Much has been written about effective schools, the culture of schools and building learning communities with particular emphasis on leadership. Leadership is frequently articulated within responsibilities of implementing a shared vision and providing quality practice. Towards the third millennium leadership is recognised at all levels of an organisation with management structures of schools suggesting that leadership can be shared according to positions of responsibility, while acknowledging the professional competence of those concerned.

Senge (1990:9) simply described leadership as "the capacity to hold the shared picture of the future we hope to create". Attaining this future is a means for judging the credibility of leaders. Kouzes and Posner (1993:30) challenged leaders to state their credo which determines the congruence between their words and actions (Kouzes and Posner, 1993:15). The "credibility" factor acknowledges values. Leaders must have the ability to uphold and express the values in what they do and dialogue with others about these values (60). Credibility involves "competence", related to the attainment of basic skills for leaders and others. The competence leads to "self confidence", resulting in leaders believing that they can achieve (74). Credibility challenges hypocracy and dishonesty (69). Five years later, the leadership foci encapsulate the following - "serving the customer" and "providing quality", placing emphases on "ethical and moral responsibility" on "works by mutuality", on "continuous improvement" and "authenticity" (Bhindi and Duignan, 1997:118). Indeed, authenticity, like credibility (Kouzes and Posner, 1993) promotes genuine action.

Block (1992:5) introduced the leadership focus of stewardship, "the set of principles and practices" which are based on service to others. Block stressed that it was not possible to be stewards of an institution and expect someone else to take care of it (Block, 1992:9). He said, "We serve best through partnership, rather than patriarchy." and saw empowerment, rather than dependency, to be exercised.

Sergiovanni (1992:139), in relation to a school community, said of stewardship. It

He further explained that in teaching, writing and modelling leadership, people's views of themselves, their roles and the ideas about how social systems advance or become problematic, are inevitably supported or challenged (Sergiovanni, 1996:95). Sergiovanni (1996:98) was adamant in stating, in relation to school leadership, that it is not enough to do the right thing but rather that it is imperative that we have the will to take up the challenge of school leadership as our life calling.

Lopez (1995:151) expanded on the servant leadership term introduced by Greenleaf and which shares the connotations of stewardship as expressed by Block (1992) and Sergiovanni (1992). Servant leaders, according to Lopez (1995) took "meditative intervals, engaged in conversations with others, analysed their dreams, developed close relationships, became interested in the ethics of (their) his company and developed relationships with others that had similar interests". Greenleaf (1977:16) stressed the necessity for servant leaders to achieve "a sustained intentness in listening (from which they) learned and received the insights needed to set the right course" and consequently, strengthened the operation of the team. Hence, servant leaders ensure that no one is harmed by the actions of others.

The ideal then is that direct leadership is no longer foremost, rather "teambuilding, leadership development, shared decision making and striving to establish the value of collegiality" (Sergiovanni, 1992:133) have taken its place. Coleman as cited by Sergiovanni (1992) stressed the need for leaders to practise "power to" which provides "the source of energy for achieving shared goals" in contrast to "power over" which is "rule bounded" and controls "what people do, when they do it and how they do it." This latter description is embedded in direct leadership rather than in shared leadership. The idea of shared leadership has been articulated in other different scenarios, for example, "Enhanced importance has been given to respect for persons, active community and the strong social ethic of citizen responsibility in a national and international scene" (McLaughlin, O'Keefe and O'Keefe, (1996). Leadership then represents "a conjunction of ideas where leadership is shared between leaders and followers" rather than being a function of position (Foster, 1989 as cited by McLaughlin, 1998).

