Abstract

This is the first of two linked articles, both reported in this edition of the journal. Taken together they consider reasons for mapping the field of leadership studies in education and make some suggestions for what this might look like. This article opens with a discussion of leadership and associated concepts, explains why and how the authors came to attempt to map the field, examines what is and what should be involved in the nature of the enterprise of mapping, and concludes with an outline of a mapping typology built around five knowledge domains (the conceptual, the critical, the humanist, the evaluative, the instrumental) and seven factors through which the domains can be further differentiated (purpose, focus, context, method, audience, communication and impact).