Conference Agenda

This symposium describes the current evidence regarding the impact of middle leadership linked to improved student academic outcomes in Australia, New Zealand and Chile. The session will draw together recent evidence from researchers completing mixed methods studies in secondary school contexts which highlight the contextual and instructional factors middle leaders require to lead high performing departments. An analysis of the research evidence from a perspective that supports the principals to consider the types of support and interventions required to develop the capacity and capabilities of middle leaders within secondary schools. Principals impact has become more indirect, and has cascaded to curriculum middle leaders who are well positioned to interact directly with teachers (Cardno et al. 2018). The symposium will provide an opportunity for similarities and differences between the jurisdictions to be discussed and specifically relates to the conference theme through its focus on authentic engagement with current practitioners (teachers and leaders) in order to better understand the important role of middle leaders in enhancing students opportunities to learn.

Disparity in student achievement within and across secondary schools is an ongoing cause for concern in New Zealand and internationally. This difference in student academic success at school is often attributed to students family background but there is building evidence that teachers and middle leaders who support them, can make a significant difference for student outcomes in the secondary school context. This paper reports the findings from three New Zealand studies and argues that ‘school effects’ are less important than ‘department effects. The reasons for within school variation and the middle leadership practices that positively and negatively impact effective teaching and learning are nuanced and include a range of organisational and behavioural factors.

This paper draws on an initial quantitative analysis of student academic results over three years which demonstrates within school variation in a sample of 41 large urban schools (Author, 2010). A follow up study of the middle leadership practices within 30 departments of the original school sample provided further evidence from of the middle leadership practices of the curriculum department leaders and the perceptions of their leadership practices from the teachers they led (Author 2022). The growing empirical research on middle leadership and the impact on effective teaching at department level has a crucial role in developing and maintaining the quality of students learning experience (Harris, Jones, Ismail & Nguyen, 2019) and the research reported in this study supports the notion that the middle leaders have the strongest level of accountability to ensure there is effective teaching of students in their department (De Nobile, 2018).The paper will also report on a recent 2023 study investigating the curriculum middle leadership practices occurring in New Zealand secondary schools. These results will provide a more up to date understanding of the middle leadership practices aimed at supporting the achievement of indigenous students and the types of culturally responsive practice occurring within and across secondary schools. Calls continue to be made for research that identifies the teacher and lesdership practices that make a difference for student populations from disadvantaged backgrounds. The design of these studies have been controlled for socio-economic factors. Middle leaders cannot control the socio- economic background of the students that study within the departments they lead. They can make decisions about how to provide the most responsive and positive learning environment for students where learning is relevant and contextualised for diverse learners.

This study investigates the leadership practices enacted by middle leaders (learning area leaders) in secondary schools. We investigate how these leaders work with their teams to improve pedagogy in their learning areas. 

International research provides consistent evidence demonstrating the impact of leadership on all aspects of schooling (Kovacevic & Hallinger, 2019). Several large systematic reviews have found leadership is ranked second to classroom teaching to positively influence student learning (Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, 2020). In secondary schools, it is middle leaders in roles such as learning area leaders (often referred to as subject co-ordinators) who take significant responsibility for pedagogy in their learning area (Cardno et al., 2015; Highfield, 2010) and whilst these leaders take on significant responsibility; many do not receive the necessary leadership development to enact these roles (Bassett & Robson, 2016). This point was reinforced by Gurr (2019), who reports that these leaders were vital to enhance teaching and learning in their schools, but often schools did not have the necessary structures in place to enable them to maximise their impact.  

This mixed methods study involved a survey and interviews in 36 schools across Australia. Using the leadership practices identified in the Ontario Leadership Framework, the middle leaders were asked to self-reflect on their leadership practices. Additionally, the teachers in the schools reflected on the leadership practices of their leaders. The 65 interviews conducted with principals, assistant principals and middle leaders in schools enabled us to further understand how middle leadership was enacted and developed in secondary schools.

Our findings indicate that there is wide variation both between and within schools in how middle leadership is both enacted and developed. Our data indicates that when principals focus on supporting the middle leaders to develop their leadership practices then this can impact on the teaching and learning in schools.

This study adds to previous school improvement literature on the important role of middle leaders and their contribution to whole school improvement.

This study investigates the leadership responsibilities reported by 94 mathematics (67% males) and 87 Language (61% females) department heads in 126 secondary schools in Chile (66% private voucher and 34% public). These middle leaders were asked about their work, the difficulties and affordances they encountered as middle leaders and their perceptions of the contributions of departmental work to school improvement.

Department heads exemplify teacher leadership as they engage in a process of social influence, within and outside their classrooms, aiming to improve teaching and learning based on collaboration and trust (Harris et. al. 2019; Leithwood, 2016; Melville and Wallace, 2007). Previous studies have shown that department head’s responsibilities may include: (a) enacting school-wide policies in their subject, (b) building a shared vision of quality teaching and learning in their subject, (c) supervising and supporting colleagues’ practices, (d) leading curriculum, and (e) representing the interests and needs of their department (Gurr and Drysdale, 2013; Brent at al., 2014). These responsibilities and the conditions to enact them effectively have been linked to enabling conditions set by the school principal (Dinham, 2007; Authors, 2022).

School principals who were surveyed as part of a larger study to investigate the contributions of departments and department heads’ leadership provided information to contact department heads in their school. Participants responded through an online survey and results show that irrespective of the learning area, their work largely focused on improving students’ learning through professional development and collaborative lesson planning. Department heads reported that most of their time was spent supervising and providing feedback to colleagues through a review of their lesson plans and assessments as well as observing their teaching. A lesser part of their time was spent on administrative tasks.

Department heads reported that their job was facilitated by decision-making autonomy afforded by senior leaders (85%) as well as by the legitimacy afforded by peers to their leadership role (82%). However their work was hindered by the amount of administrative work (61%) and 52% reported colleagues did not always fulfil their professional responsibilities. Over 83% of the participants indicated that department work strengthened collaboration, improved curriculum implementation, and professional trust to seek and give help. These outcomes are significant as these are elments of professional cultures associated with sustained higher levels of school performance (Lee and Louis, 2019).

Notwithstanding these positive contributions, the department structure and leadership position is not mandated in secondary schools in Chile and, therefore, the principal decides whether to create this middle leader position and the respective responsibilities. In the larger study we found that about 25% of the schools surveyed did not have subject departments (Author, 2023). Among those with departments, 25% did not have the position of department head. The main reasons were small school roll size and insufficient resources to provide a teacher with time to fulfill the middle leadership responsibilities. Findings suggest the need to identify alternative structures for teacher collaboration across schools, as well as within a school, when organizing teachers into departments is not possible.