Shared leadership acknowledges that "everyone has a piece of the wisdom" (De Vito, 1998), yet, it has been seen as the unheroic side of leadership - that exercise of leadership which is "developing a shared vision, asking questions, coping with weaknesses, listening and acknowledging depending on others, letting go" (Murphy as cited by D'Orsa and D'Orsa, 1998). Shared leadership is argued to be in contrast to upholding "the spiral of silence" (De Vito, 1998) wherein the popular view, sometimes the most power filled one, is accepted. Instead, ideally it is through shared leadership that teams are able to confront and hopefully resolve the controversial issues (McGilp, 1999). Shared leadership has no place for "tonic" people who dwell on the negatives but rather advocates empowering others to be "nourishing" people who promote growth of others (Du Brin, 1997:186 as cited by McGilp, 1999). The shared leadership concept acknowledges the contribution which all stakeholders have to play in establishing the life of the organisation (McGilp, 1999). An example of such is when school leadership comes from the base (Hoyle, English and Steffy, 1998:42). Hoyle, English and Steffy (1998:42) argue for the leadership collaborative to work for consensus. This can be done by giving stakeholders within the system a sense of focus and connectivity regarding the direction of activities in order to reach desired goals (46).

The shared approach to leadership indeed, is not an easy undertaking while addressing the chaos (Snyder, Acker-Hocevar and Wolf, 1995) and paradoxes of work, productivity, time and riches in times of great change (Handy, 1995: 26, 29, 31, 36). Confused leadership and ineffective management, brought about by change, are characteristic of Post-Iceberg leadership (Duignan, 1998:6). This is in contrast to Pre-Iceberg action (Duignan, 1998:6) when the waters were calm, challenge was resolved in predictable action and change was far less frequent. Wheatley (1992: Epilogue) presented a challenge for leaders - that of being uncomfortable with uncertainty in times of change and said,

While Wheatley's (1992) statement was made in relation to quantum theology it could readily be translated into the educational scene where change has been prolific.

The development of leadership, in line with changes in the business sector and the adoption of management techniques, has meant emphases on efficiency and quality. Hence, school leadership, because of economic rationalism and government pressures, has now to address different forms of accountability and benchmarking and has to achieve many external expectations placed on schools. Patching (1999:318) illustrates an aspect of the 'quality' movement of the 1980s. At this time an impression given was that not to get it 'right, first time, on time, every time' was a sign of lack of success for to 'deliver', the 'product' meant 'zero defect' (Crosby, 1984; Deming, 1988, Macdonald and Piggott, 1990). In contrast to this mechanical approach, Patching (1999: 318) stresses "working with people is not the same as working with machines", hence, "the job of developing managerial learning entails a deep understanding of the learning and design processes." In working towards such, there is the need for personal growth (the intellectual approach), personal mastery (compensating for shortcomings) and paying attention to individuation (Patching, 1999:322-324).

Even with pressures from business ideals, schools have placed education at the forefront of their responses. Consequently many authors have addressed the effectiveness of schools by paying attention to the prescriptions demanded, after highlighting learning and the welfare of the students in their care (Dimmock, 1995). The challenge towards the third millennium is for leadership in schools to be "at the cutting edge" of the services they provide. Genuine, educated leaders must contribute to the learning of the students and challenge issues and structures that prevent this. Patching (1999:139) stresses that leaders of the future will need skills to deal with facts, intentions, meanings and judgements. They will need to build into their roles "platforms for reflection on mission" to respond to the externally, imposed innovation (Day, 1995 as cited by Busher and Saran, 1995:118). They will need to remember that adaptive challenges are distressing for people for they are often adjusting to new roles, relationships, values, work practices and behaviors (Heifetz and Laurie, 1997 as cited by Fulop and Linstead, 1999:124). Hence, "as long as there is a need for improvement, namely, forever, there will be need for professional development" (Stoll and Fink, 1997:151).

In response to the external demands of addressing quality and accountability there has been much literature developed and many projects have emerged in relation to the building of effective schools, changing the culture of schools and giving attention to learning communities. Wallace and Pocklington (1998:351-352) claim these within the legitimate boundaries of "school improvement" and state this term "is commonly reserved for interventions which centre on enhancing the quality of teaching and learning." While the emphases are to "improve pupil learning outcomes", "other activity at the school level constitutes the context for a school improvement intervention" (Fullan 1992; Gray, Reynolds, Fitz-Gibbon and Jesson, 1996; Hopkins, Ainscow and West 1994, Stoll and Fink, 1996 as cited by Wallace and Pollington, 1998). A broader definition is that "school improvement" highlights a systematic, sustained effort for changing learning conditions "in one or more schools, with the ultimate aim of accomplishing education goals more effectively" (OECD as cited by Wallace and Pocklington (1998:35O).

