26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Leading Professional Learning: Hallmarks of Practice in Complex Situations
Ken Jones1, Tegwen Ellis2
1Freelance Education Consultant; 2National Academy for Education Leadership, Wales
Presenting Author: Jones, Ken
Professional learning is more than a linear process leading to pre-determined outcomes (Boylan et al, 2018, Strom and Viesca, 2021). There can be no single way that education leaders can determine the best or most effective approaches. McMillan and Jess (2021) argue that teachers need to move towards adaptive classroom practice, “…moving beyond the simplistic transmission of knowledge by developing the ability to respond to, and influence, the dynamic and ever-changing environment in which they work” (p276). In the same way, education leaders need to be developing strategies of complex adaptive leadership to address this ‘complex turn’ rather than restricting their actions to outcome-focused approaches (Daly et al, 2020).
The research which underpinned this presentation focused less on the nature of professional learning and more on the leadership of professional learning in schools in Wales. The ways in which leaders build supportive cultures of professional learning is central to ensuring continuing learning. Leaders of professional learning at all levels will stimulate active learning and enable enquiry, analysis, reflection and evaluation in a professionally critical and constantly changing environment. While the essence of professional learning rests with the individual, the interactive, collaborative nature of most professional learning needs to be effectively managed and led .
In complex education environments, much professional learning is implicit and highly personal (Evans, 2019). What works in one case may not be effective or relevant in another. However, many aspects of professional learning need to be managed and led to ensure equity and opportunity. Leaders build professional learning networks, enabling everyone to achieve. Leaders oversee professional working relationships; they intervene when necessary and always support the professional learning of others. They create and sustain cultures of critical enquiry. With others, they ensure that professional learning is active, collaborative, inclusive and not insular. So, multi-dimensional strategies are needed if leaders are to guide and support their professional colleagues most effectively (Jones, 2020), and these need to be enacted through a variety of approaches, referred to in Wales as ‘the professional learning blend’ (Jones et al, 2019).
The research evidence base on leading professional learning is wide and growing (Hallinger and Kulophas, 2020). Much of it has only marginal relevance to individual school contexts and, being international in its scope, it carries with it cultural characteristics which make direct transferability tricky. Just because it worked there, it may not work here. There is also a tendency to focus on ‘what works’, identifying examples of ‘most-effective practice’ and implying that leaders should aspire to emulate these ways of doing things successfully. Much of this research is very helpful, for example the paper by Cordingley et al (2020) on “Developing great leadership of CPDL”. Occasionally we see research which throws light on less-effective practice, and this may be just as helpful to education leaders when working with their teams to confront the realities of highly complex situations. McChesney and Aldridge (2019) identify “What gets in the way” and map obstacles facing education leaders in implementing strategies for professional learning.
This presentation will focus on the implications for school leaders in Wales of the new National Entitlement to Professional Learning. It will resonate with professionals in other European countries and internationally beyond Europe. As an example of professional learning policy and practice within Europe, it is intended to raise questions and stimulate discussion on the appropriate use of linear models in setting out strategies for leading professional learning.
The paper forms the basis of a chapter in Innovation in Teacher Professional Learning: Research, Policy and Practice accepted for publication by Routledge in 2023.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThere is a significant body of international literature exploring models of educational leadership (Bush, 2020) and an increasing literature on the leadership of professional learning (Swaffield and Poekert, 2020), but to discover how these two come together we need to look closely at practice in schools. That was the key purpose of this research, undertaken in Wales, commissioned by The National Academy for Education Leadership in Wales, carried out in 2021 and published in 2022.
The research was undertaken in two parts: a desk-based review of relevant international literature and a qualitative process of gathering views and evidence from education leaders. The work by Hallinger and Kulophas (2020) goes some way to providing a review of the literature but the definition of professional learning in their study is seen to be too narrow. For the purposes of the Wales study, the intention was to identify “hallmarks” of leading professional learning and look critically at the ways in which these could be applied in practice. This was accompanied by an analysis of current policy documents relating to education in Wales which have a bearing on both leadership and professional learning. The perspectives of a sample of professional leaders were gathered to provide an insight into how leaders at all levels shape professional learning practice. Interviews were held with leading professionals including policy makers in national government, regional professional learning coordinators, providers from higher education, and school leaders and teachers themselves. Focus groups consisting of school senior leaders were used to gather cross-Wales perspectives of practice. In addition, a sample of 12 schools (three schools in each of the four regional consortia in Wales) was used to provide coverage of primary, secondary, Welsh medium and additional learning needs settings. The schools were identified by representatives from the four regional consortia using criteria such as engagement in local and national professional learning networks, active involvement in professional research and enquiry, high quality mentoring and coaching provision, and distributed leadership which provided responsibility and authority for middle level leaders and teacher leaders to support other professionals in their learning journeys.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe research has provided an insight into leading professional learning in complex environments in Wales. It identified key hallmarks of well-led professional learning, including an emphasis on equity, supporting sustainable approaches, focusing on learner outcomes and wellbeing, encouraging professional collaboration and creating supportive structures and systems for teacher leadership. It also identified obstacles and challenges that leaders face in providing professional learning support, and highlighted policy indicators at national, regional and local government levels. A key conclusion is that, while in complex environments there can be no single form of professional learning which achieves all desired outcomes, and no single approach to leadership which supports all professional needs, using an informed professional learning blend can be motivating and sustainable.
The interview element of the research was interrupted by the Covid 19 pandemic. However, the delay did enable a new dimension to emerge: the impact of the pandemic on leadership practice and the emergence of new professional learning priorities facing teachers and other classroom practitioners. Highest of these was the urgent need to use online learning for those pupils and staff working from home.
The report was able to conclude that a number of “hallmarks” were evident in schools which placed a high priority on professional learning, that teacher leadership was paramount in building close-to-practice learning communities, and that new strategies to support individually-focused professional learning needed to be considered. Discussion of the research findings will help to show the necessary balance between the need for professional learning to be ‘led’ and for it to be ‘supported’ in complex environments.
ReferencesBoylan, M., Coldwell, M,. Maxwell, B. and Jordan, J. (2018) Rethinking models of professional learning as tools: a conceptual analysis to inform research and practice Professional Development in Education 44.1 120-139
Bush, T. (2020) Theories of Educational Leadership and Management (5th Edition) London: Sage
Cordingley, P., Higgins, S., Greany T., Crisp, B., Araviaki, E., Coe, R. and Johns, P. (2020) Developing Great Leadership of CPDL, CUREE http://www.curee.co.uk/node/5214
Evans, L. (2019) Implicit and informal professional development: what it ‘looks like’, how it occurs, and why we need to research it Professional Development in Education 45.1 3-16
Hallinger, P. and Kulophas, D. (2020) The evolving knowledge base on leadership and teacher professional learning: a bibliometric analysis of the literature, 1960-2018 Professional Development in Education 46.4 521-540
Jones, K., Humphreys, R., Lester, B. and Stacey, B. (2019) National Approach to Professional Learning: Research Report. The Professional Learning Blend 2.0 https://www.ewc.wales/site/index.php/en/statistics-and-research/research-and-policy/published-research.html
Jones, K. (2020) Multi-dimensional professional learning: a leadership perspective European Educational Research Association
https://blog.eera-ecer.de/multi-dimensional-professional-learning/
Jones, K. (2022) Leading Professional Learning National Academy for Educational Leadership Wales
https://nael.cymru/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Professor-Ken-Jones-Leading-Professional-Learning-FINAL-1.pdf
McChesney, K. and Aldridge, J.M. (2019): What gets in the way? A new conceptual model for the trajectory from teacher professional development to impact, Professional Development in Education, DOI: 10.1080/19415257.2019.1667412
Swaffield, S. and Poekert, P.E. (2020) Leadership for professional learning, Professional Development in Education, 46:4, 517-520, DOI: 10.1080/19415257.2020.1793500
Welsh Government (2017) Education in Wales: Our National Mission: Action Plan 2017-2021 Cardiff: Welsh Government
Welsh Government (2017) Professional standards for teaching and leadership Cardiff: Welsh Government
Welsh Government (2018) An introduction to the professional standards for teaching and leadership Cardiff: Welsh Government
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Group Coaching in Leadership development for School Leaders
Ulf Leo1, Kirsten Foshaug Vennebo2, Marit Aas2
1Umea University, Sweden; 2Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway
Presenting Author: Leo, Ulf;
Vennebo, Kirsten Foshaug
Over the past decades, principals have experienced an increased pressure emanating from the responsibility for managing change to improve students’ learning outcomes. Leadership learning programmes appear to emphasize the generic requirements of the job rather than leaders’ individual capabilities, moral purpose and need to take an active role in learning (McKinsey & Company, 2010), and there seems to be a challenge in finding the balance between system and reform needs and school and individual needs. A Nordic school leader profile involves performing leadership within long-established democratic societies which build on equal and collaborative relationships between leaders and staff and doing this in parallel to meeting system level accountability demands. In practice, this implies balancing the democratic idea of involvement and exerting influence with necessary decision-making (Author et al 2016 a). Despite these challenges, there is consensus in the literature that principals and school leaders need to develop knowledge and skills to understand their schools and leadership roles (Fullan, 2018; Author, 2017).
Coaching has been increasingly reported as the type of school leadership development intervention that is gaining energy and popularity (Forde, McMahon, Gronn, & Martin, 2012; Aas, 2020). In many countries, coaching is a part of national school leadership programmes (Lumby, Crow, & Pashiardis, 2008; Robertson & Earl, 2014). For example, was coaching introduced as one of the key approaches to leadership development evident in the National College in England (Bush, Glover, & Harris, 2007). So far, has the literature addressed coaching as a component of headship preparation (Earley, Weindling, Bubb, Evans, & Glenn, 2008), a tool for school development (Creasy & Patterson, 2005), succession planning (Hanbury, 2009) and the development of leadership across the school including middle leadership (Simkins, Coldwell, Caillau, Finlayson, & Morgan, 2006) and teacher leadership (Blackman, 2010).
This paper reports from a study of group coaching integrated into National Principal Training Programmes in Sweden and Norway, which aims to promote reflections on personal agency (role clarity and self-efficacy) that can lead to changes in leadership practices. In this paper, we set out to investigate the process that starts with an original coaching question that is reformulated during the group coaching session, and to investigate what support the school leader gets as a result of the coaching. The research questions are: What kind of leadership challenges do school leaders bring forth for coaching, and how can group coaching support them in developing their leadership practices?
In the study, the definition of coaching is inspired by of the GROW model – Goal setting, Reality check, Options available and Wrap up – produced by Whitmore (2004). Such an adaptation is seen in the coaching work with educational leaders by Robertson (2016). Brown and Grant (2010) developed the GROUP model – Goal; Reality; Options; Understanding others; and Perform – which takes into account that understanding others is the key factor of successful group coaching. The group coaching protocol used in the study emphasizes one participant in the group (the coachee) as the focus of the coaching process, whilst the other participants assist in the coaching role as co-coaches. The participants take turns to become the coachee. A group coach manages the process, using the protocol that ensures time is apportioned adequately and the process adheres to the agreed (Author et al b 2016).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study has a qualitative comparative approach (Crotty, 1998). The National Principal Training Programmes (hereafter NPT programmes) in Norway and Sweden, including group coaching, were purposefully selected (Silverman, 2006) based on the model utilized for coaching in the programmes bacically following the same structure, but with differences in the preparation before and in the end of the sessions. These differences make the grounds for comparing. Furthermore, the coaching groups were selected by convenience based on easy access.
The Norwegian study sample consisted of two coaching groups with six participants, in sum twelve participants, with eight women and four men. All participants worked in compulsory or upper secondary schools in different parts of Norway.
Data were collected through observation of the coaching of each twelve participants, which lasted 45 minutes, and focused on the coaching topic the participants brought forth for coaching. A month after the observations, we collected data through a questionnaire sent to all twelve participants. Nine of the participants answered and returned their answers and reflections. The questionnaire was composed of background questions followed by open questions about what happened after the group coaching, if and how the group coaching was helpful regarding action planning and what they would do to develop their leadership practice further.
The Swedish study sample consisted of observations of group coaching in four groups with five participants in the groups except one group that had six members. It was a total of twenty-one participants with sixteen women and four men. All participants were principals or assistant principals with less than three years in the position. They were working in preschool, compulsory school and upper secondary school. In the second step, four to five weeks after the observation, fourteen principals were interviewed. The questions in the interview were designed to get information on what happened after the coaching session and what support the coaching had given to deal with the challenge.
Written consent to participate was obtained from all participants.
The data analysis was guided and carried out inspired of the Braun and Clarke’s (2019) approach to reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) in a sequential six-phase process. We chose this approach because it is theoretically flexible, and it suits questions related to people’s experiences, view and perceptions. Moreover, in RTA we as researchers have an active role in the knowledge production process through reflexive engagement with theory, data and interpretation (Braun and Clarke’s (2019; 2020).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn relation to the first research question, What kind of leadership challenges do school leaders bring forth for coaching, four categories were identified; Challenges in leading individuals, challenges in leading groups of teachers, challenges in relation to leaders in the same leadership team, and challenges in relation to him or herself as a leader.
The findings reflect that these Norwegian and Swedish school leaders have their main attention on establishing good relations with co-workers. By doing so they try to link system and reform needs and school and individual needs. However, we can see how they struggle to find a balance between the idea of a democratic leadership, which build on equal and collaborative relationships between leaders and staff, and necessary decision-making. In practice, the findings show that a Nordic leadership profile involves performing democratic leadership in parallel to meeting system level accountability demands
In relation to the second research question, the findings illustrate that during the coaching sessions the school leaders enhanced their understanding of the coaching themes in four ways: clarifying and understanding challenges, sorting out and distinguish between challenges, clarifying and understanding the leadership role and trying out new ways of acting. In the coaching sessions the leaders got insight to other leaders´ context and thereby increased their understanding of how leadership can be performed, which was a help in both clarifying, understanding and distinguish between their own leadership challenges. This illustrates how learning and professional development which takes place at the individual level can lead to organizational development. In addition, bringing together school leaders that discuss and give each other feedback, seems to be of great importance for the participants' understanding of the role.
ReferencesBlackman, A. (2010). Coaching as a leadership development tool for teachers. Professional Development in Education, 36(3), 421-441.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise & Health, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Brown, S. W., & Grant, A. M. (2010). From GROW to GROUP: theoretical issues and a practical model for group coaching in organisations. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 3(1), 30-45. doi:10.1080/17521880903559697
Bush, T., Glover, D., & Harris, A. (2007). Review of School Leadership Development. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Creasy, J., & Patterson, F. (2005). Leading Coaching in Schools. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London: SAGE Publications Inc
Earley, P., Weindling, D., Bubb, S., Evans, J., & Glenn, M. (2008). valuation of the FUTURE LEADERS Pilot Programme. Final Report. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Forde, C., McMahon, M., Gronn, P., & Martin, M. (2012). Being a Leadership Development Coach: A Multi-Faceted Role. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(1), 105-119. doi:10.1177/1741143212462699
Fullan, M. (2018). Surreal Change: The Real Life of Transforming Public Education. New York: Routledge.
Hanbury, M. (2009). Leadership Coaching: An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Leadership Coaching as a Strategy to Support Succession Planning. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Lumby, J., Crow, G., & Pashiardis, P. (2008). International Handbook on the Preparation and Development of School Leaders. New York: Taylor and Francis.
McKinsey & Company. (2010). Capturing the leadership premium: how the world’s top school systems are building leadership capacity for the future (Publication no. http://mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/schoolleadership_final.pdf). (November 2010). Retrieved 09.02.2015
Robertson, J. (2016). Coaching Leadership: Building Educational Leadership Capacity through Coaching Partnerships (Second ed.). Wellington: NZCER PRESS.
