Conference Agenda

In what ways can enquiry-based leadership professional learning programmes support participants to influence wider policy as well as to lead change in their contexts?

The Education Scotland Professional Learning and Leadership Directorate supports education professionals to make a difference for learners, families and communities through access to a wide range of leadership professional learning opportunities.

The Directorate is committed to ensuring the best possible leadership at all levels across Scotland’s education sector. Our suite of leadership programmes empower educators at all levels of the education system to lead effective change for the benefit of the learners in their contexts. All of our programmes are designed to provide transformative professional learning opportunities which enhance the capacity of participants to lead, and respond to, change in their contexts.

Our leadership professional learning programmes are informed by Scotland’s national model of professional learning (Education Scotland, 2023) which emphasises ‘learning by enquiring’ as a key feature of effective learning for educators. Our programmes seek to support participants to develop an enquiring stance (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2009) through transformative professional learning (Kennedy, 2014).

Each of our programmes supports participants to learn by enquiring, but the approach taken differs between offers. The Educator Leadership Programme, which is designed primarily for practitioners, enables participants to reflect on their practices and engage in practitioner enquiry. Similarly, the Middle Leaders Leading Change programme supports middle leaders in schools to develop the use of an enquiring stance when planning and leading change in their contexts. Our Excellence in Headship offer to experienced headteachers includes opportunities to create positive change through collaborative enquiry. The Building Racial Literacy programme is for those interested in becoming anti-racist educators and leaders, those seeking to develop their confidence and skills in challenging racism and in identifying and implementing anti-racist behaviours and processes in their everyday practice.

All of our programmes, including those outlined, support participants to lead through enquiry in their context. Increasingly, this learning is also being used to influence the policy environment which these educators operate within. For example, participants on the Educator Leadership Programme are encouraged to publish their learning online which can then be shared locally, regionally and nationally. Headteachers engaging in collaborative enquiries through Excellence in Headship synthesise and share their learning as think pieces which are then communicated directly to policy makers. The activism arising from many of the participants who have completed the Building Racial Literacy programme is a particularly interesting example of the agency which can be empowered through transformative professional learning.

Effective leadership is consistently identified as a key factor in achieving positive educational outcomes for children and young people (Waters, Marzano and McNulty, 2003; Hamilton, Forde and McMahon, 2018) and the leadership professional learning offer from Education Scotland is designed to support this in Scotland. However, as we enter a period of significant reform it is important to consider the extent to which the learning arising through these programmes can also be used to inform and influence policy making at all levels.

The persistent challenge of addressing disparities in educational outcomes based on student demographics such as family income, language and immigration status spans international contexts remains a focus of educational improvement efforts, worldwide. This comparative study explores how the state of Bavaria, Germany has addressed the problem of inequitable educational outcomes and what kind of policies and institutional or structural changes are underway to address these problems compared with California at the state and local levels of the system.

This roundtable discussion will focus on a comparative research project exploring education policy, research and practice in Bavaria and California to answer the question: How do education policies in different international contexts address educational inequities and how can professionals at different levels of education systems learn from each other to address those inequities? We will aim to specify each context exactly, and then to “distinguish the conceptual, structural and operational aspects from each other” (King, 1975) by examining the similarities and differences between California education policy and the policy Bavaria.

In July 2023 we are visiting education policy scholars at host universities, education policy leaders in ministries of education, education lawmakers in Bavarian Parliament and local schools. Our approach will illuminate system needs at more than one level of the system, recognizing that state policy makers are more likely to be concerned with the effects of broad policies and programs, while teachers and administrators may seek site level insights (Bradburn, 1990) through interviews, field notes and descriptive data from observations and discussions. While in Bavaria, we will visit to one primary serving immigrant students and to one vocational school.

We, along with members of parliament, Bavarian university faculty and colleagues in the Ministry of Education, have identified important similarities and differences in our states. Following are examples that have significant implications for school improvement, quality education and equity in both states:

1. In Bavaria early tracking is now seen as somewhat limiting of some students' opportunity and there is an interest in changing this practice, not unlike how some districts in California are evaluating and increasing access to college and career coursework.

2. Both states are experiencing significant teacher shortages and are urgently interested in addressing that need.

3. Bavaria has a strong, internationally recognized, internship initiative for secondary students supported through strong partnerships with private industry; a promising model.

Our study will document how international collaboration contributes to the field of education scholars, applied researchers, system leaders, and policy makers in different contexts and how collaboration serves as a form of professional learning (Spillane, 2006). Our project aligns with the conference theme by adding to the growing body of evidence that demonstrates the impact of research/policy/practice collaboration on improving the effectiveness of education systems. Our research plan centers on purposeful equity-focused dialogue between politicians, policymakers, academic researchers, educators and the wider school community.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the ways in which a U.S. district-university partnership developed, implemented, and attempted to sustain two “network improvement communities” (NIC) aimed at improving two district-wide problems: 1) students’ mathematical reasoning, and 2) central office leaders’ understanding of student and adult social-emotional learning. Given the recent rise in district-university partnerships and NICs as mechanisms for school improvement (Bryk, Gomez, & Grunow, 2011; Farrell et al., 2021; Gomez, Biag, & Imig, 2020; Joshi, E., Redding, C., & Cannata, 202; LeMahieu et al.,2017; Russell, et al, 2017; Sanchez, Burnam, & Zaki, 2019;), we aimed to understand perspectives of multiple stakeholders engaged in this work - university faculty, central office leaders, school leaders, and teachers.

More specifically, we asked: What are the benefits and limitations of a district-university partnership utilizing network improvement communities to address problems in a large, urban school district? How do stakeholders’ perspectives about the benefits and limitations differ by role within the partnership and NICs?

We draw on organizational learning to investigate these questions, noting that NICs are designed to solve particular problems, but not designed to increase their own effectiveness as organizations (Argris & School, 1997; Mintrop & Zumpe, 2019; Redding & Viano, 2018; Sandoval & Van Es, 2021; Yurkofsky et al., 2020). Our methodological approach, described below, allowed us to contribute to the organizational learning of both the partnership and NICs themselves.

We conducted three rounds of semi-structured interviews to gather perspectives of stakeholders in different roles throughout the partnership. We analyzed findings from interviews conducted at three timepoints during the partnership – rather than only at the end - and shared those findings with partnership stakeholders at each timepoint. Findings were used to generate actionable recommendations for improving both the partnership and the NICs, with the larger goal of impacting district-wide mathematical reasoning and social-emotional learning.

Early results, based on interviews with 19 participants, indicated buy-in around the use of the NICs to facilitate change, but frustration around the slow pace of the work. Furthermore, a culture of distrust and compliance within the district acted as a barrier to both the NICs and the partnership itself.

This study connects to the conference subtheme of “leading improvement collaboratively and sustainably” by examining the use of two network improvement communities within a district-university partnership as mechanisms by which to lead improvement within a large, urban school district. Given the prevalence of district-university partnerships designed to support high quality teaching and learning, there is a need to understand the process by which partnerships are developed and implemented, as well their potential benefits and limitations.