The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm

School
A systematic review and leadership
thematic synthesis of
research on school leadership
in the Republic of Ireland 675

2008 – 2018 Received 14 November 2018

Revised 13 March 2019
15 April 2019
Gavin Murphy 29 April 2019
Accepted 1 May 2019
University College Dublin School of Education, Dublin, Ireland and
University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review and generate themes evident in research on primary
and post-primary (secondary) school leadership in the Republic of Ireland (Ireland) from 2008 to 2018.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper follows the steps of a systematic review and thematic synthesis.
Findings – Following the review, six themes are identified and described, summarising the most current
school leadership research in Ireland.
Practical implications – Potential future directions of research are identified.
Originality/value – No review of research on school leadership in Ireland is currently available and this is
timely given the policy context’s recent focus on school leadership. The steps taken to conduct the review are
clearly outlined.
Keywords Principals, Leadership, Educational administration, Educational research, Republic of Ireland
Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction
This paper reviews the last decade of research on primary and secondary school leadership
in Ireland. The paper is structured in the following way. First, the Irish school leadership
policy context is introduced. Reasons explaining why a review of the literature is timely and
practical are subsequently outlined. Second, a review framework and methodological
concerns are shared. Third, six thematic findings are described. To conclude, some gaps and
silences in the literature are identified to inform future directions of school leadership
research in Ireland.
National emphasis on school leadership reflects the international evidence base that has
consistently demonstrated the substantial indirect effects of school leadership on students’
educational achievement (Day et al., 2016; Leithwood et al., 2008; Robinson et al., 2008).
However, a limitation in the field remains that research tends to be dominated by “Anglo-North
American-Antipodean publications” (Sugrue, 2015, p. xx). Consequently, there is an impetus in
the field to expand the literature to reflect national and local contexts (Hallinger, 2018) to inform
future knowledge production. Mapping the literature – methodologically, thematically and
regionally – is important (Ärlestig et al., 2016) and methodological and thematic trends are
charted in this regional review. There is an impetus in the field to expand the literature to
reflect national and local contexts (Hallinger, 2018) given the prevalence of international policy
borrowing (Clarke and O’Donoghue, 2017; Harris et al., 2016). Besides this, several actors have
heavily influenced the development of the school leadership and policy context in Ireland Journal of Educational
historically. Significant influence has been attributed to religious authorities (Fischer, 2016; Administration
Vol. 57 No. 6, 2019
pp. 675-689
The author would like to thank to Ciaran Sugrue, David Gurr and Orla McCormack for comments on © Emerald Publishing Limited
0957-8234
earlier drafts. DOI 10.1108/JEA-11-2018-0211
JEA O’Flaherty, 1992) and teacher unions (Drudy and Lynch, 1993; Mac Ruairc, 2010), making the
57,6 context and structures in which Irish school leadership is situated somewhat distinct by
international standards (Coolahan et al., 2017; Flood, 2011; Sugrue, 2015).
Since the Irish Review of National Policies for Education (OECD, 1991), national policy
interest in school leadership has steadily grown, with research interest emerging significantly
later. According to Coolahan et al. (2017), this interest is evident in: national policies,
676 organisational changes at the school level and the provision of professional development for
school leadership. These three areas are demonstrably interlinked and connect to international
policy shifts (Harris et al., 2016). From a policy perspective, recent reforms by the Department
of Education and Skills (DES) have reconfigured school leadership structures. These reforms
align to national school self-evaluation (SSE) policy (DES, 2017, 2018), demonstrating an
international trend of aligning school leadership and evaluation practices (Hult et al., 2016;
Schildkamp et al., 2012).
Connected to this reform is the process of how appointments to formal leadership
positions are to be made, shifting from an historical emphasis on seniority dominating
selection. The reform also signals departure from an historical tendency to prioritise and
appoint a “safe pair of hands” (Sugrue, 2015, p. 107) towards understandings of leadership
as distributed, which is currently considered as the most frequently adopted school
leadership theory internationally (Wang, 2018; Wenner and Campbell, 2017), reflecting the
international conceptual evolution of educational administration (see Hallinger and
Kovačević, 2019). Ireland’s contemporary policy context can be considered a “pivotal point”
(Brown, 2011) with significant consequences for how school leadership is conceived and
practised, as well as how school leaders are prepared, selected, appointed and developed.
A national Centre for School Leadership exists since 2016 and a Postgraduate Diploma in
School Leadership is available since 2017. Partly funded for participants by the DES (Centre
for School Leadership, 2018), its implementation reflects the growing global policy interest
in and concern about school leadership preparation and development (LPD) (Bush, 2018).
These recent developments frame one end of the review period. At the other end, 2008
marked national political disappointment with Ireland’s 2008 Programme for International
Student Assessment results and the period of the tumultuous post-2008 economic downturn,
leading to significant educational reform (Murphy, 2018). School leadership was one focus of
reform and reviewing research conducted on it during this period, further, offers a distinct
contribution, especially given the absence of any such similar national review.

