Author:
Anderson Gary,Mungal Angus Shiva
Abstract
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the current and past work using discourse analysis in the field of educational administration and of discourse analysis as a methodology.
Design/methodology/approach
– Authors reviewed research in educational leadership that uses discourse analysis as a methodology.
Findings
– While discourse analysis has been used in the field, little work has been done that explores “leadership” as a discourse practice.
Originality/value
– Increased use of discourse analysis in the field might unearth the ways principals and superintendents are creators of discourse and mediators of the discourses of others.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Education,Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Education
Reference71 articles.
1. Achinstein, B.
,
Ogawa, R.T.
and
Speiglman, A.
(2004), “Are we creating separate and unequal tracks of teachers? The effects of state policy, local conditions, and teacher characteristics on new teacher socialization”,
American Educational Research Journal
, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 557-603.
2. Anderson, G.
(1989), “Critical ethnography in education: origins, current status, and new directions”,
Review of Educational Research
, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 249-270.
3. Anderson, G.
(2001), “Disciplining leaders. A critical discourse analysis of the ISLLC national examination and performance standards in educational administration”,
International Journal of Leadership in Education
, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 199-216.
4. Anderson, G.
(2009),
Advocacy Leadership: Toward a Post-Reform Agenda
, Routledge, New York, NY.
5. Anderson, G.
and
Cohen
, M.
(2015), “A framework for studying educator resistance and advocacy in the context of new professionalism”,
Education Policy Analysis Archives
, Vol. 23 No. 91, pp. 1-23.
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献