In stressing leadership for learning the concept of learning communities has been born whether within this terminology or similar terms (Dimmock, 1995) Senge, 1998; Longworth, 1998; Aspin and Chapman, 1998; Hough and Paine, 1997: Sergiovanni, 1996; Johnson. 1996). Basically it can be argued that the setting up of learning communities is related particularly to the dimensions of instructional and educative leadership for promoting excellence in learning and leadership for change (Nahavandi, 1997). The aim of learning communities is to utilise strategies for the development of learning for all its members, through the identification of their learning needs (Longworth, 1998). "Perhaps the greatest challenge in creating a learning organisation is to see that the learning flows into every nook and cranny" (Braham, 1995:51).

Learning communities are associated with culture building thus, often refocus on the purpose and vision of schools, on learning and on leadership. Learning has been defined as what to learn, how to learn and when to learn in the foci of the adapted Curriculum Standards Frameworks (Vic). It has been defined within the four pillars of learning - learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be- as presented in the Delors Report, (Australian National Commission for UNESCO, 1998).

Two approaches of leadership, which influence the learning of a school staff, are instructional and invitational leadership (Stoll and Fink, 1996). Instructional leadership involves four competencies within the roles of "resource provider", "instructional resource", "communicator" and "visible presence" (Stoll and Fink, 1996:100). Invitational leadership involves leaders concentrating on their development- physical intellectual, social, emotional and spiritual (Stoll and Fink, 1996:111) which ultimately influences their professional performance. Through invitational leadership leaders are invited to attend to themselves before challenging others to improve their professionalism. Invitational leadership also focuses on interaction for building and acting on a shared and evolving vision of enhanced educational experiences for students (1996:109). It further stresses an increase in professionalism through reading, relating, reflecting and researching (1996:112). Nahavandi (1996) in stressing leadership also saw the invitational essence for he said, "...we learn powerfully through peers" (1996:112) and can invite others personally to work with us (1996:113). The descriptions of instructional and invitational leadership highlight aspects of exemplary leadership - creating a shared vision, enabling the followers to implement the vision, challenging the process and role modelling (Kouzes and Posner, 1995 as cited by Nahavandi, 1997:194). "Leaders do generally play a major role in creating and sustaining any firms culture through the actions they take, the comments they make, and the visions they espouse" (Dessler, 1995:387). School staff are no exception. They must model "quality of life, the importance of relationships, and show sensitivity and concern for the welfare of others" (Robbins and Coulter, 1996:127), even celebrate "risktaking, diverse opinions and achievements" (Logan, Sachs and Dempster, 1996:76).

Furthermore, a learning model, which could assist leaders, is that presented by Patching (1999:303). He clearly places learning within the terms of acquiring, designing, wanting and caring (Patching, 1999:303). Within the "acquiring" focus successful learning has to do with "knowing what to do when the situation arises, knowing why it makes sense and articulating evidence to 'prove' the efficacy of the way" (303). The "designing" has to do with the ability to model situations when needed and adapt rules to meet the expectations; and knowing how this fits with other tools and concepts into a holistic framework (303). The "wanting" is associated with the internalising behaviours into 'belief systems' and wanting to make them work for one self and others; and having the determination/will/ robustness to push aside barriers to implementation (303). The "caring" component includes exploring and challenging unconscious assumptions and habits preventing learning; being able to empathise and care about others who are/will be impacted upon; and the will to care is unconsciously developed so that it happens every time (303). Patching (1999:299) claims that different approaches to learning have a great deal to do with how managers respond to the different activities and themes while working with organisational development interventions. He associates the cognitive, objective, intellectual, left brain, logical approaches with the facts, taxonomies, here and now realities and data centred specifics (300). He further describes looking at ideas, possibilities, there and then possibilities, model-centred generalisations; and further emphasises the affective, subjective, value-centred, right brain, significant approaches (300).