2. Review framework and methodological approach

Sources from the field of school leadership were consulted in formulating a review
framework and a methodological approach (Ärlestig et al., 2016; Bush and Crawford, 2012;
Hallinger, 2013; Oplatka, 2017). Adopting a systematic review and thematic synthesis
(Cherry et al., 2017) ensured accurate synthesis of “the relevant literature in a
comprehensive, transparent and objective manner” (Byrne, 2016, p. 1). This involved
negotiation of a series of issues including ensuring the review was justified; defining the
conduct of the search; critical evaluation of literature included in the review, balancing
breadth and depth of literature coverage; and providing an overview to those not only
currently interested in the field, but also for those readers who will enter the field in various
capacities. Each of these issues was attended to in this review. Inclusion and exclusion
criteria are summarised in Table I.
Keywords searched included: “school leader*”, “education* leader*”, “school
administration”, “school management”, “school principal” and “teacher leadership (TL)”.
Given the volume of the search return, these terms were subsequently first limited to the
title, abstract and subject terms; then, bracketed in a chain and searched with an AND
operator with the chain “Ireland” OR “Irish” OR “Republic of Ireland”. Databases searched
included: Academic Search Complete, British Education Index, Business Source Complete School
and ERIC (154 sources) and Scopus (94 sources), consulting databases that are both leadership
multidisciplinary and discipline specific. From this, 248 sources were considered.
Applying exclusion criteria and eliminating duplication reduced sources for analysis,
detailed in Tables III and IV. Scoping searches concluded that the majority of
peer-reviewed school leadership research was published post-2008. Prior to then only a
limited number of relevant sources were returned whose themes also featured research 677
from 2008 onwards. Given the limited number of sources to review, available doctoral
theses that focussed on school leadership were then included. Three key pieces of
research commissioned on school leadership in Ireland were also included (Table II). These
reports were commissioned by school leadership professional associations; engaged in
mixed-method, empirical research; and offer three, spaced snapshots across the last
decade with relatively large sample sizes. However, one limitation is their reliance on
self-report surveys as the primary method of data collection (Camburn et al., 2010).
Another limitation concerns the provision of a clear definition and reporting of how
literature searches were conducted, as well as citation breadth and balance (Byrne, 2016).
For example, Report A in Table II does not cite Report B.
I conducted a preliminary reading of each abstract returned from the literature search,
applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, importing literature into NVivo12 for analysis.
In preliminary analysis, data relating to descriptive information were extracted including:
authors, title, year and genre of the publication, collating information in a review matrix. At
this point I also conducted bibliographic scans of each source. The second stage of analysis
coded in a more in-depth manner in three phases: generating codes spanning keywords;

Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria

Published within 2008–October 2018 Published at any other time outside of the indicated
time frame
Limiting the scope to school leadership in primary Publications that feature in materials that are not
and secondary schools in Ireland peer-reviewed, are not in an academic edited volume or
single text, or were submitted for purposes other than
those of a doctoral thesis
Research from academic sources that was empirical, Some publications that feature leadership or Table I.
conceptual, historical, descriptive and viewpoint management as a key word as a minor word but Inclusion and
(comment) was included substantively focussed on another topic exclusion criteria

Commissioned by Date Author Title

A Centre for School Leadership, Irish 2018 Fitzpatrick Associates
Primary Principals Network (IPPN),
National Association for Principals
and Deputies (NAPD), and DES
B IPPN, NAPD
C Regional Training Unit and
Leadership Development
for Schools
School Leadership in Ireland and
Economic Consultants the Centre for School Leadership:
Research and Evaluation Report
2015 Riley Irish Principals and Deputy
Principals Occupational Health,
Safety and Wellbeing Survey
Executive Summary
2009 PricewaterhouseCoopers School Leadership Matters: An Table II.
empirical assessment of the Key school leadership
attractiveness of principalship in the research reports
North of Ireland and South of Ireland 2008–2018
JEA methodology; theoretical frameworks; findings; and limitations, comparing the sources
57,6 included which resulted in 58 codes; generating descriptive categories and based on the
coding, categorisation and analytic reflection, the generation of six final analytic themes
(Saldaña, 2009).

3. Findings and analysis

678 The six themes that emerged from the analysis are listed below:
(1) leadership preparation and development;
(2) teacher, middle and distributed leadership (DL);
(3) leading for equality, inclusivity, and care;
(4) leading with heart;
(5) leading educational reform; and
(6) religious influence on school leadership.
Table III indicates the source genre of the literature, while Table IV provides an overview of the
research methods used following Oplatka’s (2017) typology. However, as Oplatka (2017, p. 7)
states, while overviewing the research methods used in research reviewed gives a snapshot of
the methods used, it is also somewhat arbitrary given that “categories themselves are not
mutually exclusive”.
The main findings of the research conducted under each theme listed in Section III will
now be more substantively outlined.

3.1 Leadership preparation and development

Scope for improving provision of LPD is demonstrated in each of the research reports in
Table II. Further findings indicate that promotions to school leadership have been made
“without adequate preparation” (King and Stevenson, 2017, p. 659) signalling a gap between
preparation and appointment practices. Only a minority report feeling very well prepared
(Sugrue, 2009b), influencing the kinds of schools in which inaugural posts are sought

Literature Number reviewed

Peer-reviewed journal articles 41

Chapters in edited volumes 6
Table III. Books and monographs 2
Literature reviewed Theses 6

Types of literature No.

