modeling approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, B., & Brown, J. (2000). The transformation of secondary schools in learning organizations. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Understanding schools as intelligent systems (pp. 293–314). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shouse, R. (1998). Restructuring’s impact on student achievement: Contrasts by school urban city. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(Supplemental), 677–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silins, H. (1994). The relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and school improvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 272–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silins, H., Muiford, W., Zarins, S., & Bishop, P. (2000). Leadership for organizational learning in Australian schools. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Understanding schools as intelligent systems (pp. 267–292). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1964). On the concept of organizational goal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smylie, M., & Hart, A. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change: A human and social capital development perspective. In J. Murphy & K. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration, second edition (pp. 421–442). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, E., & Ebmeier, H. (1992). Empirical linkages among principal behaviors and intermediate outcomes: Implications for principal evaluation. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 75–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. (1980). Rationality and justification in organizational life. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior. Greenwich CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, G. (1979). Strategie planning: What every manager must know. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll, L., & Fink, D. (1992). Effecting school change: The Halton approach. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 3(1), 19–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoll, L., & Fink, D. (1994). School effectiveness and school improvement: Voices from the field. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(2), 149–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teddlie, C, Falkowski, C, Stringfield, S., Desselle, S., & Garvue, R. (1984). Louisiana school effectiveness study: Phase two, 1982–84. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teddlie, C, & Reynolds, D. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J., & McEwen, W. (1958). Organizational goals and environment: Goal setting as an interaction process. American Sociological Review, 23, 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timperley & Robinson, (1998). Collegiality in schools: lts nature and implications for problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(Supplemental), 608–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uline, C, Miller, D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1998). School effectiveness: The underlying dimensions. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(4), 462–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warriner, C. (1965). The problem of organizational purpose. Sociological Quarterly, 6, 139–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, W. (1967). Problems in measuring the goal attainment of voluntary organizations. Journal of Adult Education, 19, 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 673–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, A (1981). Assessing nonconventional outcomes of schooling. Review of Research in Education, 8, 405–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, S. (1998). Contextual effects on student achievement: School leadership and professional community. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, P., Bagley, C, & Glatter, R. (1998). School responsiveness in a competitive climate: The public market in England. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(Supplemental), 650–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuchtman, E., & Seashore, S. (1967). A system resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32, 891–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zald, M. (1963). Comparative analysis and measurement of organizational goals. Sociological Quarterly, 4, 57–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vanderbilt University, USA

    Philip Hallinger

  2. University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA

    Ronald H. Heck

Authors
  1. Philip Hallinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald H. Heck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada

    Kenneth Leithwood

  2. College of Management, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

    Philip Hallinger

  3. Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA

    Gail C. Furman

  4. Institute of Education, University of London, UK

    Kathryn Riley

  5. Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, UK

    John MacBeath

  6. Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Peter Gronn

  7. University of Tasmania, Launceston, Australia

    Bill Mulford

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hallinger, P., Heck, R.H. (2002). What Do You Call People With Visions? The Role of Vision, Mission and Goals in School Leadership and Improvement. In: Leithwood, K., et al. Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0375-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0375-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3920-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0375-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation