Cindy Rottmann

Struggling for Democracy Administrative Communication in a Diverse School Context

This article describes a study that explores efforts to promote democratic practice in a diverse school context. More specifically, it documents administrative endeavors to include members of the school community—teachers, parents and students—in the various school processes by encouraging inclusive communicative practices. The findings of the study indicate that administrators attempt to achieve such ends by establishing relationships with members of their school community that will enable dialogue. They do their best to display their caring natures, vulnerability and senses of humor. They also make themselves visible and approachable, work on greeting people, understanding them and dismantling the hierarchies that exclude people. In the end, however, their efforts fail to foster meaningful democratic and inclusive practices. Administrators in the study end up bypassing democratic options and drawing on the hierarchical power associated with the bureaucratic system in which they work in order to ensure that the school will be able to attract students in the quasi-market system in which it operates.

Engineering leadership: Grounding leadership theory in engineers’ professional identities:

In recent years the US-based National Academy of Engineering and Engineers Canada have urged engineering educators to supplement technical coursework with multiple domains of professional skills development. One such domain is that of engineering leadership. While leadership education is beginning to be infused into some undergraduate engineering programs, it has not yet gained traction as a legitimate field of study. The legitimacy of the field depends on engineers recognizing themselves as members of a leadership profession. Our paper facilitates this process of recognition by grounding leadership theory in the professional experiences of engineers employed by four Canadian engineering-intensive firms. Our constant comparative analysis of qualitative data collected through nine focus groups and seven interviews suggests that engineers are largely resistant to dominant leadership paradigms drawn from other disciplines, but that they do, in fact lead in ways that blend key aspects of their identities with professionally recognized forms of influence. Our compound model of engineering leadership has practical and theoretical implications for engineers, leadership theorists and engineering educators.