Critical Examination of the Role of Leadership in Devising an Innovative Curriculum

Introduction

Higher education constantly needs to improve at various organisational levels and competencies. To improve they need to look backwards to learn from the past, inward to embrace the energy needed to affect innovative change and look forward to preparing their own body of knowledge and effectiveness towards improvement?(Olivier, 2021). Kim & Maloney (2020) point out that innovators in education and learning professionals alike face various opposing challenges, with the former lacking formal training in and understanding of education and the latter the capacity to contribute and collaborate outside of institutional silos. These skills may include the understanding of the history of higher education, academic theories and teaching methods, consideration for issues of finance, budgets, and curriculum design, all complemented with skills in learning platforms and learning analytics (Chapter 5. Leading the Revolution, 2020).

This paper hypothesises that role of curriculum leadership in higher education could include, influencing the use of experiential learning of students as a source of curriculum innovation and harnessing the principles of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development to guide faculty through the process of curriculum innovation and change.?

Key Terms

Leadership

Examining the role of leadership in devising an innovative curriculum, appropriately start with definitions of leadership and the characteristics most leaders demonstrate. Birzer et al. (2012) define leadership as the role of encouraging others to carry out those assignments that are necessary to the achievement of goals and objectives. Trueland (2019) cites Dr May as defining collective leadership as “where all voices are valued” (p. 38). Fullan (2007) defines leadership as “the guidance and direction of instructional improvement” (p. 126) and Vito et al. (2014) say that the control and impact of the leadership process influence transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Douglass (2018) defines leadership as “a process of influencing positive change to achieve the desired goal or generate a new solution to a problem” (p. 388). Spreitzer (2005) and Ahearne et al. (2005), both cited by Turek (2020), assert that empowering leadership provides a measure of autonomy and independent decision-making by enhancing the significance of work and expressing confidence in high performance, while the leader retains the decision-making power. These definitions of leadership, like others, have influence, independent decision-making and change at their foundation.

All leaders exhibit identifiable characteristics. Padilla (2009) describes Ellston’s leadership style as enthusiastic, energetic, and giving hope. Douglass (2018) cites Fletcher (2004), claiming domination, control, decisiveness, and assertiveness as traits of traditional leaders. Friedman and Lynch (2013) cite Berret (2012) emphasising that “curiosity, open-mindedness, intellectual courage, thoroughness and humility” (p. 2) is supplementing the desire for lifelong learning. Turek (2020) elaborate on the behaviours of empowering leaders by listing them as encouraging opportunity thinking, self-rewards, self-leadership, participative goal setting, and teamwork. Vito et al. (2014) emphasise that transactional leaders rely on the four attributes, charisma, inspiration, individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation. Liou (2020) concludes that collaborative and instructional leadership is non-restrictive and practical in nature, requiring the adaptation and fulfilment of roles; this impacts the mindset of higher education, which need to caution itself not to confuse leadership skills (vision-driven) with management skills (task-driven) (Olivier, 2021). These characteristics supplement the cited definitions of leadership and support Olivier’s position that leaders in higher education must have the ability to influence people, allow for independent decision-making and be prepared for change as the only constant (Olivier, 2021).

Innovation

In modern times, according to Ferreras-Garcia et al. (2021), effecting change requires innovation, managing industry expectations and encouraging students to be innovation actors that contribute to supplying social demands and hold true for keeping curricula in pace with customer needs. Rogers (2016) claims that adding value to products, services and processes can be described as causing innovation and can be in the form of incremental improvement or extraordinary inventions (Chapter 5. Innovate by Rapid Experimentation, 2016). Rogers continues, explaining the term disruption, an inevitable result of innovation, as when an industry, here higher education, faces a rival that adds more value to the student as the customer (Chapter 7. Mastering Disruptive Business Models, 2016). What is concerning, however true, is that the bureaucratic tardiness of regulators contributes to higher education’s inability to innovate fast enough, making it improbable that they will be able to counter disruption?(Blass & Hayward, 2014).