Robertson, J., & Earl, L. M. (2014). Leadership learning: Aspiring principals developing the dispositions that count. Journal of of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 29(2), 3-17.
Simkins, T., Coldwell, M., Caillau, I., Finlayson, H., & Morgan, A. (2006). Coaching as an in-school leadership development strategy: Experience from leading from the middle. Professional Development in Education, 32(3), 321-340.
Whitmore, J. (2004). Coaching for performance: GROWing people, performance, and purpose. London: Nicholas Brealy Publishing.
Author (2016 a, b)
Author (2017)
Author (2020)
Author (2016).
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
Different Streams in School Principals’ Professional Development Become Diverse Teachers’ Participation Models. A Multilevel Analysis.
Jon Martínez Recio, Reyes Hernandez Castilla
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Presenting Author: Martínez Recio, Jon;
Hernandez Castilla, Reyes
Different educational research traditions have shown that the quality of school leadership is one of the factors with the greatest impact on student performance (Hattie, 2015). Therefore, for decades, school leadership has been one of the most flourishing lines in educational research, concluding that leaders who set common goals, promote teacher development and establish satisfactory relationships with their school community achieve better outcomes (Day et al., 2016). Diverse studies indicate that in high-performing and excellent schools, principals adapt their leadership practices according to specific needs and situations (Rehman, Khan & Waheed, 2019). Bastian and Henry (2015) described that some personal traits of the principals improve students’ achievement, as they influence teacher retention and development, as well as school’s working conditions. Pietsch and Tulowitzki (2017) estimated the effects different leadership models have on the instructional practices of teachers, finding the significance of being focused on the quality of teaching in classrooms. However, it is necessary to analyze from the evidence which are the practices developed by principals that have a more substantial impact on student's performance.
Likewise, Izquierdo (2016) emphasizes the need to increase school management autonomy and students' academic objectives monitoring. Recently, Huang et al. (2020) studied the relationships between principal leadership, teacher-related factors (job satisfaction, teaching self-efficacy, and collaboration), and student performance in science. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the practices of principals.
Thus, there are different models in the management career. In this study, four different models, from four different countries, were chosen. In the UK, previous experience is required to become a principal. But other merit like being senior managers or deputy managers are part of the competition. In addition, some professional development training, such as the National Professional Qualification for Management, accredited by the Department of Education, is desirable. Something similar happens in France, where headteachers are recruited by competition, aptitude list, or secondment. There is no compulsory training, but several years of experience are required. In Spain, in addition to the necessary skills and experience, principals must develop a school project that will be implemented. Likewise, another legal requirement is an aptitude evaluation for the position. This is like the States, principals must have a master's degree in educational leadership or educational administration, as well as several years of teaching experience.
Moreover, the roles and practices are different in these countries. In the U.K., headteachers will typically distribute leadership and management with their workforce, so all the roles are played, while they maintain a strategic supervision or monitoring (Day & Armstrong, 2016). In France, though, pedagogical decision making is carried out by school principals, as their responsibilities lie on management, evaluation and on teachers’ motivation (Ortega-Rodriguez, 2022). However, in practice, they share a static vision of leadership, culminating in the pure management of schools (Normand, 2016). Also, teachers benefit from great pedagogical autonomy, due to just accounting to their inspectors and not to their principals (Normand, 2016). Conversely, López-Rupérez et al. (2020) observed that a significant proportion of Spanish principals carry out leadership practices related exclusively to management. When asked about their roles and responsibilities, U.S. principals stated to give their priority to providing a safe and nurturing environment “for students to make effective academic, emotional and social progress” (Chang et al, 2019; pp 49), although their roles are more related to the instructional leadership.
This study aims to analyze the effect of certain principal practices on the academic performance of 15-year-old students in science, comparing four different models in four countries: United States, United Kingdom, France and Spain.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis project is part of the R&D&i Project "Working conditions of school directors and impact on their emotional economy. Analysis from a national and international perspective", of the State Program for the Promotion of Scientific and Technical Research of Excellence (Ref.: RTI2018-094851-B-I00).
