0.6 Young, k., larsen, d., & Mixon, j. (october 2011). the relationship  (Page 2/5)

Literature review

Professional educators have participated in school reform initiatives to establish performance standards to strengthen educational leadership preparation programs (Shipman, Queen,&Peel, 2007). According to Shipman, Queen, and Peel (2007), the Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) standards were first published in 1995. ELCC Standard 5 addresses ethical leadership as stated, “Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all students by acting with integrity, fairly, and in an ethical manner” (p. 119). Likewise, Standard 5 of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISSLC) suggests that leaders act in an ethical and fair manner toward students. This includes acting in ways that promote matters of social justice. Johnson and Ulnine (2005) suggest that instructional leaders who demonstrate the attributes contained within the ISLLC standards have been successful in closing achievement gaps in their schools and that leaders in successful schools have applied this standard by elevating the concerns of stakeholders beyond personal concerns, which are exacerbated by issues of race, ethnicity, and class, to address the needs of students.

Whereas much of the discourse within education surrounding ethics and social justice tend to focus upon standards or closing the achievement gap, with an emphasis on specific performance-based skills for educational leaders, it has been suggested that potential leaders also need to be prepared to engage in the difficult work of social justice that entails; “a shift in values, attitudes and behaviors within the school community” (Cambron-McCabe&McCarthy, 2005, p. 214). Lunenburg and Irby (2006) defined an ethical principal as “one who, in the face of adversity, ambiguity, and challenge reflects on what is right by some set standard or code and acts in a rational and caring manner to resolve problems and conduct business” (p. 346).

Starratt (2004) wrote extensively about “being present,” which he explained was achieved by really reflecting on a situation fully and understanding all components, then accepting the moral responsibility for completely addressing that situation with the involvement of significant others. Starratt (2004) wrote “the sense of moral responsibility to respond to a certain situation or event grows in proportion to our being present to that situation or event” (p. 91). Johnson (2009) identified several personal characteristics, which he found contributed to ethical leadership. Johnson noted that courage enabled leaders to take risks; optimism enabled them to persist, while compassion and justice enabled them to consider the needs of others rather than focusing only upon their own personal goals.

The study of ethics is extremely complex since the issues being considered are choices about what is considered right or wrong when examining human behavior (Rebore, 2001). Yet, as Johnson (2009) stated “The misery caused by unethical leaders drives home an important point: Ethics is at the heart of leadership” (p. xvi) and thus the study of ethics and ethics courses deserves the attention of ongoing investigation. Although, there are multiple approaches and challenges to teaching ethics to educational leaders (Coombs, 1998; Nash, 2002; Shapiro&Sefkovich, 2005; Surface, 2007;Vokey, 2005), there is a general consensus that ethical foundations provide lenses through which educational leaders can evaluate current practices (Beck&Murphy, 1997; Starratt, 1997) and, thus, need to be intentionally and explicitly taught (Bowen, Bessett,&Chan, 2006).