Kim & Maloney (2020) make an important point about the necessity for strong and empowered leadership to advocate for innovation and that academic leader can provide support surreptitious and when appropriate their support can emerge openly (Chapter 2. Institutional Change, 2020). Kotter et al., (2021) infer that higher education will need to find innovative ways to engage with faculty and students to stimulate participation, solutions, and leadership because of the unpredictable, multifaceted and rapid nature of change and uncertainty. Analysing literature about innovation competence led Ferreras-Garcia et al. (2021) to highlight the main aptitudes for innovation leaders as having high-level creative abilities, dynamism, tenacity, task impetus, the penchant to take calculated risks, and enthusiasm towards working on ambiguous and complex problems. Bovill & Woolmer (2019) propose a mindset change in the way higher education approach the incalculable effect of curriculum on the learning experience of the student and suggest that further research should be conducted to determine what factors can advise the drivers of change in higher education, but specifically in conceptualising innovative curriculum and how students can be involved.

Curriculum

The prescriptive definition of curriculum from Bobbitt (1918) as cited by Glatthorn et al. (2015) views curriculum as the entire range of directed and undirected experiences concerned with unfolding the individual's abilities. The author offers a definition of curriculum to be a journey of lifelong learning boosted by achievements and failures centred around experimentation in the real-life application of knowledge. Onyilofor (2013) cites Maduewesi & Meziobi (1990) listing the attributes of a good curriculum to include flexibility, addressing the desires and curiosity of the student as a citizen, encouraging growth, honing the skills needed to achieve pre-agreed objectives, interconnectivity, measurable and appraisable.

Curriculum Leadership

The importance of the support by academic leadership to enhance the learning experience of the student, the ability to engage role players through effective examining of data, the strategic use of standards as of a focal point in curriculum design and striving for continuous improvement of the individual student and the institution, are both the start and the accelerator of the continued reinforcement of the role of the curriculum leadership (Kim & Maloney, Chapter 2. Institutional Change, 2020; Ylimaki, 2010). Hannay & Seller (1991) cited by Yeung et al.?(2012), deduct that the role of the curriculum leader encompasses taking charge of monitoring, implementing, and improving curriculum changes.

Cited by Yeung et al. (2012), Glatthorn et al. (2009) suggest three continuous professional development timing models when considering the process of preparing faculty and organising the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure successful implementation of the curriculum. The first timing model include skills development and collaboration opportunities for faculty and students and takes place prior to the change. The second timing model requires the identification of the requirements for successful implementation before exposing faculty to new learning as the basis for development activities. The third timing model, referred to as community-based learning, involves the use of the unlimited resources communities offer and faculty can use to satisfy their learning needs. Curriculum leaders will be well-advised to structure these timing models around the three dimensions offered by Ferreras-Garcia et al. (2021); individual dimensions (ability to innovate), interpersonal dimension (abilities to communicate and work in teams), and networking dimension (abilities to create and maintain relationships in multidisciplinary and multicultural networks).

Experiential Learning

The first part of the hypothesis is that the role of curriculum leadership in higher education could include influencing the use of experiential learning of students as a source of curriculum innovation. Before considering the use of experimental learning as a source of curriculum innovation, curriculum leaders need to recognise that higher education students are adults, usually 18 years and older, that brings with them a diverse range of experiences.

Kolb & Fry (in HR Council), as cited by Erasmus et al. (2016) offers three stages as the foundation of future learning: reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation, and active experimentation. Reflective observation assumes that students compare their experiences to their knowledge after reflecting on real experiences. Abstract conceptualisation refers to the process by which the student forms new perspectives after the reflective observation stage. In the active experimentation, stage students change their behaviour based on these new perspectives. Erasmus et al. conclude that the use of suitable experimental learning methods to facilitate students through these stages results in complete learning and quotes Starr (2003) that “[L]earners construct new ideas based on prior knowledge and experience. Learning occurs by synthesising new information into current existing knowledge and adjusting prior understandings and beliefs to assimilate new experiences” (p. 208).

