Middle Management Leadership

The term' middle leadership' has many definitions, reflecting its role in the school- leading process. Most authors place middle leaders between senior leaders and other teaching staff (Busher et al., 2007; Dinham, 2016; Fleming, 2014; Gurr & Drysdale, 2013; Wise &

Bennett, 2003); others identify them as teachers who may influence another teacher, for example, if there is a novice teacher who needs guidance and helps from colleagues (Danielson, 2006); the third defines them as coordinators and heads of departments who closely work and influence teaching staff (Dinham, 2007). So, concluding the authors' ideas mentioned above, middle leadership is primarily teachers who are not assigned to a position but have some responsibility in leading and influencing the staff and the educational process.

Another more suitable definition for middle leadership is the position carried by a teacher between the senior leaders and other teaching staff - a head of the department. In schools, the heads of departments are crucial as they represent the department's interests and deliver senior leaders' orders to the teaching staff. They are like a bridge that connects these two points and coordinates the appropriate operation of the educational process at school.

According to Nobile (2018), taking one middle leadership model that will suit all schools is difficult. As was discussed earlier, everything depends on the context, the environment, and the individual characteristics of the leader. In the same article (Nobile, 2018), the author represents the shift from 'middle managers' to 'middle leaders.' It seems different for the author; however, as was shown earlier, there still needs to be a better understanding of the difference between these two notions among scholars. In this case, it is impossible to separate management from leadership, as they operate together.

According to Nobile (2018), some other factors may influence the effectiveness of middle leadership at school. They are – supported by the principal, culture of the

system/school, professional development, enthusiasm/drive, knowledge of curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment. All listed factors may equally impact middle leadership's

completion of their tasks. The support from the principal is significant for middle leadership as they are presented as ones who connect senior leadership and teaching staff. Crowther and Boyne (2016) state that teacher leaders managed to run school improvement after

encouragement from the school principal. It means that how senior leadership builds their cooperation with members of middle leadership influences the progress of the educational process and student achievement. However, middle leadership's passion is more important as it is common now to have professional burnout, which indicates a lack of enthusiasm for work. That also may appear as an indicator of a lack of principal support.

While completing the work and responsibilities, middle leadership may have one of six roles: student-centered, administrative, organizational, supervisory, staff development, and strategic (Nobile, 2018). Mostly they combine some of them as it is only possible to meet the one with other roles. Middle managers usually complete multiple tasks that require that combination. The combination of the given roles usually reflects the educational

organization's goals and strategic plan. The successful combination of roles may depend on the personal traits of middle leaders and success. For this reason, middle leaders should be flexible to changes happening in the process and able to adapt to a new combination regarding the situation.

The influence of socioeconomic context is crucial for the work of teachers and middle leaders who manage and lead the educational process. This context may include ethnic diversity, background diversity, and socioeconomic status of a student that impacts their academic achievement. As Busher et al. (2007) state in their article, these factors may cause a range of challenges for teachers and middle leaders to tackle.

Bennett et al. (2007) state three critical issues in the literature relating to tensions in the middle leader's role. They are connected to collegiality, professionality, and expertise.

Collegiality is usually understood as something happening among teachers when all team members discuss everything relating to the educational process. However, this process may negatively influence the middle leaders as they are placed between senior leaders and teaching staff. Also, the senior leaders may accept collegiality in definite departments as an

act of separation from them and leading concrete policy. Collegiality would benefit the educational process as it helps all staff members have a shared vision of the policy they implement for school improvement. Professionality is also one of the critical factors of tension that teachers and middle leaders may face.

According to Bennett et al. (2007), professionality is when a teacher's professionalism is in the institutional practice and is valued equally by all organization members. This notion comes together with monitoring and peer judgment, as they are the tools for identifying a teacher's professionalism level. Most teachers avoid being monitored by peer teachers and heads of departments as they feel that the people who come to the classroom have the only aim – to find a failure. The authors (Bennett et al., 2007) believe that the middle leader must resolve this tension; however, another opinion is about monitoring the teacher's

professionalism without interference. It is possible to tackle this by monitoring students' academic performance (Wise, 2001); the evaluation of department performance is also acceptable (Glover et al., 1998); and the results of examinations are also one of the ways of monitoring teacher's professionalism at all (Bennett & Marr, 2003; Ribbins, 2003). These results may seem too general, but they are credible about the effectiveness of teachers' methods as professionals. Another tension that is also possible to happen is the authority and expertise of middle leaders. It is believed that middle leaders should be assigned to the position according to their teaching experience, providing appropriate authority for

colleagues. However, Bennett et al. (2007) state that it is not necessary to be the best teacher in the department to be assigned as a head of a department; it is more crucial to focus on modeling good practices that will improve students' performance and show teachers'

professionalism. Finally, the authors believe that for middle managers, it is more important to be the ones who protect the interests of the department rather than to contribute to school culture and collegiality. Considering the tensions mentioned above, it is essential to

remember that there is always a human factor that may influence the way of organizing the educational process and the results of students' academic performance. It would be better to have a more individualized approach when choosing the model of a middle leader and a person ready to commit and dedicate to the position.