Department of Education, National Taiwan Normal University

Purpose

Schools are located within their communities and maintain close interactions with them. As school leaders, principals bear the responsibility of interacting with their surrounding environments. The decisions they make are often based on their understanding and sensemaking of the internal and external contexts of the school and have a significant impact on the school. However, previous literature on schoolcommunity relations has offered limited examination of how principals incorporate internal and external community contexts into their sensemaking processes. The study explores the key events of interaction with the community as interpreted by an elementary school principal, the thinking and action characteristics of his sensemaking, and possible influencing factors. 

Main Theories or Conceptual Frameworks

Previous studies have predominantly analyzed the types of interaction, school marketing, school-community partnerships, school implementation of featured curricula, or roles of the principals. They are, however, limited to how school leaders filter important information or cues from the environment, interpret them, and take appropriate actions in response to the constantly changing educational sites through the perspective of sensemaking. Therefore, this study adopts sensemaking to analyze the interactions between a principal and the surrounding community, which not only enriches existing research but also provides suggestions for the implementation in practice. 

Research Design/Methods/Participants

This study utilizes a qualitative case study method to explore the sensemaking characteristics of an elementary school principal’s interactions with the community. Through criterion-based purposive sampling, one elementary school and its surrounding community were selected as the research site. Between early August and mid-November 2023, semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand the actual interactions between the case school and the community. A total of five participants were involved in the study, including the principal, and key stakeholders within and outside the school who were related to key events in community interactions. The researchers first discuss with the principal who identified five primary critical events related to school and community interactions. With the aim to understand the principal’s interpretations and actions on those events, the researchers conduct interviews with the stakeholders to capture multiple perspectives, and to achieve cross-validation. 

Research Findings or Conclusions

Based on the research purposes, the conclusions of this study are as follows: 1. The critical events interpreted by the principal regarding the interactions between the school and the community include the role of parent-teacher associations, the school’s featured curriculum, addressing conflict, the increasing enrollment of students from outside the school district, and collaboration between families and the school. 2. Prioritizing efforts to improve school quality and to gain community recognition, providing opportunities to discuss and exchange opinions, and offering supports to all the parties are the sensemaking characteristics that appear repeatedly in critical events of the principal. 3. The principal’s sensemaking in critical events was influenced by factors such as declining birthrate trends, role identity, career experiences, and the principal’s professional development trajectory.

Theoretical or Practical Insights/Contributions/Recommendations

Based on the aforementioned conclusions, this study presents suggestions for the principal of the case study school and future research as followed. 1. Implement the admission interview for students and parents within the school district to strengthen communications in order to enhance their comprehension of the school’s ideology and featured curriculum. 2. Develop comprehensive analysis and feedback mechanisms to promote school development. 3. Conduct studies on the learning experience of school principal leadership from a sensemaking perspective.

研究目的

學校坐落於社區中，與社區關係密切，校長身為學校領導者，承載著帶領學校與外部環境互動之重責大任，校長所做的各項決定，往往建基於其對學校內、外部情境的理解與意義建構，並會對學校產生重要影響。然而，先前有關學校與社區關係的文獻，探討校長衡酌學校內、外部社區環境以領導學校的意義建構之研究，尚不多見，因此，本研究的目的主要在探討一位國小校長所解讀的與社區互動的關鍵事件、其意義建構的思考行動特徵，以及可能影響因素。

主要理論或概念架構

學校與社區關係之相關研究大多從互動類型、學校行銷、學校與社區夥伴關係、學校實施特色課程或校長角色等角度進行分析，從意義建構（sensemaking）觀點探討校長如何篩選環境中的重要訊息或線索，並對其進行理解和詮釋，據此採取適當行動以因應不斷變化教育現場的相關研究尚不多見。由於探究校長意義建構有助於瞭解學校領導者思考及學習歷程的經驗與特性，因此，本研究採用意義建構觀點分析國民小學校長領導學校與社區互動之意義建構，盼能彌補現有文獻之不足，同時提供實務參考建議。

研究設計／方法／對象

本研究運用質性研究取向的個案研究法，探討一位國小校長與社區互動的意義建構特性。透過立意取樣中的效標抽樣（criterion sampling），選定一所國小及其所在的社區作為研究場域，於2023年8月初至11月中旬，以半結構式訪談瞭解個案學校與社區互動的實際情形，研究參與者共計五位，包含個案校長，以及與社區互動關鍵事件有關之校內外成員。研究者首先和校長討論其所認定個案學校與社區互動的關鍵事件，並從中瞭解校長對事件的解讀及行動，接續由校長所提及之事件找尋相關人士進行訪談，據此瞭解不同觀點，以及達到交互檢證之效。