Empirical
Quantitative 5
Qualitative 30
Mixed 8
Conceptual 2
Table IV. Historical 2
Methodological Descriptive 5
overview of the Viewpoint (comment) 3
literature reviewed Total 55
(McGuinness and Cunningham, 2015) and augmenting experiences of initial difficulties in School
the role (Ummanel et al., 2016). Recent research indicates that LPD is a professional leadership
expectation of aspirant school leaders and that they believe it should be accessible to all
(Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants, 2018). Another study has found that
inadequacies in LPD link to why some teachers may be reluctant to move towards formal
leadership (Anderson et al., 2011). Studies tend to focus on leadership preparation rather
than development, on the role of the principalship and on the primary school sector. An 679
exception is O’Connor’s (2008) study exploring assistant principals’ perceptions of their
professional learning and learning needs as middle leaders in secondary schools. Research
has also advocated for the necessity to provide a breadth of LPD opportunities to both
aspirant and current leaders, extending to the emotional dimensions of their work (Riley,
2015). In some literature, this extends to an argument for a mandatory certification
(McGuinness and Cunningham, 2015) although other research demonstrates contrasting
views amongst research participants about mandatory certification (Cuddihy, 2012).
More critical commentary and debate concerning the “energy, motivation and
commitment but also the financial ability to support” (O’Connor, 2008, p. 115) leaders’
professional learning are broadly absent in the literature. For example, in the annex of the
most recent research report on school leadership in Ireland (Fitzpatrick Associates
Economic Consultants, 2018) significant financial support is mentioned as a condition of
LPD success but it does not elaborate further on this. Moreover, deeper analysis of other
constraints such as time limitations articulated by female research participants who are
parents (Poekert et al., 2016; Sugrue, 2015) or how commitments to furthering formal LPD
are influenced by workload are also absent.
Reported benefits of engagement with formal LPD included: enhanced perceptions of the
complexities of being a school leader, deeper understanding of and greater readiness to
enact the role’s responsibilities, a relative easiness to reconfigure professional identity than
those who did not partake in such formal preparation and a wider support network from
which to draw on upon appointment making the transition experience less negative and
arduous (McGuinness and Cunningham, 2015). Professional learning needs based on survey
data indicate that the top three critical areas are: conflict management and resolution, the
management of challenging behaviours and the distribution of leadership roles and
responsibilities (Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants, 2018). The necessity for
administrative and financial training needs (Ummanel et al., 2016) is reported elsewhere.
Elsewhere Sugrue (2015, p. 108) indicates that “preparation for the role is vital if more than
the status quo is required” to avoid overwhelming those who take up positions as school
leaders, yet he cautions against “scripted learning” (p. 118). Recognition of both formal and
informal learning as part of the journey towards being formally appointed school leader is
only somewhat superficially touched on in the literature reviewed (O’Connor, 2008; Sugrue,
2009b), although it is taken up somewhat more deeply by Sugrue (2015) describing how
participants constructed their own leadership learning. He argues that multiple approaches to
such leadership learning, embracing the formal and the informal, must be maintained for a
culture of professionalism to prevail. However, in the absence of agreed national standards for
school leaders that reflect contemporary school leadership practices beyond policy’s SSE
guidelines, it will be potentially challenging for (aspirant) leaders to confidently construct
(and invest their resources on) their own (in)formal learning to demonstrate their preparedness
to lead schools.

3.2 Teacher, middle and DL

The body of research literature on TL, middle leadership (ML) and DL is the most saturated
theme since 2015. One perspective is the necessity to reconceive of York-Barr and Duke’s (2004)
conception of TL, particularly how teacher leaders are prepared and developed
JEA (Poekert et al., 2016). The role of TL to foster inclusion in pre-service teachers’ practice has also
57,6 been examined, stating that TL “is seen within the context of DL and is situated within the
school improvement agenda” (King, 2017, p. 8) in the Irish context. This is significant given that
those in positional middle management have been those who have traditionally held the licence
to lead, as also observed by O’Donovan (2015). Research has also sought to examine how
formal leadership created the conditions for (in)formal TL and ML to flourish in schools (King
680 and Stevenson, 2017) pointing out that the limitations in understandings of scripted, licensed
leadership. O’Donovan (2015, p. 254) supports this, and finds that “the character of the school
organization” and the “particular historical contexts” in which schools are embedded matter.
Furthermore, a comparative study between the Irish and Finnish contexts through the lens
of DL found a disconnect between DL and ML practices owed to an intensification of the work
of school leaders attributed to a “tyranny of bureaucracy” (Lárusdóttir and O’Connor, 2017,
p. 430), tipping practices in favour of management rather than leadership. Lárusdóttir and
O’Connor describe a chasm between the rhetoric and reality of DL in examining practice, which
they view to merit professional learning opportunities for school leaders. This corresponds
with the research report by Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants (2018, p. 46) which
found that the third most critical area of need for further professional learning reported by
school leaders that have undergone formal professional learning is “Developing Leadership
Capacity – Distributing leadership roles and responsibilities”. Despite evidence of advantages
owed to TL, ML and DL, it is clear that challenges remain for their realisation in practice.
Research that explored a specific example in practice was a study examining the role of
mentors in the National Induction Program for Teachers (Clarke et al., 2015), although it
refers mostly to middle management. This study found that leadership potential was limited
by the hierarchical structures of school organisation and that, in the context of an evolving
policy context of initial teacher education, more attention should be paid to the relationship
senior school leaders have with teacher leaders, particularly the principal and mentor
teachers. Similarly, a recent study examined how teacher leaders become designated liaison
persons (DLPs) (Nohilly, 2018). This is an example of a specific role that is normally
expected to be the principal of deputy principal; it is a role concerned with child protection
and involves co-professional interaction with the school’s pastoral care team and child
protection services. Nohilly (2018) found that participants perceived the experience offered
by this role in disadvantaged schools to be particularly rich and transformative, although
the study does not postulate how leadership may be shared with teachers (either formally or
informally) or how organisational structures might play a factor in the almost inevitability
that the principal or deputy principal becomes the DLP.
The individual pieces of literature falling under this category employ different
definitions and understandings of TL, ML and DL. Paying sufficient and detailed
attention to the subtleties and nuances of difference in how each of these concepts are
understood and conceived in the field of school leadership is important (such as in King
and Stevenson, 2017), as is distinguishing them from management structures rather than
assuming synonymy. Paying close attention to this in future research could lead to
increasingly richer understandings of the barriers and constraints inherent in individual
schools’ organisation of leadership structures and cultures and the realisation of
leadership at all levels of the school.