In this research, we present a secondary analysis of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015 database. Hence, it is an ex post facto design aiming to study the impact on the level of performance of 15-year-old students of some leadership practices of principals.
First, a multilevel regression analysis was performed, to understand the relation between the models and students’ performance. Each performance value is composed of ten plausible values, which offer a distribution for each individual in the sample. To be able to use these plausible values, we used the SPSS macros offered in the PISA Data Analysis Manual (Tourón et al., 2019). Later, to better understand the effect of different practices have on performance, each practice was studied separately. The frequency and average of impact on performance were calculated.
As a dependent variable, we chose performance in the Science test, because in 2015 PISA was focused on this discipline. As independent variables, the answers that the principals gave in the school questionnaire. The questions related to leadership (SC009Q##TA) were selected, specifically to the questions related to the index of teacher participation in leadership, as described in the technical report (LEADTCH; OECD, 2017):
• I provide staff with opportunities to participate in school decision-making.
• I engage teachers to help build a school culture of continuous improvement.
• I ask teachers to participate in reviewing management practices.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsWhen comparing the impact that the practices have in students’ outcomes and the frequencies principals execute them, the first idea that emerges is that they are not always adjusted. For example, in the USA the most common frequency when principals allow teachers to participate in school decision making and promote the culture of improvement is 3 or 4 times a year. However, this frequency triggers the biggest decreases in the outcomes. Something similar happens in the UK when promoting the culture or in France when reviewing the management practices.
The reasons for these differences may be based on the educational systems, as all of them allow different roles and practices to principals. But it can also be related to the principal career and previous formation of principals. Many countries, as USA, are considering forcing principals to have previous formation, instead of just considering it something desirable, like the UK or France. Other countries, as Spain, do not even consider it when applying for the role, being fundamental the years of expertise and the project to the school they apply for.
Moreover, it is important to allow principals to have access to these studies. Under the thinking of “the more the better”, some principals do not reflect on their own about the best moment to develop certain practices and believe they should perform them as much as possible. In general, we can see this is so just in one of our four countries of study. Each practice has an appropriate frequency in each country.
We should also take into consideration the point of view of teachers when principals perform these practices. Some teachers may feel it is positive to be considered in school decision-making, but others may consider it is not their role. Therefore, further analysis in this direction is necessary.
ReferencesBastian KC, Henry GT. The Apprentice: Pathways to the Principalship and Student Achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly. 2015;51(4):600-639.
Chan, T. C., Jiang, B., Chandler, M., Morris, R., Rebisz, S., Turan, S., Shu, Z & Kpeglo, S. (2019). School Principals' Self-Perceptions of Their Roles and Responsibilities in Six Countries. New Waves-Educational Research and Development Journal, 22(2), 37-61.
Day, C. & Armostrong, P. (2016) England: School leadership research in England. In H. Ärsletig, C. Day & O. Johanson. (Eds.) A decade of research on school principals. Cases from 24 countries. (pp 245-268). Springer.
Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: How Successful School Leaders Use Transformational and Instructional Strategies to Make a Difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258.
Hattie, J. (2015). What Doesn’t Work in Education: The Politics of Distraction, Londres, Pearson.
Huang Wu, Jianping Shen, Ya Zhang & Yunzheng Zheng (2020). Examining the effect of principal leadership on student science achievement, International Journal of Science Education, 42(6), 1017-1039
Izquierdo, D. (2016). ¿Qué hacen los directores de centros escolares? Las prácticas de dirección en España a partir de los estudios internacionales PISA y TALIS. Revista complutense de educación, 27(3), 1193-1209.
López Rupérez, F., García García, I., & Expósito-Casas, E. (2020). School Leadership in Spain. Evidence from PISA 2015 assessment and Recommendations. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1–20.
