reculturing a school as a learning organisation: investigative narratives in … · 2010-06-09 ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Reculturing a school as a learning organisation: Investigative narratives in
two Queensland schools
Gladys Vivian Martoo M. Ed. Research (QUT), B. Ed. (QUT), Dip. Teach. (QUT)
A thesis submitted to the School of Learning and Professional Studies, Queensland University of Technology
in fulfilment of a Professional Education Doctorate in the Faculty of Education.
2006
ii
Key Words
Curriculum leadership: Curriculum reform: Organisational reform: School reform:
School reculturing: Teacher learning: Learning organisations: Professional learning
communities: Learning communities: Learning alliances: Communities of practice:
Professional learning culture: Learning leadership: Parallel leadership: Relational
leadership: Teacher leadership: Educational leadership: Action- inquiry self-study:
Practitioner research: Reflective practice: Reflection- in-action:
Publications List
Martoo, G.V. (2005). Building Teacher Learning Alliances to Support Learning
Leadership. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education–
Redesigning pedagogy: Research, policy, practice, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore, July 2005.
iii
Abstract
The focus of this study has been to connect the idea of developing schools as
learning organisations with the notion of developing learning leaders and building
school capacity for our knowledge economy. Therefore, this action- inquiry self-
study has examined the issues of curriculum reform in the context of more general
organisational reform. It has explored the notion of schools being recultured or
reconstructed to work as learning organisations in a climate that focuses on the
improved social and academic learning outcomes of their students.
This self-study represents two significant chapters in my professional life and
captures approximately four years of professional snapshots. It has allowed me to
examine my practice of partnering, conversing, arranging and developing shared
vision across two schools. This study recognized these as powerful reculturing
mechanisms and affirmed that conversations about learning, shared beliefs mission
and vision, enabling leadership that reflects parallel learning relationships and
enabling organisational arrangements are critical for sustainable reform.
Consequently the exploration of the relationship between teacher learning, teacher
leadership and a professional learning culture has been the main focus for this
research.
Analytical processes for this study first explored the relationship between
teacher learning, teacher leadership and a professional learning culture through an
examination of current curriculum reforms. This is followed by a layered analysis of
the two narratives based on my leadership in two different school settings. A
rigorous mapping and scanning process then assisted the analysis of these narratives.
This process was supported by a number of specific conceptual frameworks that
underpin the school reculturing process and reflect key qualities of schools that work
as learning organisations.
Six significant snapshots emerged from the analysis of the two narratives.
The deeper analysis of these snapshots, which have been referred to as close-ups,
formed a number of my first tentative propositions. These layers of investigation
were also supported by the responses of several key snapshot participants and reader
iv
respondents, before the final propositions were made. These responses recognised
that an organisation that works together, learns together; and that there is strength
and powerful learning when leadership can assist practitioners to work as a learning
community. These qualities were found to be directly related to this study’s
proposed reconstructed model for developing schools as learning organisations.
The reconstructed model recognised a number of other less visible elements
that can be seen in a school working as a learning organisation. These elements relate
directly to enabling/capacity building leadership and the associated relationship skills
of leaders. They were found to be necessary elements for effective collaboration and
for creating spaces for conversation, reflection, spontaneity and risk-taking.
This study also recognised that any deconstruction and reconstruction of a
school as a learning organisation is first a reconstruction of core beliefs and values.
These beliefs and values are reflected in a school’s culture and are inclusive of the
visible and less visible elements. The constant examination of one’s assumptions,
ideas, values and beliefs has been considered to be essential to the analysis process,
as well as to the process of reform and achieving organisational change. The study
revealed, therefore, that enabling/capacity-building leadership is a key to the process
of reculturing a school as a learning organisation. The data from respondents also
indicates that this notion of leadership as being enabling/capacity building has also
been a primary focus for answering the second of the key research questions: ‘How
does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction take place?’
The additional points of difference/interest that emerged from the various
respondents suggest that the process of deconstruction and reconstruction of a school
as a learning organisation would be assisted by realising that energy and passion are
needed for enabling/capacity building leadership. This form of leadership requires
moving from being top-down and become more parallel with renewed learning
relationships. This study affirmed that this focus on establishing parallel learning
relationships assists in the development of parallel learning leadership and parallel
learning partnerships.
v
Enabling/capacity building leaders working in parallel with their teachers can
also play an important role in developing/supporting flexible and imaginative school
organisation. In this way enabling/capacity building leaders can work as learning
leaders and brokers to assist the development of other learning partnerships/alliances.
This community building strategy can consequently develop opportunities for
teachers to work and learn collaboratively as learning leaders.
Enabling/capacity building leadership is correctly placed as the key to
considering how the deconstruction and reconstruction process takes place. Further,
the reconstruction process taking place reflect a culture of dynamic inquiry. This is
made possible when enabling/capacity building leaders share and commit to similar
notions of schools working as learning organisations and teachers are
assisted/brokered to work collaboratively for professional alliances and professional
growth.
Consequently this study proposes that teachers cope better with the ever-
increasing demands of curriculum reforms if:
• schools can work as learning organisations
• schools allow teachers to work as learning leaders
• administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous and
collaborative practices
• there are shared beliefs, mission and vision; organisational
arrangements/support; conversations for learning; shared approaches to
pedagogy, and parallel relationships
• enabling/capacity-building leadership for learning alliances allows for a
professional culture of dynamic inquiry that can evolve with a renewed focus
on conversations for learning.
The findings of this study have theoretical, methodological and practical
significance. In the first instance it presents as theoretical significance, the
reconstruction of a theoretical framework for schools working as learning
organisations. The methodological significance is reflected in this study’s emphasis
on theorising through layers. The methodological contribution acknowledges a
vi
legitimate and rigorous form of practitioner research, revealing self-study
methodology at a level that is more then mere self- indulgence. In presenting its final
contribution, the thesis acknowledges the practical contribution of the study by
emphasising the process involved in creating a culture of dynamic inquiry. The
transformative nature of this action- inquiry self-study is therefore confirmed in this
study. The layered analysis reflects a process of making sense of the messiness of
practitioner research, and consequently provides a true sense of this established form
of practical theorising in the teaching profession. These characteristics should be
seen not as limitations, but rather as authentic strengths.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Key Words……………….……………………………………………………..... ii
Publications List……………………………..……………………………….….. ii
Abstract…………...………………………………………………………....…… iii
Acknowledgements………………………………………………………….…… xv
Preface – The Visual Artist as Researcher …………………………….…..…..
xvi
Chapter 1: Developing Capacity Building Strengths………………………...… 1
1.01 The key concepts in school capacity building: Teaching leadership,
deconstruction and reconstruction of teacher learning and
professional learning culture………………………………………..…
1
1.02 An action-inquiry self-study ……………………………………….…. 6
1.03 The guiding research questions …….…….…………………………..
6
Chapter 2: The Inseparable - Curriculum, Assessment and Pedagogy ……….. 9
2.01 The Queensland Studies Authority’s curriculum documents and
associated reform directives for teaching and learning …………….....
9
2.02 Reforms specifically associated with curriculum for Years 1-10 in
Queensland schools……………………………………………….…...
10
2.03 Education Queensland’s ‘2010’ document and its associated
longitudinal study and school reform directives that link to leadership
13
2.04 Reforms driven by the ‘The Pitman Report’ ………………….……... 15
2.05 New leadership roles for teachers ………………………………..…… 16
2.06 Chapter summary ………………………………………………….…..
18
Chapter 3: A Strong Framework…………………………………………….….. 19
3.01 The centrality of teacher leadership for schools in times of reform –
the first step in reculturing a school as a learning organisation ……....
19
3.02 The importance of schools working as learning organisations in times
of reform…………………………………...………………………….
21
3.03 Frameworks that relate to the development of a school as a learning
organisation ………………………………………………………..….
24
3.04 Looking deeper at the layers of school culture …………………..…… 31
viii
3.05 A need for professional relationships and networks for leadership and
teacher learning ……………………………………………………….
35
3.06 A proposed reconstructed framework for developing a school as a
learning organisation ……………………………………………….....
39
3.07 Chapter summary and the questions that have guided this study ……..
42
Chapter 4: Building a Culture of Critical Reflection and Action……………... 45
4.01 A case for practitioner research …………………………………..…... 45
4.02 Practitioner investigation: A narrative self-study ………………….…. 46
4.03 Sources of data and data collection ……………………………….….. 49
4.04 Narratives as data …………………………………………………..… 53
4.05 Data analysis ……………………………………………………….…. 56
4.05.01 Critical incidents……………………………………………… 57
4.06 Credibility – validity/trustworthiness, generalisability and limitations. 65
4.07 Ethical considerations ………………………………………….……... 67
4.08 Chapter summary ………………………………………………….…..
70
Chapter 5: Theorising Through Layers………………………………………… 73
5.01 Theorising through layered text ………………………………….….... 73
5.02 Selecting significant snapshots of my work to weave into my
narratives……………………………………………………….……...
74
Chapter 6: Co-ordinating Connections : Narrative Number One…………….. 75
6.01 Coordinating university and school connections ……………………... 75
6.02 An isolated vision ………………………………………………….…. 79
6.03 Confidence in collaboratives ………………………………………… 80
6.04 In search of evidence to support my beliefs – an audit of the teaching
staff …………………………………………………………….……...
83
6.05 An experiment that focused on undergraduate learning ………….…... 85
6.06 A trial of accelerating pathways for Senior students ………………..... 87
6.07 The virtual workplace project ……………………………………..….. 92
6.08 Student exhibitions and workshops …………………………….…….. 94
ix
6.09 The courage to create substantial programs of partnering through
stronger relationships …………………………………………….…...
95
6.10 The school-based learning proposal for teachers and undergraduates 95
6.11 The design educators’ post-graduate studies project ………….……… 98
6.12 Moving on ……………………………………………………………. 98
6.13 Connecting the narratives……………………………………………..
99
Chapter 7: Confidence with Collaboratives: Narrative Number Two……….... 101
7.01 Building new credibility and trust in a tough culture – the beginnings
of a cultural deconstruction and reconstruction process………………
101
7.02 Avoiding an isolated vision yet again… strength in collaboratives and
teams ……………………………………………….……………...….
106
7.03 A sharpened focus on curriculum leadership while finding
opportunity for teacher-learning through new organisational
structures and communities of practice ……………………...………..
110
7.04 A specific focus on teacher- learning – making it more than rhetoric.... 117
7.05 Reculturing through restructure and a renewed teacher appraisal..…… 122
7.06 The creative tensions that come with change, but still coordinating
connections – confidence, contradictions, control and collisions in
collaboration …………………………………………………………..
125
Chapter 8: A Sifting Process ……………………………………………………. 129
8.01 The framework for data analysis …………………………...………… 129
8.02 The analysis process ……………………………………………...…... 132
8.03 The scanning and mapping of data ………………………………...…. 134
8.04 The most significant quality indicators that have emerged from the
mapped data …………………………………………………………
135
Chapter 9: Focusing With a Sharper Lens……………………………...……… 139
9.01 Narratives as snapshots that hold special moments and significant
qualities ………………………………………………………...……..
140
9.02 The re-presentations of six significant snapshots …………………….. 141
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 1 from Narrative Number One …………….. 142
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 2 from Narrative Number One …………….. 143
x
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 3 from Narrative Number One …………….. 143
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 4 from Narrative Number Two ………...….. 144
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 5 from Narrative Number Two ………...….. 146
#Close-up Snapshot: No. 6 from Narrative Number Two …………..... 147
9.03 The five significant qualities presented in close-up snapshots and their
relationship to teacher-theorising and my personal leadership values ..
148
9.04 The relationship between the significant qualities, teacher- learning
and schools operating as learning organisations ………………...……
149
9.05 The proposed reconstructions ………………………………………… 151
9.05.01 The proposed emphasis on conversations for learning .…...… 152
9.05.02 The proposed emphasis on learning alliances based on
parallel relationships ………………………………………………….
154
9.06 Culture of dynamic inquiry ……………….…………………………... 156
9.07 The assumptions and beliefs behind my practice …………...………... 159
9.08 Some tentative propositions ………………………………...……..….. 161
9.09 The key elements that have been examined/altered to assist the
retention of collaboration, reflective teaching/teacher theorising,
spontaneity and risk-taking …………………………………...………
162
9.10 Chapter summary – potentially powerful (almost invisible) outcomes
of ‘enabling’ leadership …………………………………...………….
164
9.11 Moving on to a confirmatory readers’ filter level of analysis …...……
165
Chapter 10: Necessary Filters……………………………………………….…... 167
10.01 The filters for my work – who were they? ……………………….…. 167
10.02 The thoughts, reflections and responses of my readers mapped for
analysis and for asking, ‘What did they have to say?’ ………………..
168
10.03 Points of emphasis that emerged from the respondents’ statements ... 171
10.04 Some concerns/questions arising from the respondents’ statements ... 176
10.05 The readers’ filters – what was confirmed and what was contested? ..
179
Chapter 11: Passion, Energy, Commitment and Mission………………….…... 181
11.01 What does deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a
learning organisation involve? ………………………………………..
181
11.02 How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction take place? 182
xi
11.03 What propositions can be elicited about the implications of
deconstructing a school as a learning culture and characterised by
educational/learning leadership? …………………………………...…
183
11.04 Significant contributions and lessons emerging from this action-
inquiry self-study………………………. ………………………….....
183
11.04.01 Theoretical contributions: The evolution of a Concluding
Model……………………….……………………………...
185
11.04.02 Methodological contributions: Theorising through
layers……………………………………………………..…
189
11.04.03 The practical contributions: The ‘Culture of Dynamic
Inquiry’ flowchart..……………………………………………………
190
11.05 Recommendations for further research...……………………….…..... 192
11.06 In closing: A reminder of the importance of passion, energy,
commitment and mission for student learning ………………………..
197
Appendices …………………………………………………………………..….. 199
Appendix A: The Teachers as Leaders Framework (Crowther, 2003) .…….. 199
Appendix B: List of artifacts from Narrative No. 1…. …………………...…. 200
Appendix C: List of artifacts from Narrative No. 2…. ……...…………...….. 202
Appendix D: Summary of Written Responses from the Six Significant
Snapshot participants ……………………..………….……...….…
204
Appendix E: Transcripts of Written Responses from the participants at the
Singapore conference presentation (volunteer audience responses)
206
Appendix F: Transcripts of Written Responses from the ‘ Six Significant
Snapshot’ participants ……….…………………………………...
208
Appendix G: Abstract for conference paper ………….……………………… 214
Appendix H: Mapping of data matrix …………………………………….….. 215
Appendix I: Criteria for Judging Overall Validity (Anderson & Herr, 1999) . 219
Appendix J: Ethical clearance procedures – Consent Forms, Information
Sheets, Question/response sheets……………………………………………
221
References ……………………………………………………………..………...
227
xii
Figures
Figure 3.1 The Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ……………………..… 26
Figure 3.2 A Peeled Onion Conception of Organisational Culture ………….. 32
Figure 3.3 The Connection Between Leadership, Partnerships and
Relationships ………………………………………………….…..
36
Figure 3.4 The Reconstruction of Arbuckle’s Triangle of Design, Circle of
Culture……………………………………………………………..
41
Figure 4.1 Examples of various artifacts…………………………………… 50
Figure 4.2 Two Narratives of Two School Situations Presented in Multiple
Layers…………………………………………………………..….
58
Figure 4.3 An Illustration of the First Three Layers of a Narrative ………..... 60
Figure 4.4 Summary of Research Process ……………………………...…….. 64
Figure 8.1 The Reconstruction of Arbuckle’s Triangle of Design, Circle of
Culture …………………………………………………...………..
131
Figure 9.1 Leading Learning Alliances for a Professional Culture of Dynamic
Enquiry …………………………………………………………....
156
Figure 9.2 A Culture of Dynamic Inquiry …………………………...……….. 158
Figure 11.1. The Original Arbuckle Model -The Triangle of Design, Circle
of Culture……………………………………………...…………...
186
Figure 11.2 Reconstruction Number One……………………………………... 187
Figure 11.3 Reconstruction Number Two…………………………………….. 188
Figure 11.4 The Concluding Model…………………………………………... 189
Figure 11.5 The Refined Model for a Culture of Dynamic Inquiry…….…….. 191
List of Tables
Table 3.1 The Qualities/Characteristics of a School Working as a Learning
Organisation …………………………………………………..…..
28
Table 3.2 Organisational Arrangements that Facilitate the Development of a
Learning Organisation ……………………………………..……..
30
Table 4.1 The Three Phases of Data Analysis……………………………...… 62
Table 8.1 The Qualities/Characteristics of a School Working as a Learning
Organisation Used for the Mapping and Analysis……………...…
133
xiii
Table 8.2 Coding Labels for Significance of Quality Indicators and Barriers
Experienced ………………………………………...……………..
134
Table 8.3 A Summary of the Most Significant Qualities …………..………… 137
Table 9.1 The Key Elements of the Reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) Model…. 163
Table 10.1 Filtered Responses that Correlate with Aspects of the Proposed
Tentative Conclusions ………………………………………...…..
170
Table 10.2 Points of Emphasis ………………………...………………...…… 172
Table 10.3 The Respondents’ Questions or Concerns Filtered from their
Statements ……………………………………………………..….
177
xiv
Statement of Original Authorship
“The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or
diploma at any other higher education institution.
To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.”
Signature: __________________________
Date: _________________
xv
Acknowledgements
While the identity of the participants of this study cannot be disclosed, I thank all
those who shared their knowledge and reflections on practice.
My supervisors, Ian Macpherson and Susan Danby, have supported my belief in the
value of this research. I am grateful for their extraordinary commitment, their
scholarship and friendship. Their discussions and critiques on my work guided and
encouraged me through the various stages of the research process.
Thanks must also go to my husband Russell, and my four sons, Matthew, Nicholas,
Joshua and James for their patience and understanding. I also thank my dear friends
Patrick Ryan, Kate Cade and Shelley Schulz for their technical expertise and
enormous support. A fellow researcher and colleague, Geof Hill, also needs to be
acknowledged for his encouragement and guidance during my early proposal stages.
I also acknowledge my sons Matthew and Nicholas for their work in creative
imaging and for collaborating with their mum, to produce our first collective of
digital images. These visual metaphors have strengthened the key messages of
parallel relationships and have been placed as inserts between the various chapters.
Finally an answer to my 92-year-old father who asks every holiday, ‘When will you
finish that study?’… ‘Dad, I can now say it’s done, and thank you for being my
inspiration and strength.’
xvi
Preface:
The Visual Artist as Researcher
My methods of theorising: Within this study I write briefly but openly about
being an arts practitioner. In art my creative processes do not necessarily begin with
a plan and finish with an end product. Some journeys can be quite linear and others
quite messy. The journey of this study has been quite similar. My art making requires
constant reflective and critical thinking along the way and involves questioning,
connecting and continual refinement in action. It involves the ability to push the
boundaries of ideas and to recognise links to previous or similar works that may be
the creator’s ideas, or the ideas of others.
When working as a visual artist with images on paper or canvas, this theorising
is quite a tangible process. Making art allows physical manipulation of the media on to
and into the surface. This manipulation is often done as a response to the reflection and
analysis that occurs while the artwork is emerging. The reflective process may also take
into account the work of other artists once seen and now long gone, or even a reflection
that is inspired by a previous work still pinned to the studio walls. A new or
reconstructed artwork/idea may emerge with some elements, or evidence, of previous
works/journeys, but it will also contain new ideas and processes. This is the evidence
of new learning and development.
Consequently, a dynamic process of art making along with this
deconstructing and reconstructing has permeated the theorising within this study.
This has involved a constant examination of assumptions and effectiveness, and has
also been constructed using many visual devices. For example, there is frequent
reference to my visual metaphors and photographic collection. These elements
sometimes sit behind, and sometimes within, the work that follows in these chapters.
In this instance, I have used large visual matrices to map and sieve my data, and
these are captured and included in the discussions of the research methods. These
devices assist the need to see the whole picture and also its multiple parts. Similarly,
when I have gathered the many parts of other people’s stories in, for example, my
literature search, I have had to write my responses and physically tape the sheets of
xvii
my writing together to form a large tapestry of the bigger picture. These methods of
dealing with large amounts of information and analysis capture my methods of
theorising.
As my analysis in this research evolved and deepened, I also found the need
to illustrate my findings. For example, I found that words alone could not capture
what it was I was coming to know about a process I titled ‘A culture of dynamic
inquiry’. Therefore I constructed a more dynamic way of writing the words on paper
through a flowchart. This flowchart, like many of my art works, evolved and
emerged from many earlier drafts. The drafts would sit in front of me in my work
area allowing me to reach for the concepts in my daily practice. This allowed for
checking and capturing the reality of my world, as well as the world that I would
write about in my research.
My photographs as visual metaphors : The visual metaphors that are
dispersed between my chapters are also responses to my need to illustrate my
findings as they emerged. The visual metaphors presented throughout the thesis
present a collection of digitally manipulated photographs. These images have been
created in collaboration with my two oldest sons, Matthew, aged 17, and Nicholas,
aged 14, during the time of analysis. Both boys have more advanced skills than their
mother in digital photography and image manipulation. As a practicing artist my
contribution was to set the photographic brief and the parame ters of the constructed
and reconstructed images. We then worked collaboratively at the image manipulation
stages, where I was able to bring significant visual literacies to this partnership.
What emerged was a parallel learning partnership, based on parallel learning
leadership and parallel learning relationships. These examples of reconstructed
digital snapshots are also visual metaphors of parallels that we might find in the
natural and constructed landscape. These images are dispersed between the chapters
and have been given titles to reflect the key focus of the writing that follows each
image.
xviii
Together the images symbolise:
• the deconstruction and reconstruction process
• the learning that can come with collaboration
• the strength of positive relationships in partnerships for learning
The images and their captions are presented below:
1. Developing Capacity-Building Strengths
2. The Inseparable – Curriculum, Assessment and Pedagogy
3. A Strong Framework
4. Building a Culture of Critical Reflection and Action
5. Theorising Through Layers
6. Co-ordinating Connections
7. Confidence with Collaboratives
8. A Sifting Process
9. Focusing with a Sharper Lens
10. Necessary Filters
11. Passion, Energy, Commitment and Mission
7b
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11
Chapter: 1 Developing Capacity-Building
Strengths
1
Chapter 1 Developing Capacity-Building Strengths
Current curriculum reform imperatives introduced in many Queensland
schools today present concern for school leaders charged with leading not only
student learning but also, in many cases, teacher learning. Given that schools are also
organisations, curriculum reform can be described as part of the general umbrella of
organisational reform. Therefore, this study looks at the issue of curriculum reform
in the context of more general organisational reform. It explores the notion of
schools being recultured or reconstructed to work as learning organisations (Senge,
1990) and, consequently, as communities of practice (Wenger & Snyder, 2000) in
order to improve the social and academic learning outcomes of their students. The
focus of this study connects the idea of developing schools as learning organisations
with the notions of developing ‘learning leaders’ and building school capacity
(Lingard, Hayes, Mills & Christie, 2003; Hargreaves, 2003). By building school
capacity, schools aim to deliver the deeper cognitive learning, creativity, sense of
community, compassion and inclusivity required for our knowledge economy and the
learning leadership for both academic and social learning.
1.01 The key concepts in school capacity building: Teacher leadership,
deconstruction and reconstruction of teacher learning and professional learning
culture
The essential keys to school capacity building seem to be teacher leadership,
teacher learning and a professional learning culture. Acknowledging Hargreaves
(2003) and Lingard et al., (2003) for their notions of school capacity building, this
research has also examined Lingard et al. (2003) for a broader acknowledgement of
who we should consider to be educational leaders:
The core imperative of educational leadership is about student
learning…[and] that the most significant educational factor in achievement of
student learning is teacher practices, rather than principal leadership… [and]
productive educationa l leadership should be exercised by principals, deputy
principals and heads of departments, but not limited to them and should also
be exercised by teachers, students, parents and others. (Lingard et al. 2003,
p. 3)
2
This study recognises that an examination of existing educational leadership,
which is implicit in school culture, also involves a process of deconstructing and
reconstructing a number of school organisational structures. As a theorising process,
deconstruction and reconstruction is very similar to what McNiff (2000) refers to as
generative transformational theorising. She explains this process as:
A process of thinking in action, and reflection on thinking in action…As soon
as we reach an answer it generates another question. We are never
static…learning is a process of disorganizing stable positions and
encouraging variety…each moment represents our present best thinking, yet
is open to change as we refine and improve our ideas. (McNiff, 2000, p. 200)
In similar discussions on teacher theorising, Ross, Cornett and McCutcheon
(1992) emphasise that, while their definition of teacher theorising is quite similar to
Schön’s (1983) notion of the teacher working as a reflective practitioner, they see
teacher theorising not as a solitary act between the situation and the practitioner, but
rather as a social phenomenon. Therefore, they argue for a process that is about
“inventing and reinventing educational practices to solve unexpected problems” and
further, a process that requires “a reflective discourse within a community of
interests” (Ross et al., 1992, p. 208). In stating this, however, they are concerned
about the practicalities of this process, and emphasise that we “should question the
degree to which reflective teaching or teacher theorising is a real possibility in
schools as they are currently organized” (Ross et al., p. 207). This very statement
has given purpose to this study.
For this study, generative transformational theorising (McNiff, 2000) and the
process of inventing and reinventing (Ross et al., 1992) are aligned with the
theorising process of deconstruction and reconstruction. Further, the processes of
analysis and reshaping involved in deconstruction and reconstruction are central to
school cultures that work as authentic learning organisations (Senge, 1990). This
dynamic and creative process can therefore be argued as playing an important role in
assisting the cultural transformation for schools in times of reform.
This deconstruction and reconstruction process is also similar to the creative
processes that I use as an artist. For example, the creative thinking behind the
3
creation of a new or developed idea or artwork requires reflection-in-action processes
to enable the conceptualisation, development and creation. As an art educator, I have
often shared this thinking and making process with students to assist their own art
making and, more importantly, their creative thinking. The cognitive processes
involved in deconstruction and reconstruction similar to the reflection-in-action
process (Schön, 1983) are in line with Ross et al. (1992). This requires questioning
how schools are organised, managed and governed.