3.3 Leading for equality, inclusivity and care

A number of studies have explored the intersection of gender and school leadership (Cuneen
and Harford, 2016; Devine et al., 2011; Lynch et al., 2012). They demonstrated that
conceptions of the role of school leader tended to be gendered and showed how this created
challenges for women that aspired to become school leaders. Elsewhere, recent research has
also examined how pluralism has begun to shape Ireland’s education system and school
leadership. Related to this, research exposes the challenges that this societal change creates, School
such as in how school leaders develop school ethos (Hickey, 2016; McNamara and Norman, leadership
2010) or a school’s characteristic spirit in publicly managed schools (O’Flaherty et al., 2018).
Research has also examined how senior school leaders create inclusive school
environments in new systemic structures emerging that are deliberately designed to
respond to this increasing pluralism and diversity in contemporary Irish society (Faas et al.,
2018). Describing the principals as being at the vanguard of the change intended by these 681
systemic structural reforms, Faas et al. (2018) reported on the challenges and opportunities
experienced by leadership in such contexts, most pronouncedly in the inclusive and
equitable interpretation and enactment of religious education curriculum. Further research
has begun to theorize leadership practices in multi-ethnic schools (Devine, 2013). Clear in the
accounts presented in Devine’s contribution are leaders’ personal formation of an emotional
compass in their experiences that influence their practices of leadership for equality,
inclusivity and care, and the struggles and tensions a desire “to effect deep change” (p. 408)
– to be transformative – creates for them as school leaders. However, despite the influence of
the post-2008 downturn significantly increasing child poverty and homelessness, no studies
exist exploring how school leadership work contends with this inequality (Shields, 2014).
Research in the field of inclusion has examined leadership practices from a longitudinal
perspective (Shevlin and Rose, 2017); case study research with pre-service teachers (King,
2017); implementation studies (Kelly et al., 2014); and comparative, descriptive research (Mac
Ruairc et al., 2013).
A focus on how schools are led to be safe places was also clear. Bullying, for example, has
been researched in tandem with school leadership (Foody et al., 2018) from a range of
perspectives. More specifically, school leaders’ preparedness to resolve instances of
homophobic bullying (Farrelly et al., 2017) and cyber bullying (Corcoran and Mc Guckin,
2014) have been examined. Other research has examined how bullying amongst staff (Fahie,
2014), including school principals, occurs in the school context, which is important given
findings and recommendations in the “Irish principals and deputy principals occupational
health, safety and wellbeing survey” (Riley, 2015).

3.4 Leading with heart

Connected with the above concerns is research on the emotional implications of school
leadership. School leaders’ high stress levels are reported across many studies. Research
findings have demonstrated and explored the affective impact of role performativity on
individuals’ personal (Brennan and Mac Ruairc, 2011) and professional identities (Lynch
et al., 2012; Sugrue, 2009b, a). Recent quantitative research using longitudinal data to
examine job satisfaction and occupational stress levels of primary school principals
(Darmody and Smyth, 2015) demonstrated that over half of the respondent principals are
dissatisfied and more than 80 per cent feel stressed about their job. Elsewhere it has been
explicated that even where job satisfaction amongst school leaders may tend to be very
high, it “is not a protective factor, and does not mediate or moderate the other negative
factors involved in the role” (Riley, 2015, p. 20). Darmody and Smyth (2015) echo Riley’s
(2015) recommendations: governing boards of schools in Ireland – termed “Boards of
Management” – can and ought to act to emotionally support principals.
Qualitative studies exploring the affective impact of the role on school leaders have also
been conducted (Brennan and Mac Ruairc, 2017) where the affective domain of leading is
demonstrated to be connected to the particularities of context and how positive or negative
the relationships are between professionals working in the school. Further understanding
about how school leadership promotes positive school climates, particularly in the most
challenging circumstances, would be beneficial. Brennan and Mac Ruairc (2017) also
reported on school leaders’ accounts of the effects of heightened negative emotions in school
JEA contexts during Ireland’s economic crash. This echoes findings by Darmody and Smyth
57,6 (2015). Riley (2015) reports that the three principle “offensive behaviours” in schools in
Ireland are conflicts and quarrels, gossip and slander and bullying by a colleague or
superior. Such behaviours create emotional difficulties, with personal as well as professional
implications (Brennan and Mac Ruairc, 2011), the toll of which remains to be researched
further as the policy context of reform has intensified. Furthermore, the necessity to
682 seriously take stock of the relational dimensions inherent in the practice of school leadership
connects to the main findings of school leaders reported professional development needs in
the Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants’ (2018) report. The report finds that
conflict management and resolution, as well as managing challenging behaviours are cited
as key professional learning needs for school leaders irrespective of whether they have
already engaged in professional learning. These findings again resonate with Riley’s (2015)
recommendation to provide evidence-based, targeted professional learning to support
school leaders with the emotional aspects of the role.
A roller-coaster of affective challenges attributed to the managerialist pressures
(King and Stevenson, 2017; Sugrue, 2011) of the role at both middle (Lárusdóttir and
O’Connor, 2017) and senior leader levels (Devine et al., 2011) emerge. Emotions span guilt,
and feeling both swamped and drained in alternation with energy and buzz.
Teaching principals consistently report a lack of sustainability in the role and the
disproportionate negative consequences they experience as school leaders (Darmody and
Smyth, 2015; Riley, 2015).