Marcus Pietsch & Pierre Tulowitzki (2017) Disentangling school leadership and its ties to instructional practices – an empirical comparison of various leadership styles, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 28:4, 629-649
Normand, R. (2016). France: Between civil service and Republican ethics – The statist vision of leadership among French principals. In H. Ärsletig, C. Day & O. Johanson. (Eds.) A decade of research on school principals. Cases from 24 countries. (pp 365-374). Springer.
OECD (2017). PISA 2015 Technical Report.
Ortega-Rodríguez, P. J. (2022). La autonomía escolar en Europa: aportaciones para la innovación educativa. Revista Española de Educación Comparada, (41), 10-27.
Rehman, A. U., Khan, M. I. & Waheed, Z., (2019). School heads’ perceptions about their leadership styles: A qualitative study. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 6(1), 138-153
Tourón, J., Navarro-Asencio, E., Lizasoain, L., López-González, E., & García-San Pedro, M. J. (2019). How teachers’ practices and students’ attitudes towards technology affect mathematics achievement: results and insights from PISA 2012. Research Papers in Education, 34(3), 263–275.
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
School Leadership Development as School University Partnership- Tracing Relationships Across Episodes
Ruth Jensen1, Kjersti Løken Ødegaard1, Hedvig Neerland Abrahamsen1, Ann Elisabeth Gunnulfsen1, Kristin Helstad2
1University of Oslo, Norway; 2OsloMetropolianUniversity
Presenting Author: Jensen, Ruth;
Gunnulfsen, Ann Elisabeth
Every year, organizations spend considerable amounts of money to train their leaders. The training might take place through “the education of leaders" (settings where aspiring and practicing school leaders are enrolled in programs that confer formal qualifications) or through “school leadership development” in workshops, networks or partnerships that offer continuing development without bestowing formal qualifications. The present study examines ongoing school leadership development as a research-practice partnership (RPP) between schools and universities in a reform context.The emphasis on school reforms is considerable and increasing internationally (Røvik et al. 2014). The process of implementing reform intentions is both long and complicated (Cuban, 1988). Reforms initiated at the central level often face problems when interpreting and implementing these initiatives locally. It may take time before the reforms bring about changes in the school organization (Karseth & Møller, 2014). In order to guide transformational work at the school level, reform initiatives from above and local initiatives from below must be interpreted and executed as concrete actions (Røvik et al., 2014). There is a need to be more sensitive to how reforms are negotiated and how they play out in local contexts (Rasmussen & Ludvigsen, 2009). One problem with reform research is that limited attention has been paid to the interpretation of the intentions of reforms and the negotiation of priorities at different levels in the reform work (Olson, 2003). The present study focuses on reform work in RPP at a school level. Several methods have been tried to support developmental work in RPP such as action research, design research and critical friendship. The present study implies formative interventions in so-called Change Laboratories (CL) (Engeström, 2001). Researchers and practitioners meet in workshops to explore various issues arising in workplaces. Reviews on "formative interventions" in CL the last 25 years (Engeström & Sannino, 2010; Sannino & Engeström, 2018) states that the method has been used in health and industrial work, teacher education, nursing education, vocational education, as well as the postal system. However, CL has to a limited degree been introduced in educational settings.There are however some exceptions. One study (Author 1, 2014, 2022) examined leadership development in a team consisting of principals, municipal-level leaders, and researchers, while Jachellen & Postholm (2022) examined a university–school collaboration as an arena for community-building in teacher education. Whether explorative work on leadership issues in CL becomes conducive to any changes in daily leadership practices is an empirical and a methodological question which raises issues of causality in qualitative research. Causal relationships are traditionally examined in quantitative research, although some researchers (Miles and Huberman 1989; Miller and Fredericks 1987) have attempted to reestablish both the legitimacy and potential of causal and qualitative analyses of empirical data. The attention in the present study is the ongoing processes in CL. The assumption is that the result is achieved in the processes (Engeström 2011). Theoretically, we built on third generation of CHAT which makes it possible to study developmental work in boundary spaces across activity systems such as schools and universities by tracing what is being worked on here and now in terms of different problem-spaces (situation constructed objects) (Engetsröm, 1999). The empirical data in the present study is examined with the help of three layers of causation (Engeström (2011). The purpose of the paper is to contribute with methodological insights into how causational relationships can be studied qualitatively in RPP. The following research questions have guided the contribution:
- How can causational relationships be traced in research-practices-partnership with a CHAT approach?