研究發現或結論

根據研究目的，本研究獲得之結論如下：一、個案校長所解讀與社區互動的關鍵事件包括家長會角色、學校特色課程、衝突化解、學區外學生增長，以及家校合作。二、個案校長意義建構之思考行動特徵為優先提升學校品質，獲取社區認肯、提供討論及交流機會，以及給予成員支持。三、個案校長在關鍵事件中的意義建構受到少子女化趨勢、角色身分、職涯經驗與成長歷程影響。

理論或實務創見／貢獻／建議

根據研究結論，本研究對個案學校校長及未來研究的建議如下：一、擴展入學面試至學區內的學生與家長，溝通理念，提升其對學校理念及特色課程的理解及認識。二、建立較為全面分析與回饋機制，以促進學校發展；三、進行更多以意義建構觀點分析學校校長領導的學習經驗研究。

Berger, E. H., & Riojas-Cortez, M.（2022）。親職教育與親師合作：家庭學校與社區（第二版）（林妮燕、陳銀螢、郭李宗文、孫麗卿、蔡嫦娟、王淑清、羅育齡，譯）。華騰文化。（原著出版於2021）
[Berger, E. H., & Riojas-Cortez, M. (2022). Families as partners in education: Families and schools working together (2nd ed.) (N.-Y. Lin, Y.-Y. Chen, T.-W. Kuo Li, L.-C. Sun, C.-J. Tsai, S.-C. Wang, & Y.-L. Lo, Trans.). Far-Terng Culture. (Original work published 2021)]

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B.（2007）。質性研究：設計與計畫撰寫（李政賢，譯）。五南。（原著出版於1999）[Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2007). Designing qualitative research (C.-H. Lee, Trans). Wu-Nan Book. (Original work published 1999)]

Olsen, G. W., & Fuller, M. L.（2010）。家庭學校關係：親師合作的成功策略（杜宜展，譯）。學富。（原著出版於2003）[Olsen, G. W., & Fuller, M. L. (2010). Home-school relations: Working successfully with parents and families (Y.-C. Du, Trans.). Pro-Ed. (Original work published 2003)]

Rockwell, R. E., Andre, L. C., & Hawley, M. K.（2004）。親師合作（葉肯昕，譯）。桂冠。（原著出版於1996）[Rockwell, R. E., Andre, L. C., & Hawley, M. K. (2004). Parents and teachers as partners: Issues and challenges (K.-H. Yeh, Trans.). Laureate Book. (Original work published 1996)]
 

何昕家、林慧年、張子超（2019）。學校與社區的合作經驗之探討─以偏鄉國民中小學特色遊學為例。台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，9（1），127-163。https://doi.org/10.3966/222372402019040901004 [Ho, S.-J., Lin, H.-N., & Chang, T.-C. (2019). A discussion on the cooperative experience of schools and communities: Characteristic learning tours of junior high schools and elementary schools in remote townships. Journal of Community Work and Community Studies, 9(1), 127-163. https://doi.org/10.3966/222372402019040901004]
 

何瑞珠（2002）。家庭學校與社區協作：從理念研究到實踐。香港中文大學。[Ho, S.-C. (2002). Cooperation among families, schools, and communities: From theory to practice. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.]
 

李藹慈（2013）。訪談研究法。載於蔡清田（主編），社會科學研究方法新論（頁55-82）。五南。[Li, A.-T. (2013). Interview research method. In C.-T. Tsai (Ed.), New perspectives on social science research methods (pp. 55-82). Wu-Nan Book.]

林明地（2002）。學校與社區關係。五南。[Lin, M.-D. (2002). School and community relationships. Wu-Nan Book.]
 

林明地（2008）。校長學：工作分析與角色研究取向。五南。[Lin, M.-D. (2008). Principalship: Work analysis and role research orientation. Wu-Nan Book.]
 

林振春（1997）。社區與學校結合的模式與作法。教育資料與研究，15，23-25。[Lin, J.-C. (1997). Community-school collaboration models and practices. Educational Resources and Research, 15, 23-25.]
 