3.5 Leading educational reform

Over the last decade it has been observed that school leaders experience “an expanding
array of demands for reform” (Sugrue, 2009b, p. 377). Mac Ruairc’s (2010) analysis
suggested that the influence of hegemonic international discourses has been profound,
informing particular new public managerialist policies promoting the effectiveness and
improvement of school leadership, including evaluation practices. Also aligning with
international critical perspectives in school leadership (Niesche, 2018) are other critical
perspectives arguing that reform has constituted a neoliberal turn in how school leadership
practices are understood and constructed, particularly in relation to the leadership of
curriculum reform (Mooney Simmie, 2014). Curriculum leadership has been explored from
both conceptual and empirical perspectives. Conceptual research proposes that curriculum
development and school leadership development are two sides of the same coin (Sugrue,
2016) while empirical research has focussed on the leadership of particular curricula
(Halbert and MacPhail, 2010; Jeffers, 2010). Each contribution makes apparent the key
influences senior school leaders have on curriculum reform at the level of the school, as well
as the international influences on senior school leaders as they set about this work. Given
significant curricular reform over the course of this past decade at both primary and
secondary school levels in Ireland, the context is ripe for the continued exploration of
curriculum leadership.
Another strand of research concerned with the leadership of educational reform has
focussed on school evaluation, particularly SSE (Ehren et al., 2015; McNamara and O’Hara,
2012). This has resulted in more importance attributed to data in the Irish education
system (Young et al., 2018) and school leaders’ proficiencies in this pertaining to
management, promotion and interpretation of data. However, school leaders’ engagement
with research and evidence beyond data, and how this informs practice, has yet to be more
systematically studied. Other research has examined how school principals promote the
use of technology and digital media in the Irish context (McGarr and Kearney, 2009). This
is an under-researched area given the prevalence of “The Digital Strategy for Schools
2015-2020” (DES, 2015).
3.6 Religious influence on school leadership School
Several studies have focussed on the influence of religion for school leadership in Ireland leadership
(Gleeson, 2015; O’Flaherty et al., 2018). This body of research describes how school leaders
create inclusive schools (Faas et al., 2018) when the school’s vision and values
typically tend, for the vast majority of schools in the Irish context, to be singularly
determined or heavily influenced by particular, mostly Catholic, religious influences.
Research in the Irish context has demonstrated that religious influences on school leaders’ 683
vision and values have created inclusive school environments, for example in
recognising and supporting the learning of immigrant children (Devine, 2013). Yet other
studies have shown that there have been inclusive leadership challenges owed, in part,
to these religious influences, for example, in considering homophobic bullying
(Farrelly et al., 2017).
Despite significant societal change over the last decade, recent research suggests that
the legacy of religious influence leads to an acceptance the place of religion in the formal
school curriculum of publicly managed schools (McCormack et al., 2018). Ongoing debate
about this, and shifts in the policy context resulting in lack of clarity, mean school leaders
feel left in limbo (Parker-Jenkins and Masterson, 2013) owed in part to non-decision-
making and silence of policy (Rizvi and Lingard, 2010). Evidence exists that school leaders
generally express a lack of awareness of how the extent of religious influence on public
education may at times be problematic, and moreover, that few leaders, if any, will
challenge the status quo (McCormack et al., 2018). Critiques have also surfaced in the
literature about the reluctance of those exercising most religious influence through
governance structures to critique the influence of market forces on schools, particularly
new public managerialism (Lynch et al., 2012). For Gleeson (2015, p. 145) this “militates
against gospel values” of “justice, fairness and equality” (p. 151). He asserts that the
challenge for system and school leaders in Catholic education is to align to a more holistic
rather than narrow, typically neoliberal view of education, particularly as curriculum
leaders. Future research could endeavour to explore and describe these practices given
emerging arguments that the spectrum of Catholicity on which schools are now situated is
increasingly broad (Byrne and Devine, 2018). Research that probes how religious school
leaders (inclusively) position their schools in an increasingly multicultural and secular
Irish society would also be of interest. There is also scope to research the curricula of LPD
programs offered by religious institutions to explore school leaders socialisation and to
determine the extent to which programmes connect to and complement international best
practice in LPD programs (Crow and Whiteman, 2016).

4. Gaps and silences in the literature reviewed

First, although research has demonstrated the necessity to improve and expand provision
of LPD, more research on current provisions is necessary, where judgements about the
adequacy of formal LPD will need to be balanced against the increasing distribution and
complexity of school leadership practices. Tracking those who engage in LPD as a cohort
study into appointment and onwards could be insightful. Given reformed leadership and
management structures, further research could be conducted on how school leaders are
selected and appointed, the profile of and knowledge base drawn on by those who select
and appoint them. Second, despite the impact gender has on aspirations to lead schools
having been explored, broader accounts of diverse school leaders ( for example, ethnicity,
religious beliefs, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status), and consequently the
opportunities and dilemmas encountered in leading (or aspiring to lead) schools, remain
underexplored. Monitoring and understanding diversity more expansively is a necessary
step to realise PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (2009) recommendation that different images of
school leaders needed to be promoted. Third, principals’ inclusive leadership practices in
JEA diverse school contexts have been explored, but more research on the practices both
57,6 system and senior school leaders employ to initiate and sustain the building of
whole-school capacity for learning about and practising leadership in contexts
experiencing increasing diversity is necessary. Despite qualitative (Sugrue, 2015) and
quantitative (Darmody and Smyth, 2015) analysis of longitudinal data, larger scale
mixed-method longitudinal research on school leadership could be conducted to become
684 an important source of sustained evidence inform decisions about educational reform and
its relationship to, and impact on, school leaders(hip). Funding this research could provide
a map of school leaders in Ireland and reliably inform sustainable, long-term system
planning. Research that examines how school leadership, particularly the principal, builds
capacity to influence pre-service teachers’ school placements or in-service teachers’
professional development within schools through DL, partnerships or collaborative
co-inquiry could be further expanded. Finally, research could also explore how and which
administrative supports, understood to increase job satisfaction (Darmody and Smyth,
2015), support school leaders best, extending to Boards of Management.
Silences were also evident in this review. Studies probing leadership’s influence on
student outcomes are absent despite prevalence in international literature (Hallinger and
Kovačević, 2019). Research on school leaders in immersion (Irish language medium) school
contexts is absent. Case study, critical incident and theory of action accounts of “successful”
or darker practices of school leadership in the Irish context are absent. Cataloguing these
through eclectic research methodologies could be a fruitful research exercise and of
particular use to those engaged in LPD.