It is claimed that "Educators are at the confluence of two major trajectories of educational leadership" (Seddon, 1996:57). They must determine an educational leadership style that is best for education, for students and their learning into the next millennium; and secondly, must decide how that style of educational leadership can be realised in the current reality, for example, in the economic and political scenes of today (Seddon, 1996:57). It is worthwhile remembering it is teachers who can see the practical applications of corporate management principles for education (Williams, 1995:8), hence, teachers' voices and ideas must be heard at every stage of their careers. Teachers' professionalism develops throughout four stages of their teaching careers- when beginning as novice teachers, when becoming professional classroom teachers, during the enlargement of the regular classroom job, and finally, when advancing to teacher leader or master teacher status (Hoy and Miskel, 1996:331). A learning principal stated, "As the pressures increased, I tried to take that pressure and use it as a creative force to pursue outcomes that seemed desirable" (Loader, 1997:61) By sharing his experiences, this principal could influence decisions for leadership action of others. In the christian community wisdom of the human spirit and quest for knowledge (Treston, 1992:36) must be shared with a view to implementing the vision.

Ultimately, the previous discussion about leadership that influences learning and the building of learning communities and effective schools, depends on an underpinning value of collaboration. What is important is leadership that promotes shared understanding and acknowledgement of each other's contributions. Traditionally, the running of schools has been allocated through a "hierarchy" built on responsibilities delegated to teachers who have proved their competence in both practice and professional expertise. A picture of such is to imagine a school where the structure involves delegation of responsibility to a principal, assisted by a deputy, level coordinators, subject coordinators and classroom teachers. The purpose of leadership within the structure of schools, for example, in the structure suggested, is ultimately for achieving the core business of schools - the education of students. In providing such a service, schools through leadership action, must have the wit and will to serve themselves (adapted from Sergiovanni, 1992:120). School staff must use their initiative to determine what effective schools might look like because of their leadership, however, they must constantly reflect on what is happening (Day, 1995 in Busher and Saran, (1995:118) because of structures and management arrangements.

In this text, the views of one hundred and fifty leaders from different sections of schools paint pictures of how they experience and action the leadership process within the realms of their areas of responsibility. The leaders, from both primary and secondary sectors, were asked to respond. They held positions of leaderships from within four categories - the positions of principal, deputy principal, coordinator, and/or teacher. While some of the participants may have occupied more than one of the roles described, the analysis was recorded from within the senior role of the applicant as per the categories listed. The participants were in leadership positions in Catholic schools and their opinions and descriptions of experiences were obtained in 1998/99.

.

The participants were asked eight specific questions which were as follows -

1. What position/status do you hold?
2. What experiences, if any, in your organisation do you value?
3. What is your experience of Catholic leadership?
4. How do you exercise Catholic leadership?
5. Do you consider you own your Catholic leadership style?
6. What challenges and ambiguities do you face?
7. What other roles do you exercise in the Catholic community?
8. If you do exercise other roles, why?

In presenting the responses the intention is to highlight the issues raised by the participants. The presentation is descriptive rather than statistical.

In response to Question 1, Table 1, Appendix 1, approximately 20 of participants were in principalships, 25 percent held the roles of deputies, 30 percent were coordinators and 25 percent were teachers.

In response to Question 2, Table 2, Appendix 1, What experiences, if any, in your organisation do you value? The participants identified the shared experiences and those that were common to particular leadership roles. All groups identified the experiences of a declared vision and mission, working in teams, sharing experiences, being able to dialogue, teaching and knowing the families. Principals spoke explicitly of valuing working with staff, learning from others and achieving set goals; also of being involved with parent groups. The deputy principals spoke particularly of the value of being part of the decision making process. They stressed appreciation for the chance to try new ideas and for support and receiving feedback on opportunities for best practice. Deputies also valued the autonomy they experienced and the teaching and facilitating within their roles. They also valued having clear directions given to them by the principals. Another valued aspect was the opportunity to attend conferences. The coordinators, in addition to the shared experiences, valued the one to one involvement with other staff and students, and the opportunities for professional development. The teachers presented different experiences which they valued. These were pioneering leading and learning in contrast to stressing the business focus that they identified in other leadership roles within their schools. Teachers also valued professional reading, knowing the students and their families, and described how they valued past students always coming back to visit the schools.