高淑清（2008）。質性研究的18堂課：首航初探之旅。麗文。[Kao, S.-C. (2008). Eighteen lectures of qualitative research: A preliminary journey of the first voyage. Li-Wen.]
 

張茂源（2004）。從家長參與談學校與社區關係。學校行政，31，266-275。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.200405.0266 [Chang, M.-Y. (2004). Discussing school-community relationships through parental involvement. School Administrators, 31, 266-275. https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.200405.0266]
 

許舒皓、林明地（2023）。九陶實驗教育及學校與社區夥伴關係之個案研究。學校行政，145，40-60。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.202005_(145).0003 [Hsu, S.-H., & Lin, M.-D. (2023). A case study on Jîu-Táo experimental education and the school and community partnership. School Administrators, 145, 40-60. https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.202005_(145).0003]
 

陳幸仁、林慧芸（2021）。以品牌忠誠度探討偏遠學校校長經營學校與社區關係的個案研究。學校行政，136，35-55。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.202111_(136).0002 [Chen, H.-J., & Lin, H.-Y. (2021). Exploring the relationship between school-community relationship and brand loyalty of principals in remote schools: A case study. School Administrators, 136, 35-55. https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.202111_(136).0002]
 

黃義良（2002）。學校與社區資源的合作教學模式探討。學校行政，21，64-77。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.200209.0064 [Huang, Y.-L. (2002). Exploring collaborative teaching models between schools and community resources. School Administrators, 21, 64-77. https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.200209.0064]
 

黃鴻文（1994）。社區與學校結合的模式。社區發展季刊，66，4-8。[Huang, H.-W. (1994). Community-school collaborative models. Community Development Journal(Quarterly), 66, 4-8.]
 

劉依萍（2016）。中小學校長的角色與職責：如何促進學校與社區、上級長官、民意代表的對話、溝通。臺灣教育評論月刊，5（12），41-47。[Liu, I.-P. (2016). The role and responsibilities of elementary and junior high school principals: Fostering dialogue and communication with the community, superiors, and elected representatives. Taiwan Educational Review Monthly, 5(12), 41-47.]
 

蔡金田、吳品儒（2017）。少子化衝擊下國民小學社區互動模式與經營策略之研究：以南投縣國民小學為例。教育行政論壇，9（2），81-105。[Tsai, C.-T., & Wu, P.-R. (2017). A study on school-community interaction models and management strategies under the declining birth rate in Nantou County elementary schools. Forum of Educational Administration, 9(2), 81-105.]
 

謝文全（2020）。教育行政學（第六版）。高等教育。[Hsieh, W.-C. (2020). Educational administration (6th ed.). Higher Education.]
 

鍾敏芳（2024）。國民小學校長與社區互動意義建構之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立中正大學。[Jhong, M.-F. (2024). A case study on sensemaking of interaction between an elementary school  principal and the community [Unpublished master’s thesis]. National Chung Cheng University.]
 

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1989). Organization, technology and environment. In R. Glatter (Ed.), Educational institution and their environments: Managing the boundaries (pp. 23-28). Open University.
 

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1993). Everyday epistemology in school leadership: Patterns and prospects. In P. Hallinger, K. Leithwood, & J. Murphy (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on educational leadership (pp. 21-33). Teachers College Press.
 

Brezicha, K., Bergmark, U., & Mitra, D. (2015). One size does not fit all: Differentiating leadership to support teachers in school reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(1), 96-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X14521632
 

Coburn, C. E. (2005). Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy, 19(3), 476-509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904805276143

Comstock, M., & Margolis, J. (2021). “Tearing down the wall”: Making sense of teacher leaders as instructional coaches and evaluators. Journal of School Leadership, 31(4), 297-317.
 https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684620969932

Cornelissen, J. P. (2012). Sensemaking under pressure: The influence of professional roles and social accountability on the creation of sense. Organization Science, 23(1), 118-137.  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0640

Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action. Corwin.
 

Evans, A. E. (2007). School leaders and their sensemaking about race and demographic change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 159-188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X06294575

Forrester, G., Kurth, J., Vincent, P., & Oliver, M. (2020). Schools as community assets: An exploration of the merits of an Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) approach. Educational Review, 72(4), 443-458. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1529655

Ganon-Shilon, S., & Schechter, C. (2017). Making sense of school leaders’ sense-making. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(4), 682-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216628536

Gigliotti, R. A. (2016). Leader as performer; leader as human: A discursive and retrospective construction of crisis leadership. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 24(4), 185-200.
 https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2016.1208660

Goldring, E. B. (1990). Elementary school principals as boundary spanners: Their engagement with parents. Journal of Educational Administration, 28(1), 53-62.