The terms ‘deconstruct’ and ‘reconstruct’ are familiar to Emery (2002), an art
educator/theorist who refers to this process, saying:
Postmodernists look at life through different eyes…Instead of optimistically
looking forward to a brighter future postmodernists tend to look sideways and
backwards in search of the source and origins which frame values, tastes, and
attitudes…post-modern thinkers see many issues quite differently…in a
wider cultural and societal framework. It is this wider social and cultural view
that frames the basis of postmodern thinking. (p.33)
The terms ‘deconstruction’ and ‘reconstruction’, when used together, imply a
process that is dynamic rather than linear. In art making, this creative process does
not necessarily begin with a plan and finish in production. It requires constant
reflective and critical thinking along the way and involves questioning, connecting
and continual refinement in action. It involves the ability to push the boundaries of
ideas and to recognise links to previous or similar works that may be the creator’s
ideas, or the ideas of others. The new or reconstructed artwork/idea may emerge with
some elements or evidence of previous works/journeys, but it will also contain new
ideas/processes. This is the evidence of new learning and development.
Consequently, this dynamic process of deconstructing and reconstructing involves a
constant examination of assumptions and effectiveness. In this way, this process is
aligned with the processes of action research and the professional practice research
discussed by Macpherson, Brooker, Aspland and Cuskelly (2004) and conceptualized
as:
Critically- informed, politically-activist and action-oriented…a
transformatively-reconstructive interrogation and investigation into our lives
as professional practitioners. (p.98)
4
For this study, the constant examination of one’s assumptions, ideas, values
and beliefs have been considered to be essential to the process of reform and
achieving organisational change. On this process, Ross (1992) states:
This type of action research aims to develop personal practical knowledge
and theories of action that are essential for the transformation of practice in
particular settings. Reflection as reconstruction of experience focuses on
explicating the taken-for-granted assumptions and cultural construction that
constrain and frustrate practice. (p.188)
Ross (1992) in his discussions on collaborative action research emphasises
the need for a Deweyan (1916, 1967) notion of education and therein believes in a
form of reflection that insists on the interaction between individuals and their social
frameworks. In these discussions, Ross (1992) refers to the process of reflective
reconstruction, saying that it is essential to the definition of education itself.
Following Dewey (1916/1967), he suggests that this reconstruction process is a
reorganisation of experience and that it can add to the meaning of the experience and
therefore influence subsequent experiences.
The deconstructive and reconstructive processes are critical for those seeking
to achieve organisational change (McNiff, 2000; Ross, 1992). Unless assumptions
are continually being examined, then actions cannot be effectively assessed and
aligned effectively in relation to changing goals and circumstances (Crowther,
Kaagan, Ferguson & Hann, 2002). The deconstructing and reconstructing process
questions or problematises the hegemony of traditional leadership and teaching
paradigms, which can lead then to more parallel relationships that can support the
practice of leading for learning, which in turn can assist curriculum reform. As such,
the terms deconstruction and reconstruction are the preferred terms for this research
study; they have been used to describe the cultural transformation processes in which
schools are involved when meeting the challenges posed by curriculum reform
initiatives.
This study argues that teachers can be provided with new leadership for
learning if a deconstruction and reconstruction of existing leadership and teacher-
learning practices can be undertaken. In so doing, teachers are central to the process.
5
While curriculum reform is an important part of school reform, cultural reform is
more powerful in assuring more sustainable and less contrived curriculum change.
While both cultural and curriculum reform leadership have been traditionally
delegated to the role of the principal, other frameworks for leadership associated with
reform can and do exist, such as ‘parallel leadership’, (Crowther et al., 2002) and
‘dispersed forms of leadership’ (Lingard, et al., 2003). These proposed frameworks
suggest that teachers and/or devolved leadership can be central to the cultural
transformation process.
This study contributes to the field of educational reform by documenting the
significance of specific organisational/relational constructs that assist schools to
work as learning organisation through a reculturing process. In addition to the
personal professional development that this level of practitioner investigation has
brought, the findings of this self-study as a form of action inquiry research, can now
be shared with others who are faced with similar leadership and reform challenges.
The relationship between teacher- learning, teacher-leadership and a
professional learning culture has been the main focus for this study (Andrews &
Crowther, 2003; Proudford, 2003; Hargreaves, 2003; Lingard et al., 2003; King,
Youngs & Ladwig, 2003; Crowther, Kaagan, Ferguson & Hann, 2002; Fullan, 2001;
Arbuckle, 2000; Grundy & Bonser, 2000; Fullan, 2001; Connor & Lake, 1994). In
the first instance, these relationships were explored through an examination of
current curriculum reforms, and, secondly, through a rigorous analysis of two
personal narratives of my leadership in two Queensland schools. The analytical
mapping and scanning was supported by a number of specific frameworks. These
conceptual frameworks underpin a school reculturing process and the key qualities of
schools that work as learning organisations (Arbuckle, 2000). Six significant
snapshots emerged from the analysis of the two narratives that were set in two
different school settings. The deeper analysis of the six significant snapshots formed
the first set of key propositions. Further investigation was supported by the responses
of several key snapshot participants and reader respondents before final propositions
were made.
6
1.02 An action inquiry self-study
This study is most appropriately defined as practitioner research and has been
undertaken within the context of a professional doctorate. The research design is
most aptly described as action inquiry self-study. Therefore, it is imperative to
acknowledge my own leadership roles, as well as the relevant current literature,
when forming the questions that have guided this investigation.
In this study there are two narratives. These reflect my practices in two very
different school settings. The first narrative is set in a large government co-
educational inner city high school in Queensland and the other is set in a large inner
city private single-sex school, also in Queensland. The writing of these two
narratives documents the deconstruction and the reconstruction of school culture to
build learning organisations within a context of curriculum reform through its
numerous snapshots.
Both professional practice and scholarship of practice have assisted this
inquiry and have allowed more alert and attuned interpretations of the professional
learning cultures of the schools involved. This study has strengthened the potential to
see, feel and hear the connections, anomalies, synergies, gaps and silences within my
own leadership and teaching practice. It has the refore assisted a critical praxis, as I
have worked in response to specific curriculum reform agendas and leadership
practices, on the one hand, and theory associated with the development of schools as
learning organisations, on the other.
1.03 The guiding research questions
The following research questions guide this study:
• What does deconstructing and reconstructing a school as a learning
organisation involve?
• How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a
learning organisation take place in particular cases?
7
• What propositions can be elicited about the implications of deconstructing a
school and reconstructing it as a learning culture characterised by
educational/learning leadership?
The importance of working as professional practice researchers is emphasised
by Macpherson et al. (2004), stating:
It has been argued that current educational practices do not develop true
critical thinking at the school or teacher education level …. This lack enables
the maintenance of an “ideological hegemony” by which dominant groups
reinforce their legitimacy. …Developing a culture of critical reflection and
action in schools, as engendered within a practitioner research culture, is
essential to question existing policies and practices and provide rich data as a
basis for change. (pp. 93-4)
This study, similar to the work of Macpherson et al. (2004), McNiff (2000)
Tripp (1993) and Ross et al. (1992), has asked whether teacher theorising is possible
in schools as they are currently organised. This self-study has followed this call for
critical reflection and action, and has endeavoured to challenge the ‘ideological
hegemony’ brought to the surface in times of curriculum reform, by deconstructing
some of the more traditional notions of leadership, management and organisation.
This study captures and reports on the essential elements of this deconstruction and
reconstruction process.
8
Chapter: 2 The Inseparable - Curriculum,
Assessment and Pedagogy
9
Chapter 2 The Inseparable – Curriculum, Assessment and Pedagogy
Numerous curriculum reform imperatives have been introduced in
Queensland schools recently. They are presenting many concerns for school leaders
charged with leading student- learning, and, in many cases, teacher- learning as well.
This chapter presents several of these reform imperatives. In particular, there is a
focus on curriculum/syllabus documents being handed down from Queensland
Studies Authority (QSA)1. These include reforms associated with the curriculum for
Years 1-10 in Queensland as well as the senior schooling reforms associated with
‘The Pitman Report’. In addition, this chapter discusses the curriculum and reform
imperatives connected to Education Queensland’s education reform document called
‘2010’ (Education Queensland, 2000) and its associated ‘Queensland School Reform
Longitudinal Study’ (QSRLS) (Lingard, Ladwig, Mills, Bahr, Chant, Warry,
Ailwood, Capeness, Christie, Gore, Hayes & Luke, 2001).
2.01 The Queensland Studies Authority curriculum documents and associated
reform directives for teaching and learning
The Queensland Studies Authority’s (QSA) senior syllabus curriculum
documents and Years 1-10 syllabus documents have for some years now emphasised
a constructed view of knowledge. This places an emphasis on ‘process-driven
curriculum’ for schooling in Queensland, mirroring a belief that a knowledge society
demands critical thinking skills, tools of analysis, synthesis, and comparison. These
skills are stated by QSA in their Years 1- 10 syllabi as the attributes of a life long
learner. These attributes state that a student should be:
• a knowledgeable person with deep understanding
• a complex thinker
• a creative person
• an active investigator
• an effective communicator
1 The Queensland Studies Authority (QSA) is a state statutory body responsible for the development of state syllabi, the accreditation of associated school programs and the resulting certification of students’ achievements. It is a result of an amalgamation of the Queensland School Curriculum (QSCC) Council and the Board of Senior Secondary School Studies (BSSSS) in 2002.
