London University’s Institute of Education carried out the research, involving thousands of students, teachers and heads in 96 schools in South Australia and Tasmania.

A much smaller-scale project looking at leadership in challenging schools in the UK, carried out for the National College for School Leadership, came to similar conclusions (see TES, February 22).

The Australian work found that the kind of leadership which makes a difference in schools is one which is shared by heads and teachers. These schools had trusting and collaborative climates in which staff (and pupils) had a shared mission, felt safe to take risks and were involved in relevant professional development.

Pupils in such schools had a more positive perception of their teachers’

work - which in turn improved their engagement with school, academic confidence and success. Factors such as school size, and whether children were supported at home, also affected leadership and pupil outcomes, however.

Professors Bill Mulford and Halia Silins, of Tasmani and South Australia universities, conclude: “Faith in one person, ‘the leader’, as the instrument for successful implem- entation of educational policy, let alone broader and longer-term educational outcomes, might bring initial success, but the dependency relationship that it establishes will eventually ensure mediocrity if not failure.”

They compare the management model, put forward by consultants of excellence for school leaders, contrasting its emphasis on the drive and ability of the leader to provide clear direction and enthuse others with their stress on support, care, trust, participation and whole staff consensus.

Karen Thornton

The report, priced pound;3 is available from the National School Improvement Network on 020 7612 6347