In response to Question 3, Table 3, Appendix 1, What is your experience of Catholic leadership the participants commonly described experiences associated with empowerment, challenge, modelling, encouragement, sharing and support and upholding values and articulation of Catholic faith. The principals particularly stressed modelling Catholic faith traditions. Deputies valued the positive experiences of working with principals who showed concern and addressed personal growth. The coordinators said they valued the care and support particularly in times of need. The teachers revealed that those around them seemed to show conviction of their belief and also that their colleagues demonstrated integrity. Having described the experiences that they valued, the leaders, with the exception of the principals, described some negatives which they also experienced. The deputies' negative experiences were of indifference shown by principals, disappointment in expectations not being met, and the experience of principals who inhibited the possibilities which the deputies saw as necessary. The coordinators who experiences some negativity spoke of the conservatism of the principals and the experiences of communicating with principals who were prepared to listen but did not hear what was being said. It was the teachers who readily addressed the gap between the vision and the reality.

In response to Question 4, Table 4, Appendix 1, How do you exercise Catholic leadership? The participants presented common themes of striving for the personal qualities of enthusiasm, modelling, courage and promoting principles of trust and collegiality. The principals described their roles of working towards connectedness with parish communities and ministering in the school community in caring, collaborative ways. They spoke of planting seeds and ideas. The deputies reiterated many of the points made by principals but also spoke of assisting staff and students, caring for one self, and of listening and reflecting. The coordinators described how they exercised their leadership role in terms of trying to prioritise, reflect, be tolerant, listening, clarifying issues and being in the role of management as well as teaching. The teachers spoke of exercising their leadership particularly through modelling, prioritising and through stewardship.

In response to Question 5, Table 5, Appendix 1, Do you consider you "own' your leadership role? It was interesting to note the following responses. Some 100 percent of the principals, 80 percent of the deputies, 30 percent of the coordinators and 100 percent of the teachers said they owned their leadership role. The common themes in the responses were that they had been selected for their roles, enjoyed the tasks, were competent in what they did and could have some influence on the way they operated. The coordinators expressed three concerns. They were faced with job descriptions which could be prescriptive, but were "working against the clock" and with many staff who were caught in change; all of which had influence on their being authentic, servant and their exercise of stewardship.

In regard to Question 6, Appendix 1, What challenges and ambiguities do you face? The following responses were received. The common challenges were those of articulating the shared vision, particularly between church and school; attaining open communication and the question of using time well. An ambiguity expressed was that of creating new visions while attitudes and ideas are entrenched in the past and there are personal alliances to protect the past. The principals spoke of the particular challenges for them presented by external influences, the role of the Church and maintaining the ethos. The deputies spoke of the challenges associated with the changing nature of leadership and instances of top down management, the challenge of innovating in the day to day demands; and of forward planning. The deputies also spoke of the challenge of exploring their roles and potential and some even asked the question, How am I serving? Three ambiguities expressed by the group of deputies were as follows. They experienced the difficulty of remaining true to the vision when personal interests predominate, and when everyone is not practising the vision; also being expected to fulfil their roles yet having to fill in for principals; and finally, the lack of time to do the job well. The coordinators were those who saw challenges associated with their change of responsibility; also in working with changing leadership and age and old ideas, and saw the need for providing a meaningful education course for postmodern students. The coordinators also spoke of the challenges associated with the courage and tenacity required of the pastoral role, the tensions and constraints associated with the expectations of students and parents, and the need for clear vision for each new project. They also identified that middle leadership is limited; also working with balancing work and family. The ambiguities expressed by the coordinators were the time structures and ideas that were imposed versus the constant challenge to do the job well; and of trying to introduce new ideas while inheriting ideas and structures from previous people. They spoke of the time and energy it takes for administration which consequently leaves little time for inspiration and vision. The teachers presented the following challenges and ambiguities. The challenges were of working with language which perhaps does not mean the same when we are working with institutional and business values and emphases on efficiency and outcomes, and balancing the demands of work and family.

