Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines symbolic practices of instructional leadership, indicating their significance in enhancing teaching and learning.
Instructional leadership has traditionally been conceptualized in terms of concrete practices aimed at improving teaching and learning, such as supervising instruction, coordinating curricula, and supporting teacher development. This study extends that conceptualization by examining symbolic practices of instructional leadership, which focus on signaling the primacy of instruction rather than on technical interventions. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 21 elementary school principals in Israel, the analysis identified three categories of symbolic practices: talking about teaching and learning, being present where teaching and learning happen, and making teaching and learning visible. By positioning symbolic practices alongside concrete practices, the study broadens the theoretical scope of instructional leadership.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haim Shaked (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: