Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of School–University Partnerships
- The Cambridge Handbook of School–University Partnerships
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I The History and Conceptual Foundations of School–University Partnerships
- Part II Teachers and Learning to Teach in School–University Partnerships
- Part III Equity and Student Learning in School–University Partnerships
- Part IV Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- Introduction to Part IV: Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- 25 Teacher Leaders in School–University Partnerships
- 26 Aspiring and Thriving
- 27 Embracing Complexity Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- 28 The Role of Leadership in Designing School–University Partnerships
- 29 Commentary: Leadership in and for School–University Partnerships
- 30 Commentary: Using Third Spaces, Boundary Spanning, and Brokering to Describe School–University Leadership
- 31 Commentary: Perspectives on Leadership in and for School–University Partnerships
- Part V Community Schools as School–University Partnerships
- Part VI Inquiry and Innovation in School–University Partnerships
- Part VII Funding, Policy, and the Politics of School–University Partnerships
- Part VIII Looking at School–University Partnerships across Geographic and Cultural Borders
- Index
- References
27 - Embracing Complexity Leadership in School–University Partnerships
Framing Possibility within Guiding Principles
from Part IV - Leadership in School–University Partnerships
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 November 2025
Edited in association with
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of School–University Partnerships
- The Cambridge Handbook of School–University Partnerships
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I The History and Conceptual Foundations of School–University Partnerships
- Part II Teachers and Learning to Teach in School–University Partnerships
- Part III Equity and Student Learning in School–University Partnerships
- Part IV Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- Introduction to Part IV: Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- 25 Teacher Leaders in School–University Partnerships
- 26 Aspiring and Thriving
- 27 Embracing Complexity Leadership in School–University Partnerships
- 28 The Role of Leadership in Designing School–University Partnerships
- 29 Commentary: Leadership in and for School–University Partnerships
- 30 Commentary: Using Third Spaces, Boundary Spanning, and Brokering to Describe School–University Leadership
- 31 Commentary: Perspectives on Leadership in and for School–University Partnerships
- Part V Community Schools as School–University Partnerships
- Part VI Inquiry and Innovation in School–University Partnerships
- Part VII Funding, Policy, and the Politics of School–University Partnerships
- Part VIII Looking at School–University Partnerships across Geographic and Cultural Borders
- Index
- References
Summary
As hybrid spaces for enacted practice, school–university partnerships (S-UPs) are complex systems for leadership and educational change. Therefore, in this chapter I explore various educational leadership theories–from a wide perspective encompassing paradigms, conceptual frameworks, and constructs as described in the literature on educational leadership – and work to identify coherence among the complexity in order to provide guiding principles (from theories) for SUP leadership practice and scholarship. Among the discussions of theory and practice in educational leadership scholarship, tensions and even contradictions are identified when considering enacted practice of educational leaders. Embracing tensions to meet complexity with complexity, I highlight a framework with theories as guideposts for leaders in SUPs to engage and live in a dynamic way to best meet the needs and purposes of SUPs through complexity leadership.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of School–University Partnerships , pp. 415 - 432Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 12–169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akkerman, S., & Bruining, T. (2016). Multilevel boundary crossing in a professional development school partnership. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 240–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2016.1147448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002). Developing an empirical account of a community of practice: Characterizing the essential tensions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 489–542. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1104_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K. & Keating, T. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemic tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9, 76–107. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327884MCA0902_02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. & Harvey, J. A. (2003). Distributed Leadership. National College for School Leadership.Google Scholar
Davis, B., & Sumara, D., (2006). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching and research. Routledge.Google Scholar
Fenton-O-Creevy, M., Dimitraidia, Y., & Scobie, G. (2015). Failure and resilience at boundaries: The emotional process of identity work. In Wenger-Trayner, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., Kubiak, D., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (Eds.), Learning in landscapes of practice: boundaries, identity and knowledgeability in practice-based learning (pp. 33–34). Routledge.Google Scholar
Gharajedaghi, J. (2011). Systems thinking, managing chaos and complexity: A platform for designing business architecture (3rd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Hartley, D. (2009). Education policy, distributed leadership and socio-cultural theory. Educational Review, 61, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910902844721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self: meaning as movement. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ho, J. & Ng, D. (2017). Tensions in distributed leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 223–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316IXI668I630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, J. P. Y., Chen, D. V., & Ng, D. (2016). Distributed leadership through the lens of activity theory. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(5), 814–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215570302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoy, W. K. (1982) Recent developments in theory and research in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X82018003002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, C., Crawford, M., & Oplatka, I. (2019). An affective paradigm for educational leadership theory and practice: connecting affect, actions, power and influence. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 22(5), 617–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604124.2018.1481536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. L. (2010). Simply complexity: A clear guide to complexity theory. Oneworld.Google Scholar
Kruse, S. D., & Johnson, B. L. (2017). Tempering the normative demands of PLCs with the organizational realities of life in schools: exploring the cognitive dilemmas faced by educational ladders. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 45(4), 588–604.10.1177/1741143216636111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kubiak, C., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Appleby, K., Kempster, M., Reed, M., Solvason, C., & Thorpe, M. (2015). Brokering boundary encounters. In Wenger-Trayner, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., Kubiak, D., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (Eds.), Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity and knowledgeability in practice-based learning (pp. 81–95). Routledge.Google Scholar
Lynch, M. E. (2021). Supervision to deepen teacher candidates’ understanding of social justice: The role of responsive mediation in professional development schools. Journal of Educational Supervision, 4(2), 80–100. https://doi.org/10.31045/jes.4.2.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, K. (2010). Complexity, theory, school leadership and management: Questions for theory and practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(3), 374–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143209359711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oplatka, I. (2009). The field of educational administration: An historical overview of scholarly attempts to recognise epistemological identities, meanings and boundaries from 1960s onwards. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1), 8–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230910928061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senge, P. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (2nd ed.). Currency, Doubleday.Google Scholar
Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2020). Systems thinking leadership: New explorations for school improvement. British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society, 34(3), 107–114. https://doi.org/10/1177/0892020620907327.Google Scholar
Shields, C. M. (2017). Is transformative leadership practical or possible? Learning from superintendent about social justice. International Studies in Educational Administration, 45(2), 3–20.Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., & Orlina, E. C. (2005). Investigating leadership practice: Exploring the entailments of taking a distributed perspective. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760500244728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theoharris, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X06293717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2017). Complexity leadership: Enabling people and organizations for adaptability. Organizational Dynamics, 46, 9–20. http://dx.doi.org/10/1016/j.orgdyn.2016.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennebo, K. F. (2017). Innovative work in school development: Exploring leadership enactment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(2), 298–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215617944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y. (2018). The panorama of the last decade’s theoretical groundings of educational leadership research: A concept co-occurrence network analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(3), 327–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18761342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, P. A., Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., & Wise, C. (2004). Variabilities and dualities in distributed leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32, 439–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143204046497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this book
complies with version 2.1 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved
user experiences and achieves the intermediate
(AA)
level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.