Alice Miel (1946), as cited by (Walker, 2002) conclude that change is brought about in people by addressing their desires, beliefs and attitudes through their knowledge and skill. Curriculum leaders should aim to balance the level of importance they assign to their own interpretation of desires, beliefs, and attitudes with those of students. Allowing students to collaborate, empowers them to not only apply their own life experiences but also to learn by exposure to new experiences during curriculum innovation.

Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development

The second part of the hypothesis is that the role of curriculum leadership in higher education could include harnessing the principles of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) to guide faculty through the process of curriculum innovation and change.

The introduction makes the point that innovators in education and learning professionals face various opposing challenges. In their respective Zones of Current Development (ZCD), where each can independently solve problems within their field of expertise, the innovators in education lack formal training in and understanding of education and the learning professionals lacks the capacity to contribute and collaborate outside of institutional silos. Applying Lev Vygotsky’s ZPD to curriculum innovation could bear fruit by encouraging the cohesion between innovators in education and learning professionals. In its original form, the zone of proximal development represents what students can achieve with guiding instruction from educators (Harland, 2003). The inference could be dawn that with the help of capable curriculum leadership, innovators in education and learning professionals could develop skills to bridge these challenges finding themselves in the zone of proximal development. After successfully bridging the skills gap as part of a cycle of constant professional development, the outer perimeter of the ZPD then become the new outer perimeter of the ZCD.

Leaders should encourage collective thinking that not only answer the issue of “what to change” but also the issue of “how to change”. Rogers?(2016) offers the highly iterative divergent experimental method as a tool for innovations that are not well-defined at inception. Rogers explain the divergent experimental method by allocating the ten steps to the three phases: preparation, iteration, and action. In the preparation phase, curriculum leaders define the problem, set time, money, and scope limits, and select the people to be involved. The iteration phase is where the real experimentation occurs and ideas are generated, tested, and refined and includes observation, generating multiple solutions to the defined problem, building a minimum viable prototype (MVP), e.g., maximise learning at the minimum cost, field testing and deciding to either, proceed, pivot, prepare to implement or to exit the project. The action phase applies paths to scaling up and then the recording and sharing of the learning experience (Chapter 5. Innovate by Rapid Experimentation, 2016).

Conclusion

Blass & Hayward (2014) suggests that higher education have an obligation to support, sustain, develop, and promote innovation. Curriculum leaders are essential to this process and have to acknowledge the contribution of external sources in developing innovative ideas preventing higher education not to become too inwardly focused on a process of open curriculum innovation. Ferreras-Garcia et al. (2021) acknowledged that higher education’s ability to innovate and drive innovation forward is pivotal to professional success and a fundamental learning outcome. Ferreras-Garcia et al. reiterate the need of society for students to behave developed skills and competencies during their higher education journey in order for them to engage in innovative activities in the workplace.

In conclusion, the role of leadership in devising innovative curriculum proves to centre around their ability to balance the qualities of both innovators in education and learning professionals, with the institutional strategy and the desires, beliefs and attitudes of students and society. Further research on how tools like the divergent experimental method can contextually be adapted to strengthen the role of curriculum leaders by assisting them in addressing the “how-to” issues in their effort to devise innovative curriculum.?

Works Cited

Birzer, M. L., Bayens, G. J., & Roberson, C. (2012). Principles of Leardership and Managemenet in Law Enforcement. New York: CRC Press. Taylor & Francis Group.

Blass, E., & Hayward, P. (2014). Innovation in higher education; will there be a role for "the academe/university" in 2025?: [doc 41]. European Journal of Futures Research, 2(1), 1-9. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40309-014-0041-x

Bovill, C., & Woolmer, C. (2019). How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum the curriculum. Higher Education, 78(3), pp. 407-422. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0349-8

Douglass, A. (2018). Redefining leadership: Lessons from an early education leadership development initiative. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(4), 387-396. doi:doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0871-9

Erasmus, B., Loedolff, P., Mda, T., & Nel, P. (2016). Managing Training and Development (Seventh ed.). Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press.