10
• a participant in an interdependent world
• a reflective and self-directed learner
(Queensland School Curriculum Council, 2002, p.1)
In this way, these documents emphasise the importance of higher order
thinking processes, and question the more traditional testing and pedagogies
associated with a content-driven curriculum and the notion of ‘assessment for the
sake of assessment’.
The importance of higher order thinking skills is emphasised further by the
use of the QSA’s Core Skills Test for Queensland’s Year 12 students. This test assists
in positioning students in preparation for university courses. These core skills are
categorised as: comprehending and collecting, structuring and sequencing, analysing,
assessing, concluding, creating and presenting, applying techniques and procedures.
These processes are emphasised across the many senior subjects and are explicitly
taught now by many schools even earlier, beginning in the middle and early years of
schooling.
The QSA process-focused curriculum documents for Years 1-12 have
demanded a new paradigm for many teachers, a paradigm that respects that learning
is constructed and student-centred. For some teachers, this paradigm is often in stark
contrast to their own learning and their everyday practices. Understanding such
reform initiatives and their impact on curriculum and teachers’ assessment and
pedagogical practices has been investigated in the Queensland study, called the
‘Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study’ (QSRLS) (Lingard et al., 2001) and
the associated initiatives of Education Queensland’s ‘New Basics’ (Education
Queensland, 2001). These reform initiatives set the direction for the more recent
curriculum reforms and consequential cultural reform in Queensland schools.
2.02 Reforms specifically associated with the curriculum for Years 1-10 in
Queensland schools
The curriculum reforms that have been driven by the Years 1-10 curriculum
are having a significant impact on teachers in Queensland schools (Proudford, 2003).
11
These reforms, in the main, attempt to align curriculum, assessment and pedagogy.
In many cases, they have been delivered without the valuable systemic teacher
development networks that have supported the accreditation and moderation
procedures of the QSA’s senior school curricula (Proudford, 2003). Consequently,
the demands of the QSA’s Years 1-10 curriculum reforms are without the
professional development and support structures necessary for nurturing new
communities of practice. The systemic structures that support the reculturing process
evident in the trial schools involved in the New Basics reforms (Education
Queensland, 2001) and the long-standing, senior schooling, criteria-based
curriculum, are not evident in all schools.
An example of the reform challenges that some Queensland teachers
currently face can be explored by examining the curriculum reforms associated with
Years 1-10 Queensland syllabi. Years 1-10 curriculum documents are organised as
eight syllabi, each representing one Key Learning Area (KLA) and reflect an
outcomes approach to curriculum, assessment and pedagogy. While each syllabi
contains its own specific learning outcomes, strand descriptors and level statements,
there is an overarching framework that assists in setting the associated pedagogy and
assessment and these are related to students developing the attributes of the lifelong
learner (as outlined above in section 2.01).
Proudford (2003) has examined some of the challenges that some Queensland
teachers are facing in light of these curriculum reforms, and presents a case for
establishing professional learning communities. Her work in response to the
curriculum reforms challenging a number of cluster schools within the Queensland
context, acknowledges:
The restructured curriculum poses significant challenges for teachers because
it requires them to plan differently, to teach differently, and to assess
differently…Changes of this magnitude and complexity transform teachers’
work because they represent “a shift from one set of assumptions, beliefs,
norms, and behaviours and practices to another” (Miller, 1998, p.530), which
in turn creates a new culture of learning and a new culture of teaching. In
essence, the changes call for ‘a fundamentals reculturing of schools’ (p. 530).
12
Central to the process of reculturing is promotion of organisational learning
and the development of organisational capacity. (Proudford, 2003, p.2)
The reform demands from QSA syllabus documents and Education
Queensland’s ‘New Basics’ agenda, as well as other recent reform initiatives, relate
to the early, middle and senior years of schooling in Queensland. These reform
agendas have been driven by the State Government’s knowledge economy, ‘Smart
State’ initiatives, and have been associated with Education Queensland’s strategic
plans. For example, Education Queensland’s 2003 State School Action Plan: ‘Middle
Phase Of Learning’ (Education Queensland, 2003), focused on many national
middle-schooling goals for curriculum, assessment and pedagogy. Some imperatives
articulated in the plan included:
• improving curriculum coordination time for teachers;
• improving curriculum so that teachers can give more depth to the subjects
that teach;
• giving more support for students with difficulties; smoother transition from
primary to secondary; and
• providing specific training for teachers in the middle years (Education
Queensland, 2003).
These initiatives relate to the middle years and were delivered at the same
time as several trials for a new preparatory year in a number of Queensland schools.
These initiatives raised the starting age of school children in Queensland to be in line
with the rest of the nation.
In addition to the reform directives outlined in this section that are having a
significant impact on teachers and school leadership, there has also been a more
recent focus on senior schooling. This additional layer of challenges is presented next
to understand the changes that seem to be confronting our schools in Queensland in
more recent times.
13
2.03 Education Queensland’s ‘2010’ document and its associated longitudinal
study and school reform directives that link to leadership
A focus on constructed knowledge for schooling in a knowledge society
dominates the Education Queensland publication, ‘2010’ (Education Queensland,
2000). This document represents and maps the Queensland Government’s ‘Smart
State’ educational reform agendas and, as a result, the associated culture reform for
the State of Queensland. It states, for example, that:
If schools are to prepare students for:
• flexible and adaptable life pathways;
• work in sustainable and flexible knowledge and service–based
economies; and
• participation in cohesive social communities.
They need a new and more flexible model for managing learning. (Education Queensland, 2000, p.10)
Specifically, ‘2010’ (Education Queensland, 2000) points out that
Queensland students are working in a knowledge society. This document
concentrates on a knowledge society’s forces for change and identifies the many
potential directions that Education Queensland schools will be adopting as a result.
Many Education Queensland teachers know this publication simply as ‘ the “2010”
document’, and it is of interest to many Education Queensland teachers because it
was the forerunner to more recent research/directions and challenges to Queensland’s
school curriculum, assessment, pedagogy and school-based management. This
document is also significant because it identifies the necessity for investing in the
staff and leadership of schools in order to meet its strategic goals.
The ‘Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study’ (QSRLS) conducted by
Lingard et al. (2000) prompted the work of Education Queensland’s ‘2010’ and,
specifically, ‘New Basics Project’ (Education Queensland, 2001). The ‘New Basics
Project’ (Education Queensland, 2001) involved 59 schools in a four-year trial from
2000-2004 and is summarised:
The project is an experiment in task-oriented and transdisciplinary learning
operating over a range of age groups, and focusing on the perceived
14
technological, social, civic and economic needs of students and society in the
future. (Page, 2003, p.1)
The QSRLS research (Lingard et al., 2001) that informed the ‘New Basics’
(Education Queensland 2001) organised the alignment of curriculum, assessment and
pedagogy. Lingard et al. (2003) acknowledges this alignment saying:
In the QSRLS, alignment of these three message systems was shown to be an
important feature of schools with a strong focus on student learning…Our
observations of Queensland schools suggest that, in order to achieve
improved outcomes for all students, it is necessary to align curriculum,
pedagogies and assessment. We conceptualize this alignment as a process of
backward mapping…that is underpinned by an agreed understanding of
desired student outcomes and hence the nature of the curriculum. (Lingard et
al., 2003, p. 4)
Similar to the reforms outlined above in section 2.01 for senior schooling, the
New Basics trials have introduced new language, new reflective practices, and new
ways of planning, assessing and teaching for a number of Queensland state schools.
The New Basics trials, while only involving to date a small of percentage of state
schools in Queensland, have been supported with a significant degree of professional
development and systemic support provided by State funding.
The alignment of curriculum, assessment and pedagogy implies an
interrelatedness and, consequently, each with an impact on the other. The reform
associated with this alignment can be contrasted to a culture of practice that reflects a
way of teaching where the three are quite separated. Many teachers consider all
three, but in isolation. For some, ‘the curriculum’ needs to be interpreted more
broadly than merely ‘content’ to be covered and should include, for example, higher-
order thinking skills as well as the practical application skills. In addition, within a
student-centred paradigm, the pedagogy or the ‘how’ we teach, the assessment
methods we use to assist student learning, and the interrelatedness of the demands of
this paradigm, may be quite foreign to those who teach and assess only through a
content driven paradigm (Lingard et al., 2003).
15
Education Queensland’s ‘2010’ (Lingard et al., 2003), suggests that the
relationship between assessment, curriculum and pedagogy deserves far more
attention if we are aiming to improve our students’ academic outcomes. This
alignment is driven by an assumption that knowledge is constructed and that learning
must be student-centred. This alignment demands a new paradigm and, consequently,
cultural reform. It is a reform that means change for teachers and also for many who
lead learning.
