Conference Agenda

Purpose: To explore gaps regarding principals' experiences of developing their identities, capacities, and sense of agency while leading diverse schools through transformation and inquire into why principals’ voices have been underrepresented in education leadership discourse (Bryman, 2004; Crow, Day & Moller, 2017; Hallinger, 2014, 2018; Quaglia, 2016).

Perspective: Canada’s K-12 education landscape is liquifying (ATA & CAP, 2014; C21 Canada, 2012; Dugan & Humbles, 2018; Hannon & Peterson, 2021; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009; Kaser & Halbert, 2008, 2009; OECD, 2018; Pollock, Wang, & Hauseman, 2014; Safir & Dugan, 2021). Navigating “permanent white waters” (Vaill, 1996) requires professional development. Principals need strong identities, capacities, and agency to create collaborative, equitable learning cultures for diverse learners (Safir, 2017; Stoll, 2009; Timperley, 2011) while navigating uncharted waters, work intensification, and unprecedented critical events (Pollock, Wang, & Hauseman, 2014; Safir & Dugan, 2021). However, across BC’s diverse districts, it is unknown how principals develop the means to influence change in their schools (Leithwood, Handford & Airini, 2018) nor how current discourses are influencing them (Karp, 2013) as they are “negotiating who they are for others as well as for themselves” (Moller, 2012, p. 456). The social construction/deconstruction of their identities is understudied (Karp, 2013; Karp & Helgo, 2009).

Ponderings: What are the experiences of British Columbia’s principals leading K-12 school transformation? How are BC Principals developing their sense of identity, capacity, and agency? How do research methods mute or amplify principal voice?

Processes: Research about principals often involves “looking at” their actions, not “listening to” their diverse stories (Bryman, 2004; Crow, Day, & Moller, 2017; Hallinger, 2014). Diversity in voices may present counter-narratives to popular or political discourse (ATA, 2017; Sugrue, 2009). Using metaphorically framed, social constructivist/critical narrative inquiry (Clandinin, 2007, 2013), in-depth, semi-structured interviews (Anderson & Kirkpatrick, 2015; Beuthin, 2014), and discourse analysis, this study amplifies diverse voices. Transcripts were analyzed through a narrative analysis (Riessman, 1994), discourse analysis (Gee, 2001, 2011; Rogers, 2011), and poetic analysis and poetic representation (Faulkner, 2007, 2017, 2019; Hopper & Sanford, 2008; Lemon, 2020; McKenna-Buchanan, 2017; Richardson, 2012; Ward, 2011). Ten participants shared stories (1) of being a principal/vice principal during the pandemic; (2) of leading change from a self-selected significant time in their career; and (3) of how they started as principals. They shared a metaphor that they felt described their experience of leading transformation. They reflected on those stories to describe how they developed their professional identities, capacities, and sense of agency during these events. Verbatim excerpts were written in a poetic representation as “stories from the river”.

Potentialities. Principals are diverse yet key points of leverage for ensuring successful, equitable education systems (Wahlstrom et al., 2010); they’re “at the centre of a rapidly changing society and the impact it is having on its children” (ATA & CAP, 2014, p. 1). Deep changes are impacting on their (re)figured worlds (Holland et al., 1998). With rising principal attrition and burnout (Wang, 2022), these gaps in understanding could put principals and the education transformation movement at risk.

For three decades, policymakers, scholars, and educators have been attracted to the benefits of the learning organisation concept and its potential for school improvement and supporting school leadership functions (Senge et al., 2012; Stoll & Kools 2017).

The concept has been explored to varying degrees in several countries to date, with Wales (UK) highly prominent. Unlike Wales, it appears Ireland has not applied the School as Learning Organisation (SLO) concept to support education policy reform, at least not explicitly. However, there is frequent reference to learning organisations in the recent Irish school self-evaluation policy “Looking at our School 2022”.

This paper focuses on problematising the concept of SLOs informed by the literature and policy documentation available. This will serve to explore the research and evidence base for leadership education and capacity building as it relates to the SLO. Data from a pilot study is used to further explore the SLO concept. There appears to be a gap in knowledge regarding the usefulness and application of the SLO concept. The study will aim to address this gap, particularly as it relates to teacher leadership and school improvement.

This paper will focus on how applicable and useful the SLO concept is in school effectiveness by addressing the following research question:

Is the School as a Learning Organisation (SLO) concept relevant for school improvement and school leadership?

This paper is based on a review and scoping of existing literature in the field which informs a preliminary pilot study for a larger research project. The extent to which the characteristics of SLO exist – particularly in relation to school leadership and school improvement – may be considered as unexplored to date. A review of the literature and policy documentation will further define the SLO concept and highlight its usefulness as a function of school improvement, particularly as this relates to the role of school leadership.

The paper is framed by a pragmatic approach that utilises the Kools et al. (2020) SLO survey instrument and will focus on two jurisdictions in the primary school context (Wales and Ireland). Data sources include relevant literature and empirical data from the pilot study. Adopting a mixed methods approach the pilot uses three instruments, a quantitative survey, followed by qualitative focus groups and semi-structured interviews.

Findings from the pilot may support the SLO model’s potential application in the Irish education context, and offer learnings based on its implementation (to date) in Wales. Interpretations of the possibilities and permutations of SLOs to support school improvement in national education systems may offer useful insights for international and national policy makers, researchers and educators.

