Educational Leaders’ Preparation for Digital and Change Management in Basic Education: A Qualitative Document Analysis of Policy Expectations and Preparation Pathway
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Aim: Digital transformation has expanded expectations placed on educational leaders in basic education, particularly in relation to organizational change, innovation, equity, and governance. International policy and institutional frameworks increasingly position school leaders as key agents of digital transformation, yet less is known about how leadership preparation is framed in these documents and whether preparation pathways are articulated beyond aspirational expectations. This study examines how educational leaders’ preparation for digital and change management is conceptualized and articulated in publicly available online policy and institutional documents.
Materials and Methods: The study employed qualitative document analysis guided by Bowen’s framework. A corpus of fifteen agenda-setting documents published between approximately 2015 and 2024 was purposively selected from a broader universe of international policy and institutional texts based on relevance to educational leadership, digital transformation, and change management in basic education. The dataset included UNESCO policy reports and guidance documents, alongside leadership standards, digital competence frameworks, and policy-oriented reports from other reputable international organizations. Data was analyzed using iterative qualitative content analysis combining deductive and inductive coding, with SDGs 4, 9, 10, and 16 used as an analytic lens. Digital tools supported document organization and cross-document comparison
Results: Findings indicate that leadership preparation is predominantly framed in normative and competency-based terms, emphasizing leadership roles and expectations but offering limited articulation of explicit preparation pathways. While key competencies related to digital leadership and change management are highlighted, alignment with the SDGs is partial and uneven. Preparation discourses align more strongly with SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 9 (Innovation and Infrastructure) than with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Strong Institutions), which remain largely implicit. Significant gaps persist in relation to digital ethics, equity-oriented leadership, AI governance, and systematic change management preparation.
Conclusion: The study identifies a persistent disconnect between policy expectations and preparation pathways for educational leaders in basic education. The findings underscore the need for explicit, coherent, and SDG-aligned leadership preparation frameworks that move beyond aspirational rhetoric toward systematic capacity-building for sustainable and equitable digital transformation.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright on any article in the Journal of Education and Learning Reviews is retained by the author(s) under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permission to use text, content, images, etc. of publication. Any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. But do not use it for commercial use or with the intent to benefit any business.
References
Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Baker, B. (2020). E-leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source and transmission. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), Article 101377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101377
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Bush, T. (2020). School leadership and management in England: The paradox of simultaneous centralization and decentralization. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143219896054
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2022). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 26(1), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
Fullan, M. (2020). Leading in a culture of change (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Hallinger, P. (2020). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218822772
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Education responses to COVID-19: Embracing digital learning and online collaboration. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/education
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). School leadership for learning: Insights from TALIS 2018. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/4f9556a1-en
Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Tikly, L., Joubert, M., Barrett, A. M., Bainton, D., Cameron, L., & Doyle, H. (2020). Supporting global sustainable development: The role of education. Comparative Education, 56(2), 166–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2020.1745114
UNESCO. (2016). Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action. https://unesdoc.unesco.org
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms? https://www.unesco.org/gem-report
UNESCO. (2024). Education leadership: Transforming education systems through leadership. https://unesdoc.unesco.org
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995
Williamson, B., Eynon, R., & Potter, J. (2020). Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices: Digital technologies and distance education during the coronavirus emergency. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(2), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1761641
