Abstract
Management science, as it has been defined in behavioral-structural frames in educational administration, cannot encompass the realm of leadership. The frames themselves eliminate that which is most important, that is, the interaction/communication of the idiosyncratic and complex personal/character/interpersonal dimensions between leaders and followers, and these dynamic exchanges and reciprocities within a special context, culture, and historical period. This paper offers a schemata based on the works of J. Barber (1985), J. Burns (1978), and H. Gardner (1995) that may help to establish a counter-discourse about leadership in the field. (Contains 42 references.) (LMI)