2.04 Reforms driven by ‘The Pitman Report’
‘The Senior Certificate: A New Deal’ (Pitman, Herschell, Allen, Veerman,
Gray, Harris, Bell, Kelly, Brennan & Delley, 2002) is known to Queensland teachers as
‘The Pitman Report’, and presents new directions for senior or post compulsory
years of schooling. This report makes relevant the longer-term social and economic
ramifications associated with students becoming disengaged and leaving early, or
performing poorly. The arguments for a significant degree of curriculum reform in
senior schooling in Queensland are driven also by issues concerned with preparing
students for a knowledge society (Pitman et al., 2002). Because the key drivers for
‘The Pitman Report’ are disengagement, early departure and poor performance, it is
essential to consider this report’s concerns in association with concerns that are
driving the reforms relevant to the compulsory years of 1-10.
‘The Pitman Report’ highlights the disengagement, early departure and poor
performance of senior school students and presents reasons for students leaving
school early. The report outlines several programs and school structures that have
been more successful in overcoming the problem and make recommendations for
broadening the delivery, tracking and credentialing of learning. Practitioners and
leaders are asked to consider a broader interpretation of learning: one that accepts
that learning can occur both within and beyond the school fence (Pitman et al.,
2002). These considerations, in the main, are associated with shifting or reculturing
to accommodate student-centred learning and knowledge construction necessary for
students participating in a knowledge society.
16
It seems logical, therefore, to argue for new leadership roles to re-engage
teachers and place them central to successful curriculum reform (Proudford, 2003).
Teachers are being challenged to rethink what and how students learn, and also
where and when. Schools are being challenged to develop the capacity to deliver the
deeper cognitive learning, creativity, sense of community, compassion and inclusivity
(requirements for our knowledge economy).
It is not surprising, then, that these challenges are documented by many as
contributing to a growing disengagement amongst the general teaching profession
(Hargreaves, 2003; Hargreaves, Earl, Moore & Manning, 2001; Fullan, 2001;
Cuttance, 2001; Crowther, Kaagan, Ferguson & Hann, 2002; and Proudford, 2003).
As a profession, Hargreaves (2003) believes teaching is in considerable trouble:
Teaching is in crisis. The demographic turnover among teachers, along with
years of burnout and disillusionment with large-scale reform is draining the
profession. (Hargreaves, 2003, p.160).
A reconstruction of learning leadership to be inclusive of teacher leadership
has therefore been described in this study as a key to successful reculturing and
reform, and recognised as a core component of the reconstruction/reculturing
process. The section that follows therefore suggests that if we can reconstruct the
relationships between teachers and their administrators, then all school members can
support and learn from one another through their constructed and experiential
knowledge. This reconstructed relationship between teacher- leaders and
administration- leaders would seem to be a key quality of a school working as
‘learning organisation’ (Senge, 2000; Arbuckle, 2000; Crowther, 2003) and it is the
construct of ‘a school working as a learning organisation’ that is at the centre of this
investigation.
2.05 New leadership roles for teachers
The previous section identified significant moves in Queensland toward
curriculum reform designed to assist teachers to develop more aligned, student-
centred curriculum, assessment and pedagogy. In coming to this conclusion, the
significance of the agenda of the ‘New Basics: Theory into Practice’ (Education
17
Queensland, 2001; ‘The Queensland School Longitudinal Study’ of Lingard et al.
(2001); as well as the work of Proudford (2003) and Lingard et al. (2003) is
recognised. These reports challenge the traditional conventions of curriculum design,
pedagogy and assessment to suggest instead changes that demand a more student-
centred approach. As a consequence, the hegemony of a traditional paradigm for
teaching and leadership derived from a content-driven model of curriculum and
assessment, and pedagogy where teacher is constructed as expert, is being challenged
by a process-driven, student-centred paradigm. This reform insists on teacher as
‘facilitator’ and ‘collaborator’, with teacher as co-learner. This reconstructed view
demands a cultural shift for schools, their leaders and schooling.
In addition to developing the necessary skills to plan, write and assess more
student-centred curricula, teachers will need to be as concerned about their
pedagogical skills and, consequently, the skills to collaborate, examine and learn
through their practice and the practices of others. Teachers, like their students, will
need to broaden their notions of their own learning in order to become the lifelong
learner that they promote for their students.
Cunningham, Stedman, Tapsall, Bagdon, Flew and Coaldrake (2000)
describe this paradigm shift when discussing similar paradigm shifts that universities
need to make and state:
From the constructivist perspective the individual makes his/her own
‘meaning’ from available information but within the ‘frame’ of existing
knowledge and contextual need. This has implications for teaching theory and
practice, since it places more emphasis on the student as the primary
meaning-maker. At its extreme, the constructivist view de-emphasizes the
power of the discipline (and hence the ‘content’) and the role of the teacher as
‘expert’. Hence it aligns with arguments that the knowledge exp losion
prevents anyone (even the ‘expert’) from knowing ‘all there is to know’ about
a discipline, and emphasizes the importance of ‘learning to learn’, lifelong
learning, and learning processes rather than ‘content’. (Cunningham et al.,
2000, p. 21)
18
Here, Cunningham et al., (2000) describe pedagogy as closely aligned to
project-based, constructivist approaches to teaching and learning. This pedagogy
insists on having students at the centre of a more ‘borderless’ concept of curriculum
delivery. Such an approach is about a curriculum that is complemented by real- life
projects and a pedagogy that is assisted by collaboratives (Pitman et al., 2002;
Cunningham et al., 2000). It is a practice that requires, as Boud and Soloman (2001)
suggest, teachers who can partner with others beyond their subject area and beyond
the school.
In addition to the demands that come with a notion of curriculum, assessment
and pedagogy alignment, the use of collaboratives assumes that teachers are
confident in certain forms of collaboration and communication. This demands that
learning leaders are able to converse more generally and widely in areas other than
their preferred discipline area. This paradigm shift demands more than knowledge
experts (Hargreaves, 2003). It demands collaborative planners and moderators, as
well as reflective-practitioners who have the ability to discuss their teaching and their
own learning as well as their student- learning: that is, their pedagogy.
2.06 Chapter summary
The recent reform initiatives of the types presented in this chapter insist that
the three drivers of curriculum, assessment and pedagogy are inseparable (Lingard et
al., 2001). This presents significant challenges for teachers within traditional school
structures. Teachers, when asked to operate and communicate within relational
structures that may be quite new and difficult, may feel deskilled and disempowered
as a result of these demands (Lingard et al., 2003; Proudford, 2003) and yet teachers
are at the centre of successful curriculum reform (Hargreaves, 2003; Lingard et al.,
2003; Crowther et al., 2002; Cuttance, 2001; Fullan, 2001; Hargreaves et al., 2001).
The following chapter presents the challenges for schools with
reconstructions that place teachers at the centre of curriculum reforms. The chapter
identifies a new set of challenges that come when breaking down traditional
curriculum management/leadership models and, consequently, some traditional
school cultures when reconstructing schools for curriculum reform.
Chapter: 3 A Strong Framework
19
Chapter 3 A Strong Framework
The impact of curriculum reform imperatives on existing school cultures has
been highlighted in the previous chapter. This chapter presents a new set of
challenges when reconstructing some traditional organisational cultures of schools
for curriculum reform. The chapter acknowledges that this reshaping takes place not
by policy changes alone, but requires also the deconstruction and reconstruction of
many aspects of a school’s culture and its relationship to the leadership of teacher-
learning and development.
3.01 The centrality of teacher leadership for schools in times of reform – the
first step in reculturing a school as a learning organisation
In the senior and middle years of schooling the Heads of Faculties and
Deans of Curriculum traditionally have been responsible for their schools’
curriculum development. In these instances, teachers consider themselves to be
teachers of subjects rather than teachers of students and can consequently have less
focus on curriculum development. On a much broader scale, Ross, Cornett and
McCutcheon (1992), in discussing centralised curriculum changes in New York State
Education, point out that teachers have become curriculum implementers instead of
creators and believe that, “as responsibility for creating one’s own curriculum
decreases, technical and management concerns become the foremost part of
teachers” (p.185). The cultural shift involved in teachers moving from balkanised
approaches to curriculum development and delivery toward more collaborative
teaming of knowledge requires a number of cultural changes. For example, these
changes would insist that teacher discussions would need to move to conversations
about learning across disciplines, as well as deeper, comparative discussions on
course content and assessment. To ensure these conversations take place,
timetabling/management also would need to recognise a necessity for time to lead, as
well as time to enable/support these conversations. These conversations across
disciplines therefore demand specific collaborative skills that may not be part of the
school’s existing culture or, put more simply, may not be seen in every teacher’s
repertoire.
20
The necessity for a type of leadership/management support that enables
conversation about learning and teaching is clearly recognised by Crowther et al.