Ferreras-Garcia, R., Sales-Zaguirre, J., & Serradell-López, E. (2021). Sustainable innovation in higher education: The impact of gender on innovation competences. Sustainability, 13(9), 5004. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13095004

Friedman, H., & Lynch, J. A. (2013). Psalms: Lessons in values, leadership, and character for today. I-Manager's Journal on Management, 7(3), 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/psalms-lessons-values-leadership-character-today/docview/1473906931/se-2?accountid=188730

Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a Culture of Change. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, ProQuest Ebook Central. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=707700

Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2015). The Nature of Curriculum. In Curriculum Leadership: Strategies for Development and Implementation (4 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Harland, T. (2003). Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and Problem-based Learning: linking a theoretical concept with practice through action research. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 263-272. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1356251032000052483

Kim, J., & Maloney, E. J. (2020). Chapter 2. Institutional Change. In Learning innovation and the future of higher education (pp. 53-84). Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=5989986

Kim, J., & Maloney, E. J. (2020). Chapter 5. Leading the Revolution. In Learning Innovation and the Future of Higher Education (pp. 141-175). Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=5989986

Kotter, J. P., Akhtar, V., & Gupta, G. (2021, August 13). Is Your Organization Surviving Change — or Thriving in It? Retrieved from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2021/08/is-your-organization-surviving-change-or-thriving-in-it?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=November

Liou, J.-N. (2020). Collaborative instructional leadership: A case study of elementary school principal and teacher leaders. Collaborative instructional leadership: A case study of elementary school principal and teacher leaders, 33(1), 33.69. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/collaborative-instructional-leadership-case-study/docview/2441576802/se-2?accountid=188730

Olivier, N. J. (2021, October 12). Managing change towards improvement at Outsourced Learner Management (OLM). Retrieved from LinkedIn: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/managing-change-towards-improvement-outsourced-olm-nick-olivier-cfe/

Onyilofor, F. N. (2013). Repositioning guidance and counselling and curriculum innovation in higher education in Nigeria. Journal of International Education Research, 9(2), 153-164. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/repositioning-guidance-counselling-curriculum/docview/1433388265/se-2?accountid=188730

Padilla, F. E. (2009). Collaborative Education Leadership In Times Of Education Renewal: What Every New Teacher Should Know. Planning and Changing, 40(3), 207-223. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/collaborative-education-leadership-times-renewal/docview/909493258/se-2?accountid=188730

Rogers, D. L. (2016). Chapter 5. Innovate by Rapid Experimentation. In The Digital Transformation Playbook. New York: Columbia University Press. Retrieved from vbk://9780231541657/epubcfi/6/26%5B%3Bvnd.vst.idref%3Dcch05%5D!/4/32/7:133

Rogers, D. L. (2016). Chapter 7. Mastering Disruptive Business Models. In The Digital Transformation Playbook. New York: Columbia University Press. Retrieved from vbk://9780231541657/epubcfi/6/30%5B%3Bvnd.vst.idref%3Dcch07%5D!/2%400:0

Trueland, J. (2019). Compassionate leadership: Does it really give nurses a voice? Nursing Standard, 34(12), 38-41. doi:doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.7748/ns.34.12.38.s18

Turek, J. W. (2020). Leadership and creativity: A quantitative quasi-experimental vignette study on follower perceptions of the effects of empowering leadership and gender on teacher creativity (Order No. 28257507). ProQuest One Academic. (2487826539). Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/leadership-creativity-quantitative-quasi/docview/2487826539/se-2?accountid=188730

Vito, G. F., Higgins, G. E., & Denney, A. S. (2014). Transactional and transformational leadership: An examination of the leadership challenge model. 37(4), 809-822. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-01-2014-0008

Walker, D. F. (2002). Chapter 9. Improving School Curriculum. In Fundamentals of curriculum : Passion and professionalism (pp. 279-318). Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=237080

Yeung, S. S., Lam, J. T., & Leung, A. W. (2012). Chapter 10. Curriculum Leadership in Schools. In Curriculum change and innovation (pp. 231-254). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=3011750

Ylimaki, R. M. (2010). Chapter 3. Critical Curriculum Leadership. In Critical curriculum leadership : A framework for progressive education (pp. 55-90). Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UNICAF/detail.action?docID=667812