Goldring, E. B. (1995). Striking a balance: Boundary spanning and environmental management in schools. In S. B. Bacharach & B. Mundell (Eds.), Images of schools: Structures and roles in organizational behavior (pp. 283-314). Corwin Press.

Goldring, E. B. (1997). Educational leadership: Schools, environments and boundary spanning. In M. Preedy, R. Glatter, & R. Levacic (Eds.), Educational management: Strategy, quality and resources (pp. 290-299). Open University.

Goldring, E. B., & Rallis, S. F. (1993). Principals of dynamic schools: Taking charge of change. Corwin Press.

Grooms, A. A., & Bohorquez, D. G. (2022). What’s your excuse? Sensemaking about chronic absenteeism in a rural, Latinx high school. Journal of School Leadership, 32(4), 384-405.
 https://doi.org/10.1177/10526846211026260

Hemmer, L., & Elliff, D. S. (2020). Leaders in action: The experiences of seven Texas superintendents before, during, and after Hurricane Harvey. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(6), 964-985. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143219873073

Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (1989). Schools and their external environments. In R. Glatter (Ed.), Educational institution and their environments: Managing the boundaries (pp. 29-47). Open University.

Jabbar, H., & Creed, B. (2020). Choice, competition, and cognition: How Arizona Charter school leaders interpret and respond to market pressures. Peabody Journal of Education, 95(4), 374-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956x.2020.1800174

Kudesia, R. S. (2017). Organizational sensemaking. In O. Braddick (Ed.), Oxford encyclopedia of psychology (pp. 1-47). Oxford University Press.

Longmuir, F. (2021). Leading in lockdown: Community, communication and compassion in response to the COVID-19 crisis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51(5), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211027634

Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 226-251. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392453

Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21-49. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.15993111

Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.873177

Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. (2007). Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 57-84. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160971

McHenry-Sorber, E., & Campbell, M. P. (2019). Teacher shortage as a local phenomenon: District leader sensemaking, responses, and implications for policy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(87), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4413

Merz, C., & Furman, G. (1997). Community and schools: Promise & paradox. Teachers College Press.
 

Nardon, L., & Hari, A. (2022). The sensemaking perspective. In Making sense of immigrant work integration: An organizing framework (pp. 15-29). Palgrave MacMillan.

Patriotta, G., & Spedale, S. (2009). Making sense through face: Identity and social interaction in a consultancy task force. Organization Studies, 30(11), 1227-1248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609347036

Preston, J., & Barnes, K. E. (2017). Successful leadership in rural schools: Cultivating collaboration. The Rural Educator, 38(1), 6-15. https://doi.org/10.35608/ruraled.v38i1.231

Riley, K. A. (2013). Walking the leadership tightrope: Building community cohesiveness and social capital in schools in highly disadvantaged urban communities. British Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 266-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2012.658021

Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2015). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, S6-S32. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1937

Sleegers, P., Wassink, H., Van Veen, K., & Imants, J. (2009). School leaders’ problem framing: A sense-making approach to problem solving processes of beginning school leaders. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(2), 152-172.

Spillane, J. P., & Coldren, A. F. (2015). Diagnosis and design for school improvement: Using a distributed perspective to lead and manage change. Teachers College Press.

Spillane, J. P., Diamond, J. B., Burch, P., Hallett, T., Jita, L., & Zoltners, J. (2002). Managing in the middle: School leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educational Policy, 16(5), 731-762. https://doi.org/10.1177/089590402237311

Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2006). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. In I. Westbury & G. Milburn (Eds.), Rethinking schooling (pp. 196-230). Routledge.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.
 

Tsakeni, M., Munje, P. N., & Jita, L. C. (2020). Instructional leadership sensemaking for science and maths in South African multi-deprived middle schools. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 345-364.
 

Vlaar, P. W. L., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Coping with problems of understanding in interorganizational relationships: Using formalization as a means to make sense. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1617-1638. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606068338

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.
 

Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133

Yurkofsky, M. (2022). From compliance to improvement: How school leaders make sense of institutional and technical demands when implementing a continuous improvement process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(2), 300-346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211053597

Zuckerman, S. J. (2019). Making sense of place: A case study of a sensemaking in a rural schoolcommunity partnership. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 35(6), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.26209/jrre3506