In response to Question 7, Table 7, Appendix 1, What other roles do you exercise in the Catholic community? The participants commonly identified their involvement in the roles of parish activities, special ministers and working with pastoral council. The deputies, coordinators and teachers specified the roles as follows. Deputies stressed their involvement as liturgists, catechists, parents, models, service organisers, pastoral leaders, listeners and contributors to the local parish schools. Coordinators spoke of being fundraisers, mentors, supporters, RCIA team members and participants, and of being members of their parish communities. Those who said they did not participate in the parish roles gave reasons of being involved in schools to the extent that they had not time for anything else or were exhausted. The teachers spoke of their involvement within the common categories identified.

Question 8 asked, Table 7, Appendix 1, If you do exercise other roles, why? The participants spoke of the importance of being community members, participating as part of a total life style and being fulfilled, of wanting to be enriched in their lives and of the importance of sharing in a Church community. They also noted that they had something to offer and were strengthening the parish.

From the outcomes it is possible to make some observations and recommendations. There is congruence between many of the ideas of the participants. There are indications of shared values of vision and mission (Kouzes and Posner, 1993) and ethical and moral responsibility (Bhindi and Duignan, 1997). The participants expressed common, valued experience (within the vision and mission, sharing and dialogue, teaching, and knowing the families - Block, 1992); within experiences of Catholic leadership (empowerment, challenge, modelling, encouragement, sharing and supporting and upholding ideals and articulation of faith - D'orsa and D'Orsa, 1998), and within their exercise of enthusiasm, modelling, courage, trust, and their connectedness with the parish communities - Du Brin, 1997). These present many links with the shared vision concept articulated for the Catholic schools (D'Orsa and D'Orsa, 1998, Treston, 1992). The four groups certainly highlighted qualities which are synonymous with credibility (Kouzes and Posner, 1993) and servant leadership (Lopez, 1995) and the exercise of stewardship (Block, 1992; Sergiovanni, 1996). To a lesser degree there are indications of the old paradigm of leadership equated with "power over" (Sergiovanni, 1992; Patching, 1999), for example, reference to conservatism, indifference and changing leadership styles, which do not fit with postmodern leadership.

There was a high level of satisfaction (Patching, 1999) associated with the roles of principals, deputy principals and teachers. Coordinators were those who presented most discussion on their roles of responsibility. Only approximately one third of the coordinators were satisfied in their roles. They indicated that a change in role, with the added component of management, required an adjustment by many (Heifetz and Laurie, 1997 as cited by Fulop and Linstead, 1999). The expectations seemed too great with their role still demanding many of the works of teachers as well as coordination. The development of individuals for the position of responsibility, coordinator, becomes a question (Wheatley, 1992; Stoll and Fink, 1997)). Perhaps the coordinators have yet to establish their own means of operation which allow them to experience credibility, competence and confidence (Kouzes and Posner, 1993). Another observation is that the teachers raised many important issues and searching questions (Williams, 1995). It might be that the teachers are at the coalface, and therefore, see what is actually influencing the core business of education for students (Williams, 1995). There are indications of the leaders using reflection on practice in their day to day roles of responsibility (Greenleaf, 1977, as cited by Lopez,1995; Day, 1995 as cited by Busher and Saran, 1995). While commitment to the wider parish community (McLaughlin, O'Keefe and O'Keefe, 1996) is apparent with school personnel taking leading and supportive roles (Lopez, 1995), those leaders that don't exercise wider community involvement indicate the pressure of time (Handy, 1995) and exhaustion as reasons for the lack of involvement.