5. Conclusion
Despite policy interest in school leadership in Ireland growing steadily since the early 90s,
only over the past decade has more significant progress in educational research been
achieved. Based on this systematic review and thematic synthesis, each discussion under
the each of the six themes generated in Section III demonstrates progress, persistent
obstacles and the merging of local and global perspectives (Hallinger and Kovačević,
2019) with implications for future directions for theory, research, policy and/or practice in
Ireland and internationally (Hallinger, 2013). From a theoretical perspective, DL can be
seen to underpin – at least in official policy – school leadership in Ireland. From a
research perspective, DL’s convergence with school evaluation and leadership preparation
are both interesting and under-examined convergences. Exploring these convergences in
Irish and other contexts, in implementation studies, for example, could be fruitful to
advance school leadership theory, research and practice. The practical challenges of
establishing balance in national approaches to LPD that are sustainable, particularly
when conjointly implemented with multiple other reforms, rigorous, accessible and
professionally enhancing for participants, from both their own and the system’s
perspective, are undoubtedly difficult and create onerous responsibilities for system
leaders(hip). Therefore, these challenges necessitate further research. “Religious influence
on school leadership”, while taken up by Striepe et al. (2014) elsewhere, is a theme distinct
in this review. While in Ireland, it impacts almost every school leader given systemic
structures, leadership implications of religion, pluralism and diversity – both in secular
and faith schools – demands further study globally. Given policy lacunae despite
significant societal change and shifting international migration patterns, research could
focus on how pluralism and diversity might be inclusively and democratically achieved,
exploring implications for school and system leadership, particularly in politically
uncertain times. Therefore, based on this national review, numerous possibilities are
raised for continued generation of “a truly global knowledge base” (Hallinger and
Kovačević, 2019, p. 28) in school leadership.
References School
Anderson, K., Brien, K., McNamara, G., O’Hara, J. and McIsaac, D. (2011), “Reluctant leaders: why are leadership
some capable leaders not interested in the principalship?”, International Journal of Management
in Education, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 384-400.
Ärlestig, H., Day, C. and Johansson, O. (2016), A Decade of Research on School Principals: Cases from 24
Countries, Springer, Cham.
Brennan, J. and Mac Ruairc, G. (2011), “Taking it personally: examining patterns of emotional practice 685
in leading primary schools in the Republic of Ireland”, International Journal of Leadership in
Education, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 129-150.
Brennan, J. and Mac Ruairc, G. (2017), “Different worlds: the cadences of context, exploring the
emotional terrain of school principals’ practice in schools in challenging circumstances”,
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 129-146.
Brown, K.M. (2011), “Pivotal points: history, development, and promise of the principalship”, in
English, F. (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Educational Leadership, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA,
pp. 82-109.
Bush, T. (2018), “Preparation and induction for school principals: global perspectives”, Management in
Education, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 66-71.
Bush, T. and Crawford, M. (2012), “Mapping the field over 40 years: a historical review”, Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 537-543.
Byrne, J.A. (2016), “Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews”, Research Integrity and
Peer Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-4.
Byrne, R. and Devine, D. (2018), “ ‘Catholic schooling with a twist?’ A study of faith schooling in the
Republic of Ireland during a period of detraditionalization”, Cambridge Journal of Education,
Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 461-477.
Camburn, E.M., Huff, J.T., Goldring, E.B. and May, H. (2010), “Assessing the validity of an annual
survey for measuring principal leadership practice”, The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 111
No. 2, pp. 314-335.
Centre for School Leadership (2018), “Post graduate diploma in school leadership”, available at: www.
cslireland.ie/post-graduate-diploma-in-school-leadership.html (accessed 20 October 2018).
Cherry, M.G., Smith, H., Perkins, E. and Boland, A. (2017), “Reviewing qualitative evidence”, in Boland,
A., Cherry, M.G. and Dickson, R. (Eds), Doing a Systematic Review: A Student’s Guide, SAGE,
Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 193-222.
Clarke, M., Killeavy, M. and Ferris, R. (2015), “Mentor teachers as leaders and followers in school-based
contexts in the Republic of Ireland”, The International Journal of Educational Management,
Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 368-379.
Clarke, S. and O’Donoghue, T. (2017), “Educational leadership and context: a rendering of an
inseparable relationship”, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 167-182.
Coolahan, J., Drudy, S., Hogan, P., Hyland, Á. and McGuinness, S. (2017), Towards a Better Future: A
Review of the Irish School System, Irish Primary Principals’ Network, National Association of
Principals and Deputy Principals, Dublin.
Corcoran, L. and Mc Guckin, C. (2014), “Addressing bullying problems in Irish schools and in
cyberspace: a challenge for school management”, Educational Research, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 48-64.
Crow, G.M. and Whiteman, R.S. (2016), “Effective preparation program features: a literature review”,
Journal of Research on Leadership Education, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 120-148.
Cuddihy, N.J. (2012), “Understanding school leadership: a mixed methods study of the context and
needs of serving and aspiring post primary school principals”, unpublished manuscript, Dublin
City University, Dublin.
Cuneen, M. and Harford, J. (2016), “Gender matters: women’s experience of the route to principalship in
Ireland”, in Fuller, K. and Harford, J. (Eds), Gender and Leadership in Education, Peter Lang,
Oxford, pp. 147-175.
JEA Darmody, M. and Smyth, E. (2015), “Primary school principals’ job satisfaction and occupational
57,6 stress”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 115-128.
Day, C., Gu, Q. and Sammons, P. (2016), “The impact of leadership on student outcomes: how successful
school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference”,
Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 221-258.
DES (2015), “Digital strategy for schools 2015-2020 – enhancing teaching, learning and assessment”,
Department of Education and Skills, Dublin, available at: www.education.ie/en/Publications/