- What is the potential of tracing causaltional relationships in school leadership development
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe analyses is illustrated with examples from three upper secondary schools in Norway which have collaborated with researchers from a university since 2020. The innovation part of the present empirical study consists of eight workshops of two hours in the three schools which are led by the researchers. To ensure that the work conducted in the laboratories leads to testing and follow-up in daily leadership practice, three different types of “triggers” are introduced which may push change processes (Engeström, 2001) such as data from the school which mirrors the practice itself, theoretical models and analytical concepts that may bring conversations and reflections to a higher analytical level and help to clarify tensions that may prevent progress, and specific questions about the past, present, and future leadership practices. In formative interventions, it is the practitioners' need for change that constitutes the starting point rather than the researcher's needs, which is often the case in experimental design. The process of formative interventions is characterized by negotiation and collaboration between researchers and practitioners rather than implementing changes that are predetermined. The purpose of formative interventions is to develop action skills among practitioners. The role of the researcher in formative interventions is to provoke processes that are led by practitioners to solve problems and deal with dilemmas, whereas in experimental design it is important to control variables.These are particularly important aspects of change work that require the interpretation and development of professional judgment, which is a turning point in the leadership of reform work.
The processes in CL have been video-recorded for research purposes. The video data for the present study consists of 24 hours of videotaped material from each case. The data also consists of diverse materials which has been introduced in the workshops. All video data have been transcribed. The transcripts from each case have been divided into episodes (subject specific objects). A new episode was delimited by a start or a thematic shift pertaining to the situational object (what was worked on here and now). We developed criteria for the selection of what Barab et al. (2001) conceptualized as "action relevant episodes" (ARE). For this article, we looked for episodes that could Preliminary findings suggest that causal relationships become visible in the process data of school leadership development across episodes.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsExpected Outcomes:
Causational relationships can be traced in research-practices-partnership with CHAT guided by theory on three layers of causality by switching between attention to the trajectory of the partnership in terms of project object and situastional objects here and now be following specific issues being worked on. It requires attention to what motivates and drives the engagments in the teams under study rather than individual actions. The potential of tracing causational relationships in school leadership development is to contribute with insights into what triggers development over time and what matters become condusive to new perspectives and actions in school leadership. More emperical cases is needed to test out the present methdology.
ReferencesAbbott, A. (1992). From causes to events: Notes on narrative positivism. Sociological Methods and Research, 20(4), 428–455.
Barab, S., Hay, S., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2001). Constructing networks of action-relevant episodes: An in-situ research methodology. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1), 63–112.
Engeström, Y. (1999b). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. I: Y.
Engeström, R.- L. Punamäki- Gitai & R. Miettinen (red), Perspectives on Activity Theory (s. 377– 404). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education
and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
Engeström, Y. (2011). Activity theory and learning at work. I M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans & B. N. O’Connor (red.), The
SAGE handbook of workplace learning. London: SAGE.
Engeström, Y. & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges.
Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.
Karseth, B. & Møller, J. (2014). «Hit eit steg og dit eit steg» – Et institusjonelt blikk på reformarbeid i skolen. Norsk pedagogisk tidsskrift, 98(6), 452–468.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1989). Some procedures for causal analysis of multiple-case data. Interna-
tion Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2(1), 55–68.
Miller, S. I., & Fredericks, M. (1987). The confirmation of hypotheses in qualitative research. Methodika,
1(1), 25–40.
Olson, D.R. (2003). Psychological Theory and Educational Reform: How School Remakes Mind and Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pre
ss.
Røvik, K. A., Eilertsen, T. V., & Furu, E. M. (Eds.). (2014). Reformideer i norsk skole: spredning, oversettelse og implementering. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
|