The research is significant given the heightened attention to the application of the SLO concept within a number of jurisdictions globally, including the emergent aspirations within an Irish context. This research may offer new insights and interpretations regarding SLO potential for supporting Ireland’s recent primary curriculum reform (Government of Ireland, 2023). This in turn has implications for school effectiveness and improvement and may inform educational policy and practice globally.

Purpose

Leaders of primary and secondary schools across the globe are responding to increased expectations for continuous improvement and evidence-informed policy and practice to ensure instructional effectiveness and learning (Schildkamp et al., 2013). An essential component of instructional leadership involves using various forms of data associated with student learning to guide internal policies, school cultures, and capacity building. Principals’ data use practice largely involves supporting teachers’ data use by establishing norms, expectations and clear vision for use in instructional decisions. Principals also support teacher growth and capacity by providing time, tools, professional development and modeling effective routines and strategies (Drake, 2022). Grigsby and Vesey (2011) found that less than 30% of school leader preparation programs, however, focused on data use and the preparation of leaders to make data-informed decisions, or evidenced-based policy or practice broadly (Brown & Greany, 2018). Research on preservice leader preparation remains limited (Dexter et al., 2022). We examined preservice leader preparation programs in one US state to understand how data use is addressed in leader preparation.

Methods & Data Sources

We used qualitative methods to explore how 20 pre-service leader programs provided by 16 colleges or universities in Virginia focused on data use. The study involved two phases. The first was a review of published course descriptions for each program (N = 163). This phase included an in-depth review of 23 syllabi from six universities. Next, we conducted individual semi-structured interviews with seven program coordinators to understand how the field experience course prepared preservice leaders to use data. Data were analyzed using deductive coding and narrative analytic approaches.

Findings

Preservice leaders are receiving little preparation in data-informed decision making. Stand-alone courses on data use and decision-making were rare. We found that two of the 20 programs had courses focusing on data use and data-informed decision making. Approximately, 8% of course descriptions referenced data use and data-informed decision making. Of these, 38% focused on school improvement, 31% on generally approaches to data-informed decisions across different leader domains, and 23% related data use to curriculum, instruction and student learning. Several programs offered related courses including research design, assessment, program evaluation and statistics content that could support school leaders’ data use – these accounted for 5% of all courses. Interviews with program coordinators revealed the importance and heavy reliance on the field-based internship experience to support preservice leaders' development in data use skills and practice. Yet, these experiences were highly variable and dependent on placement school needs, indicating that not all preservice leaders had similar opportunities to develop data-informed decision making skills.

Significance & Connection to ICSEI 2024

The study findings demonstrate that gaps in school leader preparation to engage data-based continuous and school improvement efforts persist. Our findings coupled with other research literature demonstrate the need to further examine field-based experiences of pre-service school leaders. This study closely aligns ICSEI 2024’s focus on school improvement by investigating gaps in school leader preparation to effectively lead data use.

Principals face increasing expectations for enhancing student outcomes, heightened community needs, and implementation of a range of policy reforms. Further, there is a growing disquiet with current practices demanding a rethink of the narrative of leading schools. One principal professional organisation, the Queensland Association of State School Principals (QASSP) in Australia recently commissioned an exploration of a new narrative for leading primary (P-6/Elementary) schools into the future (Turner, 2021). A jointly developed project with members of the Leadership Research International (LRI) team at the University of Southern Queensland (USQ), designed a three-phase study using a sequential mixed method approach (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). The research questions for this study were: What is the contribution of primary education to the future economic and social performance? and What is the contribution of school leadership to the achievement of quality primary school student outcomes, academic and social?

Phase one in response to the first research question comprised an extensive literature review of national and international literature about primary school leadership (Bauman et al., 2022), the outcome of which developed a framework of 12 hypothesised capabilities and their associated indicators. Phase Two focused on the second research question and involved a survey of measures to empirically test the 12 factors (capabilities) and indicators of the hypothesised framework. Participants were principals of public and independent primary schools in the State of Queensland. Principal axis factoring was used to initially identify a model which was subsequently subjected to confirmatory factor analysis and resulted in a refinement of the School Community-Oriented Leadership Framework with eight capabilities: Agility, Relational Collaboration, Advocacy, Visionary Commitment, Creative Innovation, Life-long Learning, Critical Decisiveness, and Courageous Communication. Each capability required more focused definition to reflect the expertise principals need for their complex work roles. Phase Three comprises two steps: a) an invitational workshop of leaders from the field; and b) purposive sampling of principals for individual interviews.

The focus of this paper is evidence derived from the first step of Phase three. This commenced with initial data collected from a workshop that invited principals and other school leaders to reflect on their individual experiences in relation to the eight capabilities. Small group discussions also provided evidence of implications for this framework in practice. This step was extended with an invitation for data to be collected from other contexts/countries and this paper presents findings from two countries - Australia and Canada. It is anticipated that these findings will strengthen the purpose and conduct of the individual interviews which form the basis of the second step of Phase Three. It is proposed that the interviews will result in case studies to discern the applicability of the School Community-Oriented Leadership Framework as a new narrative for primary school leaders. Ultimately, the purpose of this research partnership is that the findings will provide a capabilities framework for primary school principals that could assist system policy and leadership development designers with a point of reference for ongoing dialogue on leadership effectiveness for now and into the future.