(2002), in their presentation of a new paradigm for teacher leadership which they call
‘The Teachers as Leaders Framework’. This framework proposes characteristics and
practices of teacher- leaders and is summarised below in point form (and in more
detail in Appendix A). In summary, teacher- leaders have the ability to:
• convey convictions about a better world
• strive for authenticity in their teaching, learning and assessment practices
• facilitate communities of learning through organisation-wide processes
• confront barriers in the school’s culture and structures
• translate ideas into sustainable systems of action
• nurture a culture of success.
Within these attributes Crowther et al. (2002) highlight the importance of the
relational skills required for a teacher to be a facilitator/communicator. In this way
they are acknowledging the centrality of teachers in this reculturing process and
therefore the impact that teachers, working as leaders, can have on their schools and
communities. As a result, they insist that hierarchy in organisational relationships
will decrease in importance.
Investing in the development of teacher-leaders therefore would seem to be
the first step in reculturing a school as a professional learning
community/organisation. This reculturing requires a deconstruction and
reconstruction of traditional notions of human resource development strategies or
capacity building strategies. It demands a reculturing that has school members
learning in cooperation with others through experience and, in so doing, acting as
learning resources for each other. Crowther et al. (2002) and Proudford (2003)
consider this to be a powerful formula for successful school revitalisation and
curriculum reform. The reconstruction required for reform therefore, demands a
centrality of teacher- leadership for curriculum reforms to take hold. This
reconstruction would then recognise the necessity for schools working as
professional learning communities/organisations. That is, members of an
organisation, learning from one another through their constructed and experiential
21
knowledge (Crowther et al., 2002; Fullan, 1991; Hargreaves, 2003; Louis et al.,
1996; McNiff, 2000; Proudford, 2003; Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith,
Dutton & Kleiner, 2000). For example, Proudford (2003) advocates:
Central to the process of reculturing is promotion of learning
organisation…creating professional learning communities to generate
organisational learning and develop organisational capacity…[and
that]…schools and educational systems should think about the creation of
professional learning communities by design rather than by default. (p.2)
3.02 The importance of schools working as learning organisations in times of
reform
The previous section 3.01 argues for the centrality of teacher- leadership for
schools in times of reform and states that this is the first step in reculturing a school
as a learning organisation. This section discusses in more depth the concept of a
learning organisation. It presents the essential elements or characteristics associated
with the structural changes, as well as the social and human resources needed to
support this type of school-based learning community (Arbuckle, 2000; Crowther et
al., 2002; Louis, Marks & Kruse, 1996; Proudford, 2003).
The qualities of a school working as a learning organisation imply that
learning communities/organisations take collective responsibility for student
learning. The previous section also argues that school reform also has teachers
playing a central role in this cultural transformation process and that it seems to be a
process that is supported by schools working as learning organisations.
The concept of a learning organisation originally came from the field of
management literature, and has been introduced into education literature (Senge et
al., 2000). A school that operates as a learning organisation invests in organisational
and relational structures that assist teachers to study their own work and that of
others (Senge et al., 2000).
Critical to the process of reculturing is the development of organisational
learning and organisational capacity for teacher-theorising and reflective practice
22
(Fullan, 2001, 2002; Newman & Wehlage, 1995; Proudford, 2003). In saying this,
however, Macpherson et al. (2004), Ross et al. (1992) and Schön (1983), in their
discussions of teacher reflective practice, have argued that traditional school
organisation works against teachers theorising their practice, pointing out that
fundamentally different forms of organisation are required. Macpherson et al. (2004)
and Ross et al. (1992), in particular, emphasise the importance of a revitalised
teaching force that comes with a culture of learning, supported by new forms of
collaborative leadership, management and organisational structures.
Reforms require new ways of working together and there is local Queensland
evidence to support this belief. One example to be found is an examination of the
Queensland Studies Authority’s (QSA) senior schooling credentialing processes.
This authority holds within it a significant model of a learning organisation to assist
the senior school practitioners across the state of Queensland. The senior schooling
section of the QSA shares common goals and practices and is sustained by a
community of practitioners whose professional culture demands rigorous reflective
practice, feedback and professional dialogue amongst its teachers, review officers,
panel members and administrators.
Specifically, the curriculum reform agendas for teachers in the senior school
have largely been directed and supported by QSA’s review and accreditation
procedures (Martoo, 1996). This authority respects the knowledge and practices of
existing teachers and has set up panels/committees of teachers from across the state
to develop, maintain and scrutinise the curriculum, assessment and pedagogical
practices of senior schooling. Therefore, it would be easier to gauge the degree to
which senior schooling practices have been altered by examining the data that
emerges each year as schools seek approval for their student standards/placements.
This moderation process is managed by teachers and review officers appointed to the
QSA who are seconded teachers holding leadership positions. Their tasks are to carry
out formal procedures whereby teachers come together to approve firstly the teaching
programs, and then the assessments and levels of achievements being proposed by
the school. Many are connected also to the writing committees responsible for the
development of curriculum/syllabus documents used to guide the school-based
curriculum, assessment and pedagogy.
23
These current procedures and structures for senior subject accreditation also
monitor indirectly the teaching programs and assessment procedures across the state.
These procedures in Queensland’s senior schooling practices are based on a belief
that leading teachers can lead other teachers and that, while their primary function is
to moderate standards, teachers are in fact operating as a learning
community/organisation.
The work done in senior schooling by the Queensland Studies Authority,
involving teacher-led models, assists teachers to question and refine their curriculum,
assessment and pedagogy. This assistance comes as a result of the peer reviews that
are part of the credentialing and accreditation processes. Consequently, it seems
imperative to ask if wider learning communities/organisations that go beyond the
involvement of senior schooling personnel and discipline-specific conversation can
be developed? If so, would these communities reflect a school working as a learning
organisation?
Professional relationships and networks assist in sustaining the communities
of practice and the connected learning communities. Reculturing implies a license to
rethink the hegemony of school staffing and recommended organisational structures.
Similarly, the “2010” (Education Queensland, 2000) document asks schools to
“unlock the skills of the school workforce” (p.9). This description speaks of schools
as learning organisations, by stating that teachers need to develop a commitment and
skills for life long learning and that schools need to make strategic partnerships
within their schools and beyond to assist their core business. The leadership
development that is required for this is discussed in the following:
Education Queensland will help state school principals develop their abilities
…on educational leadership. …Educational leadership also rests with
experienced and leading teachers. They need similar development
opportunities…Education Queensland will operate on the basis that the
success of state schools in meeting the purpose of education is dependent on
the quality of teachers. Teachers will have the opportunity to maintain their
knowledge, skills and competences to keep their practice contemporary.
(Education Queensland, 2000, p. 22)
24
Implicit in this statement is the critical place for rethinking leadership. The
emphasis on schools working as learning organisations to improve student outcomes
is not unique to Education Queensland. Crowther et al. (2002), Cuttance (2001)
Fullan (2001) and Hargreaves (2003) recognise the importance of schools working as
learning organisations. Senge et al. (2000) also give practical advice to schools that
are interested in rebuilding their schools as learning organisations. This practical
advice to schools is supported by the organisational theories of Peter Senge (1990)
whose work specifically focuses on the development of five organisational
disciplines: systems thinking, personal mastery, mental modes, building shared
vision and team learning. These are designed to take organisations away from being
controlling organisations to learning organisations. Within the later text by Senge et
al. (2000), a section by Arbuckle (2000) presents a framework diagram to help
teachers and administrators consider school culture, and to show how effective
school structures can assist organisational action.
The following section outlines this work of Arbuckle (2000) and presents a
number of potential frameworks that will assist the analysis within this study. These
frameworks are deconstructed against a background of related literature, and then
reconstructed to provide a suitable set of lenses to map and scan the narratives
presented in the following chapters.
3.03 Frameworks that relate to the development of a school as a learning
organisation
The framework that Arbuckle (2000) adapted from Peter Senge’s work was
constructed to help teachers and administrators think about school culture and to
assist ‘principals trying to create cultures of professional learning’ (Arbuckle, 2000,
p. 326). This focus on the professional learning that can emerge when we understand
the important relationship between school structures and culture aligns with the
notion of re-culturing schools as learning organisations. Consequently Arbuckle’s
(2000) framework and the associated qualities that have been identified for schools
working as a professional learning culture have been used to assist the analysis of
data within this study.
25
Arbuckle’s (2000) work is reproduced in Figure 3.1. This framework
suggests that not all school cultures stimulate or promote organisational learning and
that in fact, there may be some school structures that could even be stifling it.