686 Policy-Reports/Digital-Strategy-for-Schools-2015-2020.pdf (accessed 4 November 2018).
DES (2017), “Leadership and management in primary schools – circular letter 0063/2017”, Department
of Education and Skills, available at: www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Archived-
Circulars/cl0063_2017.pdf (accessed 4 November 2018).
DES (2018), “Leadership and management in post-primary schools – circular letter 0003/2018”,
Department of Education and Skills, available at: www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/
Active-Circulars/cl0003_2018.pdf (accessed 4 November 2018).
Devine, D. (2013), “Practising leadership in newly multi-ethnic schools: tensions in the field?”, British
Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 392-411.
Devine, D., Grummell, B. and Lynch, K. (2011), “Crafting the elastic self? Gender and identities in senior
appointments in Irish education”, Gender, Work & Organization, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 631-649.
Drudy, S. and Lynch, K. (1993), Schools and Society in Ireland, Gill & Macmillan, Cork.
Ehren, M.C.M., Gustafsson, J.E., Altrichter, H., Skedsmo, G., Kemethofer, D. and Huber, S.G. (2015),
“Comparing effects and side effects of different school inspection systems across Europe”,
Comparative Education, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 375-400.
Faas, D., Smith, A. and Darmody, M. (2018), “The role of principals in creating inclusive school
environments: insights from community national schools in Ireland”, School Leadership &
Management, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 457-473.
Fahie, D. (2014), “Blackboard bullies: workplace bullying in primary schools”, Irish Educational Studies,
Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 435-450.
Farrelly, G., Norman, J.O. and O’Leary, M. (2017), “Custodians of silences? School principal perspectives
on the incidence and nature of homophobic bullying in primary schools in Ireland”, Irish
Educational Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 151-167.
Fischer, K. (2016), Schools and the Politics of Religion and Diversity in the Republic of Ireland: Separate
but Equal?, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants (2018), School Leadership in Ireland and the Centre for School
Leadership: Research and Evaluation, Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants, Dublin.
Flood, P. (2011), “Leading and managing Irish schools: a historical perspective”, in O’Sullivan, H. and
West-Burnham, J. (Eds), Leading and Managing Schools, SAGE, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 43-59.
Foody, M., Murphy, H., Downes, P. and O’Higgins Norman, J. (2018), “Anti-bullying procedures for
schools in Ireland: principals’ responses and perceptions”, Pastoral Care in Education, Vol. 36
No. 2, pp. 126-140.
Gleeson, J. (2015), “Critical challenges and dilemmas for Catholic education leadership internationally”,
International Studies in Catholic Education, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 145-161.
Halbert, J. and MacPhail, A. (2010), “Curriculum dissemination and implementation in Ireland: principal
and teacher insight”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 25-40.
Hallinger, P. (2013), “A conceptual framework for systematic reviews of research in educational
leadership and management”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 126-149.
Hallinger, P. (2018), “Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership”, Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 5-24.
Hallinger, P. and Kovačević, J. (2019), “A bibliometric review of research on educational administration:
science mapping the literature, 1960 to 2018”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 89 No. 3,
pp. 335-369.
Harris, A., Jones, M. and Adams, D. (2016), “Qualified to lead? A comparative, contextual and cultural School
view of educational policy borrowing”, Educational Research, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 166-178. leadership
Hickey, E. (2016), “The principal’s role in developing ethos in primary schools”, doctoral dissertation,
University College Dublin, Dublin.
Hult, A., Lundström, U. and Edström, C. (2016), “Balancing managerial and professional demands:
school principals as evaluation brokers”, Education Inquiry, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 283-304.
Jeffers, G. (2010), “The role of school leadership in the implementation of the transition year programme 687
in Ireland”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 469-486.
Kelly, A., Devitt, C., O’Keeffe, D. and Donovan, A.M. (2014), “Challenges in implementing inclusive
education in Ireland: principal’s views of the reasons students aged 12+ are seeking enrollment
to special schools”, Journal of Policy & Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 68-81.
King, F. (2017), “Evolving perspective(s) of teacher leadership: an exploration of teacher leadership for
inclusion at preservice level in the republic of Ireland”, International Studies in Educational
Administration, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 5-21.
King, F. and Stevenson, H. (2017), “Generating change from below: what role for leadership from
above?”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 657-670.
Lárusdóttir, S.H. and O’Connor, E. (2017), “Distributed leadership and middle leadership practice in
schools: a disconnect?”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 423-438.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2008), “Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-42.
Lynch, K., Grummell, B. and Devine, D. (2012), New Managerialism in Education: Commercialization,
Carelessness, and Gender, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.
McCormack, O., O’Flaherty, J., O’Reilly, B. and Liston, J. (2018), “‘That’s how it works here’: the place of
religion in publicly managed second-level schools in Ireland”, British Educational Research
Journal, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 161-180.
McGarr, O. and Kearney, G. (2009), “The role of the teaching principal in promoting ICT use in small
primary schools in Ireland”, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 87-102.
McGuinness, S. and Cunningham, V. (2015), “Primary school leadership: understanding preparation in
the Tóraíocht programme”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 207-223.
McNamara, G. and Norman, J. (2010), “Conflicts of ethos: issues of equity and diversity in faith-based
schools”, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 534-546.
McNamara, G. and O’Hara, J. (2012), “From looking at our schools (LAOS) to whole school evaluation-
management, leadership and learning (WSE-MLL): the evolution of inspection in Irish schools
over the past decade”, Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 79-97.
Mac Ruairc, G. (2010), “This way please! Improving school leadership: the OECD way”, Journal of
Educational Administration and History, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 223-246.
