Scholarly Responses to “who Leads, Who Follows?”
Chengbing Wang,Liz Jackson,Kwok Kuen Tsang,Colin Evers,Wei Zhao,David A. Turner,Liwen Ma,Benjamin Green,Baocun Liu,Tien-Hui Chiang,Percy Kwok,Marianna Papastephanou,Elvira Nica,Xiyuan Zhang,Sean Sturm,Cathy Ping Xie,Philip Wing Keung Chan,Alfonso Montuori,Fazal Rizvi,Petar Jandrić,Nesta Devine,Tina Besley
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/25902539-05010016
2023-01-01
Beijing International Review of Education
Abstract:Who Leads, Who Follows? "Critical Review of the Field of Leadership Studies" by Professor Michael A. Peters, offers one of the clearest and most complete discussions of "critical leadership studies" in the twenty-first century.It deeply considers many of its most important issues, including its evolution and its path forward, its most important paradigms, and its many transformations in the hands of a variety of scholars.The perspective and vision that he brings to bear in the article and its wide ranging discussions of the many relevant contemporary issues that it concerns are deeply thought-provoking.Some of the scholars mentioned by Professor Peters in the paper in question are certainly familiar to Chinese scholars, including Max Weber, while many others will be either little known or have not as yet been examined within the framework of educational philosophy in China.As a professor of philosophy in China, I would like to express the following three comments:First, Professor Peters emphasizes three areas in the "leadership in the Twenty-First Century."The first is "Leadership, multipolarity, and the production of global public goods," the second is "Leadership in the Biodigital Future," and the third is "The Ecological-System Model of Leadership."He individually isolates these three areas because it allows him to articulate and highlight important issues and challenges that leadership education in the 21st century must be aware of and manage.In my humble opinion, no matter whether it is a question of public goods, of the biodigital future, or the ecology-system, each of these areas demands our attention precisely because they are without doubt the urgent issues of educational philosophy confronting China today, and they equally deserve to be seriously considered and discussed by Chinese scholars.Second, in his essay, Professor Peters fully displays a remarkable presentation of the Marxist philosophy of leadership.In Chinese philosophy classes, we often deal with Marxist topics concerning the relationship between the masses and the leaders, between the heroes and the masses, and between the times and the heroes, but in most cases, the discussions take place within the Beijing International Review of Education 5 (2023) 51-91 53