The findings can be related to many of the emphases for building learning communities. Learning communities take into account the learning of all. There are indications of restrictions, hence, to further the learning communities the specific needs of some individuals require attention (Robbins and Coulter, 1996; Longworth, 1998). Since coordinators indicate that they value professional development, this could be further extended to enhance satisfaction. There are indications of successful managerial roles being performed - those of working with staff, achieving goals, facilitating, giving directions, and providing feedback (Hoyle, English and Steffy, 1998). There were indications that principals need to listen actively (Greenleaf, 1977 as cited by Lopez,1995) and allow others to take responsibility and initiative in the process of innovation. However, while managerial roles are functioning, it appears that innovation is mostly at the discretion of the deputies and teachers, with some of the former experiencing restrictions while the teachers often lead the way in incorporating new ideas and strategies into the learning for students (Logan, Sachs and Dempster, 1996).

The findings from the leaders' responses can be identified in the learning model of acquiring, designing, wanting and caring (Patching, 1999:303). The "acquiring" is seen in the fact leaders were able to articulate why the vision makes sense and gave evidence to prove the efficacy. The beliefs systems were in operation with values and acceptable qualities upheld in the style of leadership and practised generally by leaders. The "designing" component has to be developed in relation to the coordinators' roles so that their "wanting stage" is developed within a belief system which allows them to operate confidently. There are certainly indications of the right brain affective conditions in use. The "here and now realities" based on "data-centred specifics" give indicators for improvement.

It would seem from the responses that the following recommendations for Catholic school leaders might be considered to hold the shared picture of the vision they wish to create (Senge, 1990; Sergiovanni, 1996)

• continue upholding core values;
• work on the understanding of new paradigm of shared leadership;
• dialogue frequently about the exercise of leadership roles;
• promote active listening for understanding the real issues;
• address the shortcomings honestly;
• free rule bound approaches;
• address pressures of time and commitment;
• carry out professional development for the role of coordinator;
• keep in mind, "We'll get to the future in each other's arms across all the divides of race, creed and culture or otherwise we may not get there at all" (O'Murchu, 1997:190).

The aim of this text has been to present responses of leaders in four roles in Catholic education with a view to promoting greater understanding of how they see Catholic leadership and how they articulate and exercise such. The intention of the discussion was to present the issues as described by the participants in a descriptive rather than statistical framework to raise the awareness of the readers so that they might reflect on their own school scenes. The theoretical background of the first part of the paper provided a framework of reference for discussion and evaluation of the participants' comments. The work as presented is a first analysis.

References

Bradford, D.L.(1997) managing for excellence. USA: John Wiley and Sons.

Braham, B (1995) Creating learning communities. California: Crisp Publications.

Du Brin, A.J. (1995) Leadership findings and research skills. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Handy, C. (1995) The empty raincoat. Britain: Arrow Books Ltd.

Hoy, W.K., Miskel, C.G. (1996) Educational Administration. Sydney: McGraw- Hill Inco.

Johnson, N. (1996.). Becoming learning communities. Learning Matters. 1(1),7-11.

Haigh, G. (1997) Guide to school management. Melbourne: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1993). Credibility, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1993). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Loader, D. (1997) The inner principal. London: Falmer Press.

Mant, A. (1997) Intelligent leadership. Allen and Unwin.

Nahavandi,A.(1997) The art and science of leadership. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

O'Murchu, D. (1997). Quantum theology, New York: Crossroad.

Patching, K. (1999) Management and organisational development. London:Macmillan.

Sarros, J.C., Butchatsky, O (1997) Leadership. Sydney: Harper Collins.

Senge, P.M. (1992) The fifth discipline. Milsons Point, NSW: Random House.

Sergiovanni, T.J., Starratt, R.J. (1998) Supervision. New York: Prentice Hall.

Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building community in schools, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. (1996). Leadership for the school house, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. (1996) Learning community, professional community, and the school as a centre of enquiry. Principal Matters. April.

Stoll, L., Fink, D. (1997) Changing our schools. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Treston, K., (1992) Transforming Catholic schools. Brisbane: Creation Enterprises.