Mac Ruairc, G., Ottesen, E. and Precey, R. (2013), Leadership for Inclusive Education Values, Vision and
Voices, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.
Mooney Simmie, G. (2014), “The neo-liberal turn in understanding teachers’ and school leaders’ work
practices in curriculum innovation and change: a critical discourse analysis of a newly proposed
reform policy in lower secondary education in the republic of Ireland”, Citizenship, Social and
Economics Education, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 185-198.
Murphy, G. (2018), “A tangled tale? Teachers making sense of school evaluation in The Republic of
Ireland”, in Ottesen, E. and Stephens, F. (Eds), School Evaluation with a Purpose: Stories from
European Schools, Routledge, London, pp. 53-66.
Niesche, R. (2018), “Critical perspectives in educational leadership: a new ‘theory turn’?”, Journal of
Educational Administration and History, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 145-158.
Nohilly, M. (2018), “Becoming and being DLP: designated liaison persons’ experience of the role in the
Irish primary school”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 19-32.
JEA O’Connor, E. (2008), “ ‘There is a lot to be learnt’: assistant principals’ perceptions of their professional
57,6 learning experiences and learning needs in their role as middle leaders in Irish post-primary
schools”, doctoral dissertation, University College London, London.
O’Donovan, M. (2015), “The challenges of distributing leadership in Irish post-primary schools”,
International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 243-266.
OECD (1991), Ireland, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
688 O’Flaherty, J., McCormack, O., Gleeson, J., O’Reilly, B., O’Grady, E. and Kenny, N. (2018), “Developing
the characteristic spirit of publicly managed schools in a more secular and pluralist Ireland”,
Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 317-333.
O’Flaherty, L. (1992), Management and Control in Irish Education: The Post-Primary Experience,
Drumcondra Teachers’ Centre, Dublin.
Oplatka, I. (2017), “Fifteen years of publication: leadership and policy in schools and its scholarly
contribution since its foundation”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-26.
Parker-Jenkins, M. and Masterson, M. (2013), “No longer ‘Catholic, White and Gaelic’: schools in Ireland
coming to terms with cultural diversity”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 477-492.
Poekert, P., Alexandrou, A. and Shannon, D. (2016), “How teachers become leaders: an internationally
validated theoretical model of teacher leadership development”, Research in Post-Compulsory
Education, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 307-329.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2009), “School leadership matters: A North South report. An empirical
assessment of the attractiveness of principalship in the North of Ireland and South of Ireland”,
available at: http://pdst.ie/node/311 (accessed 20 October 2019).
Riley, P. (2015), “Irish principals and deputy principals occupational health, safety and wellbeing
survey”, available at: www.principalhealth.org/ie/2015_Final_Report_Ireland.pdf (accessed 10
October 2018).
Rizvi, F. and Lingard, B. (2010), Globalizing Education Policy, Routledge, London.
Robinson, V.M.J., Lloyd, C.A. and Rowe, K.J. (2008), “The impact of leadership on student outcomes: an
analysis of the differential effects of leadership types”, Educational Administration Quarterly,
Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 635-674.
Saldaña, J. (2009), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, SAGE, Los Angeles, CA.
Schildkamp, K., Vanhoof, J., van Petegem, P. and Visscher, A. (2012), “The use of school self-evaluation
results in the Netherlands and Flanders”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 125-152.
Shevlin, M. and Rose, R. (2017), “Leadership approaches to inclusive education: learning from an Irish
longitudinal study”, in Milton, M. (Ed.), Inclusive Principles and Practices in Literacy Education,
Emerald Publishing, Bingley, pp. 53-67.
Shields, C.M. (2014), “The war on poverty must be won: transformative leaders can make a difference”,
International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 124-146.
Striepe, M., Clarke, S. and O’Donoghue, T. (2014), “Spirituality, values and the school’s ethos: factors
shaping leadership in a faith-based school”, Issues in Educational Research, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 95-97.
Sugrue, C. (2009a), “From heroes and heroines to hermaphrodites: emasculation or emancipation of
school leaders and leadership?”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 353-371.
Sugrue, C. (2009b), “Performativity and professionalism: Irish primary principals’ experience of
building leadership capacity”, European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 372-386.
Sugrue, C. (2011), “Autonomy and accountability”, in O’Sullivan, H. and West-Burnham, J. (Eds),
Leading and Managing Schools, SAGE, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 59-74.
Sugrue, C. (2015), Unmasking School Leadership: A Longitudinal Life History of School Leaders,
Springer, New York, NY.
Sugrue, C. (2016), “Curriculum development and school leadership: unattainable responsibility or School
realistic ambition?”, in Wyse, D., Hayward, L. and Pandya, J. (Eds), The SAGE Handbook of leadership
Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, SAGE, London, pp. 997-1014.
Ummanel, A., McNamara, G. and Stynes, M. (2016), “The career paths of primary school principals in
Ireland”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 57-71.
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,
Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 327-365.
689
Wenner, J.A. and Campbell, T. (2017), “The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership:
a review of the literature”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 134-171.
York-Barr, J. and Duke, K. (2004), “What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two
decades of scholarship”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 255-316.
Young, C., McNamara, G., Brown, M. and O’Hara, J. (2018), “Adopting and adapting: school leaders in the
age of data-informed decision making”, Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability,
Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 133-158.

About the author

Gavin Murphy studies Educational Policy and Leadership at the School of Education, University College
Dublin (UCD). At UCD, Gavin is affiliated to the “Leading, Teaching, Learning” research cluster with
teaching and research responsibilities in initial teacher and school leader education. Gavin was awarded an
Endeavour Research Fellowship to the Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne
(2018) and a Cambridge European Scholarship to the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge (2015).
Gavin Murphy can be contacted at: gavin.murphy@ucd.ie

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.