Conference Agenda

Chile has a highly privatised and marketised school system where schools are individually accountable for their performance and, ultimately, responsible for their sustainability (Carrasco & Gunter, 2019; Falabella, 2016; Zancajo, 2019). In this context, which would propel schools apart, recent policies and reforms are deliberately encouraging them to join mandated networks and work collaboratively under shared goals (Bellei, 2018; Pino-Yancovic et al., 2019). Nevertheless, to date, questions on how schools relate to others in such contrasting conditions have not been empirically addressed.

Considering this, this paper aims to explore to what extent schools build relationships of collaboration and support; and, if so, inspect who they turn to, and examine the motives driving them to get together.

To fulfil these purposes, this study adopted a Mixed Method Social Network Analysis approach (Bellotti, 2014; Borgatti et al., 2018), a conceptual and methodological framework concerned with the relational structures schools and their communities are embedded in. Empirical data was yielded between November and December 2022 through Ego-centric Network Map interviews (Altissimo, 2016) with sixteen primary school headteachers from an urban school district in Santiago, Chile. Interviews aimed at collecting data on relationships schools forge to support the work they do daily, acknowledging features of the networks, drivers, and the content of these bonds.

Findings show that schools and school leaders make use of both policy-framed and individual means to engage with schools that are similar in terms of their structural characteristics, forging networks that are mainly locally rooted, and diverse in terms of their size and the strength of their ties. Moreover, the research reveals four main ends driving schools to work along with others: i) to innovate in teaching and learning processes, ii) to provide administrative and managerial support, iii) to secure students’ smooth transitions to secondary education, and iv) to organise joint extra-curricular activities.

Unlike most research addressing school networking where the networks under study are setting the boundaries of the inquiry, this study provides an account of all the social worlds in which schools are intertwined. By doing so, this research seeks to expand current notions on the way schools relate to others, challenging assumptions on individualisation that usually are part of scholarly discussions on processes of privatisation. At the same time, it sheds light on relational perspectives to understand processes of school improvement that are not commonly addressed by the literature.

Considering the above mentioned, this paper seeks to contribute to the ‘Leading improvement collaboratively and sustainably’ ICSEI congress sub-theme.

Ensuring that every learner learns successfully is an urgent global challenge. To address this, ACER has committed its expertise and resources to make a significant contribution internationally. We work in partnership with education systems to drive ongoing, sustainable improvements in teaching and learning. This work is underpinned by our suite of evidence-based holistic improvement frameworks (tools), which assist education systems, schools, and school leaders in their improvement journeys. Such frameworks help establish common understandings of what improvement looks like in terms of observable, measurable practices to guide improvement foci, strategies, planning, and monitor progress.

Our flagship improvement framework is the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT). The NSIT reflects the interrelatedness of a broad range of practices at different levels in a school (highlighted in research, Robinson et al., 2017, Yatsko et al., 2015) and has been used successfully by schools and education systems in Australia and internationally since 2013. It consists of nine domains of practice with accompanying performance levels to support schools to deeply reflect on their current practices, paving a clear pathway for improvement. ACER determined a need to develop a second iteration of this tool, renamed the School Improvement Tool (SIT), drawing on the most recent international research, including our own, to ensure its fitness for purpose in informing sustainable school improvement.

This presentation highlights key learnings from research and practice that informed the development of the SIT. A comprehensive review of research on school improvement, school effectiveness and school leadership confirmed the robustness of the nine-domain framework. The SIT reflects learnings from an extended evidence base, new developments in the field, changes to common terminology and 10 years of evidence from NSIT school reviews.

Examples of themes that have been strengthened across the SIT include a more explicit focus on student wellbeing and engagement as well as student learning. Inclusive practices and the consideration of student perspectives to support sustainable school improvement have also been amplified. Fundamentally, it reflects a shift in the focus of school improvement research from student academic achievement outcomes to educational outcomes more broadly (Scheerens & Ehren, 2015). Another key theme that has been strengthened is collective efficacy and collaboration, reflecting compelling research findings in relation to school cultures characterised by high expectations (e.g., McAleavy et al., 2018) as well as distributed leadership (Leithwood et al., 2020), and ongoing professional learning of teachers and school leaders—directly related to the conference theme.

The SIT was published in 2023. Feedback from professional learning with school and system leaders and its application in schools across three Australian jurisdictions strongly endorses the shifts in emphases from NSIT to SIT and the value of the SIT as a tool to guide school improvement.

The SIT is a practical tool that can be used in any school setting internationally to enable schools to make judgements about where they are on their improvement journey and guide improvement-focused actions. At a policy level, it provides a unifying framework that can assist in ensuring system-wide consistency in school improvement efforts.

A school district's most important work is to ensure the highest quality of instruction for students. School district leaders typically don't invest in meaningful, ongoing development of building leadership capacity within their own team (Meyer & Vandermolen, 2021). The intent of this study was to shift that reality through the development of a thought partner relationship between superintendents of local school districts and former school administrators from a regional intermediate school district. The purpose of this partnership was to build strong leadership capacity to include a laser focus on learning and teaching. Results include superintendents appreciation of having a thought partner, an increase in classroom observational practice and various indicators of moving the needle toward instructional leadership.

Research questions included the following:

How to increase leader capacity for cohesive and collaborative leadership in support of improving teaching and learning for all?

Does having a focused though partner/coach have a positive impact on superintendent instructional practices? What is the impact?

How do superintendents influence the improvement of instruction and what leadership is needed for superintendents to better be able to focus on learning and teaching?

How does leadership coaching evolve over the course of the coaching relationship?

The theoretical perspectives for this study included Hall and Hord's (2011) Six Shared Functions for Facilitating Change as well as Smith and Smith's (2018) Big-Five High-Impact Instructional Leadership Practices and the Web of Support for Learning Improvements (Knapp et al., 2014). The authors also used language from Marzano's District Leadership Map (Marzano, 2018) and Cognitive Coaching (Thinking Collaborative, 2023) since those were frameworks local districts used for growth goal setting and evaluative purposes.

This study was a case study including multiple data sources to enable investigators to understand how superintendents utilized the knowledge, skills, behaviors and strategies they acquired by engaging with their thought partner on a consistent basis.

Primary data sources included semi-structured interviews. The tool used to conduct these interviews was the Concerns Based Adoption Model. Additional data sources included weekly huddle artifacts such as minutes, agendas, meeting recordings, data collection instruments and self assessments in which both the superintendent and the thought partner utilized on a consistent basis.

A principal is the second leading indicator of student performance falling only to fall behind the classroom teacher (Grissom et al., 2021). Similarly, when there is high principal turnover or a less effective principal leading a building, student achievement is negatively impacted (Grissom et al., 2021). Therefore, it is important to support building level leaders with professional learning that is meaningful and will bring results of increased leader performance. The purpose of this practice and subsequent study was to build the capacity in superintendent and central office leadership and support so that they may, in turn, engage in strategies and instructional focus to support their building level leaders (and teachers and students).

The conference's theme is "Quality Professional Education for Enhanced School Effectiveness and Improvement." Through this study, the investigators strived to provide quality professional learning to impact learning and teaching.