Arbuckle’s (2000) diagram has been adapted from the work of Peter Senge. Arbuckle
(2000) explains her adaptation, saying:
This diagram, adapted from Peter Senge’s article “Moving Forward” (The
Fifth Discipline Fieldbook, p.43), shows how a school’s structures for
organizational action (the triangle on the left) and its intangible but enduring
culture and community (the circle on the right) continually co-evolve. If all
three “points” on the triangle are strategically designed, then gradually they
will influence the organisation’s attitudes, beliefs, skills, and capabilities,
awareness and values. Thus without directly being commanded to do so
people in the school will slowly orient themselves more toward
organizational learning…I changed Peter Senge’s phrase “Innovations in
infrastructure” to “Organizational arrangements”, because to educators the
infrastructure – what wires things together, on the surface and beneath it –
includes all the elements of the triangle. Because I see the theory behind
methods and tools as articulated in guiding ideas, I have also changed the
third corner’s label from “Theory, tool and method” to “ Methods and tools”.
(Arbuckle, 2000, p. 327)
26
Figure 3.1. The Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture2
The circle titled Domain of Enduring Change within the Figure 3.1 identifies
a professional learning community. Culture is presented as something that is not
static, but where attitudes, values and skills continually reinforce each other. The
schools that operate as professional learning communities can assist teachers to adapt
to the ever- increasing demands: that is, to adapt to enduring change. But for this to
occur one must understand the relationship between school structure and school
culture.
The triangle symbolises the Domain of Action, and represents the direct ways
that leaders can create a culture of learning. This area represents school polices,
deliberate practices, rules, by-laws, and channels of authority. These elements would
represent what Connor and Lake (1994) define as indicators, as they are quite
2 From: Arbuckle, M. (2000). “Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ”. In Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton and Kleiner , Schools That Learn , London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, p.327.
27
observable and include visible artifacts and behaviours, such as teacher self/peer
appraisal models. Arbuckle (2000) believes that these elements of organisational
culture “can be deliberately designed around learning” (p.326), triggering the deep
learning circle.
Exposed to new kinds of experiences, people would come to look at things
differently; they would take on new practices and approaches as their own. In
other words, by making deliberate changes in structure, you can gradually
produce changes in the way people learn. (Arbuckle, 2000, p.326)
The model suggests that by working on an organisation’s three key ideas of
Guiding Ideas, Methods and Tools, and Organisational Arrangements (those aspects
identified at each of the points of the triangle), school leaders work toward creating a
learning organisation and “thus without directly being commended to do so, people
in the school will slowly orient themselves more toward organisational learning”
(Arbuckle, 2000, p. 327).
Arbuckle (2000) explains that Guiding Ideas represent concepts like mission,
vision and belief. Simple and direct language is used to describe school principles,
values, purpose and direction.
The second influence on the Domain of Action – Organisational
Arrangement, represents “decision-making structures, policies, allocation of space
and time, feedback and communications mechanisms, and planning processes”
(Arbuckle, 2000, p.330). These organisational arrangements may be powerful when
purposefully designed around the school’s key Guiding Ideas. Structures of a school,
such as timetabling, staff room allocations and teacher teams, are examples of school
infrastructures that can be specifically designed to support the school as a learning
organisation (Arbuckle, 2000).
The third and final Organisational Domain is Methods and Tools, which
emphasises that tools for teaching and supporting learning environments need to be
grounded in appropriate knowledge and theory of teaching and learning. Arbuckle
(2000) points out that “when used with discrimination, powerful tools and
methods…can ingrain better skills and attitudes at the classroom, school or district
28
level” (Arbuckle, 2000, p. 332). For example, a Collaborative Assessment
Conference is one tool that allows teachers to share/conference on student and
teacher work. Another example is a School Quality Review, which can assist in
developing the skills of self-critique, and use the strategy of outsiders as critical
friends to review individual and school progress toward learning goals.
Arbuckle’s (2000) work also identifies the key qualities of a school that
operates as a professional learning organisation. These qualities have been used to
guide the mapping and scanning of the data. The details of this process are outlined
more fully later in Chapter 9 – The Analysis Process. This mapping has assisted the
early stages of the data analysis process and has funnelled quite broad areas of
reflective practice into manageable snapshots of teacher learning, leadership and
collaborative practices. Consequently, Arbuckle’s (2000) qualities have been critical
for the scanning and mapping process and therefore they are presented in Table 3.1,
The Qualities of a School Working as a Learning Organisation.
Table 3.1. The Qualities/Characteristics of a School Working as a Learning
Organisation 3
Reflective dialogue Members talk to each other openly and reflectively about their situations and challenges; their subject matter, the nature of learning, their teaching practices, and their own thinking – their attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of the world.
3 From: Arbuckle, M. (2000). “Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ”. In Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton and Kleiner, Schools That Learn , London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, p.327.
29
The qualities presented above in Table 3.1 illustrate a school whose individuals
are:
• moving and not static
• supported and not struggling in isolation
• led and not told, and consequently
• growing professionally, as a community of practitioners who share common
beliefs and understandings and mission for their students’ learning.
As discussed earlier, this study emphasises the significant relationship
between school structures and school culture, and this is also the premise behind the
work of Arbuckle (2000). Consequently it will be important to also refer to what
Arbuckle (2000) has identified as the organisational arrangements that ‘facilitate the
development of a professional community and collective accountability’. In addition
30
to using Arbuckle’s (2000) Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture illustrated in Figure
3.1, and the qualities/characteristics identified in Table 3.1, this study also refers to
Arbuckle’s (2000) associated list of Organisational Arrangements that Facilitate the
Development of a Learning Organisation. These are presented in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2. Organisational Arrangements that Facilitate the Development of a
Learning Organisation4
Scheduling time and space for teachers to meet and talk
Substantial and regularly scheduled blocks of time are needed… to work as small groups as well as to come together as a full faculty.
4 From: Arbuckle, M. (2000). “Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ”. In Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton and Kleiner, Schools That Learn , London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, p.327
31
In summary, this section has presented three essential frameworks that will be
examined further through the analysis of data related to this study. The three
frameworks are:
• Arbuckle’s (2000) Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture model (Figure 3.1)
• Arbuckle’s Qualities of a School Working as a Learning Organisation (Table
3.1) and
• Arbuckle’s associated Organisational Arrangements that Facilitate the
Development of a Learning Organisation (Table 3.2).
In addition to examining the data for existing school
organisational/management structures and organisational action, these frameworks
examine the relationship to the key cultural elements/layers within the schools
represented in each narrative. These deeper layers of an organisation’s culture allow
for deeper analysis. The following section outlines a framework for this level of
investigation.
3.04 Looking deeper at the layers of school culture
The previous section presented the Arbuckle (2000) model, key qualities and
associated organisational arrangements as frameworks to examine how schools may
be working as learning organisations. Elements within school organisational
structures can influence core behaviour and beliefs, and therefore the business of
bringing about a cultural change within a learning organisation requires a deep
understanding of the current culture of the organisation. Consequently this section
presents one further model used in this study for this deeper investigation. It is taken
from the work of Connor and Lake (1994) and respects that their work in presenting
a multi- faceted model has been able to assist my observations, understanding and
deconstruction of organisational culture.
Connor and Lake’s (1994) work represents the cultural basis of an
organisation as four layers of a multi- layered model. These are presented in Figure
3.2 - A Peeled Onion Conception of Organisational Culture. This framework sits
with Arbuckle’s (2000) listed qualities and associated organisational arrangements
and Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture framework and guides this study. The
32
Connor and Lake (1994) model presents the visible behaviours of an organisation
that reflect the organisation’s culture and also presents the less visible elements at the
core of behaviour. They argue that these central and less visible elements of an
organisation’s culture are essential for examining and developing cultural change.
Figure 3.2. A Peeled-Onion Conception of Organisational Culture5
5 From “Managing Organisational Change” by Patrick E. Connor and Linda K. Lake, 1994, Organisational Culture Defined, p.47.
33
The onion diagram prepared by Connor and Lake (1994) illustrates the
culture of an organisation at four levels, ranging from those that are quite visible and
explicit on the outer edges of the onion, to those that are often quite hidden and at the
very core of the organisation. Conner and Lake (1994) argue that the outer layers are
much easier to change than the inner layers.
The outer layers are the observable behaviours and visible artifacts referred to
as Indicators, and include stories, rites, language and symbols. The deeper levels are
the most longstanding and, in order to witness any real change or reform, we would
need to witness a paradigm shift.
According to Connor and Lake (1994), stories are identified as significant
cultural elements and serve at least three purposes:
To inform new employees about the organisation; to affirm important values
and norms; and to reveal what is unique about the organisation’s function in
society…In short, stories portray the organisation’s history while tying it to
the present. (Connor & Lake, 1994, p. 49)
Rites, on the other hand, “indicate what is really important” (p.49). By
studying rites, we are making meanings of behaviour. For example, rites can be
examined in studying how people greet one another and how meetings are run. Rites
can be seen in social gatherings of an organisation as well as in the management
practices.
Language of an organisation is also an indicator of an organisation’s culture,
and includes the everyday technical jargon as well as the informal jokes and common
sayings. Connor and Lake (1994) add that “the vocabulary of an organisation’s
language contains works that convey meanings inside the organisation that they
would not have outside…there is little doubt that language is a potent means for
transmitting organisational culture” (p.50).
Symbols provide the most explicit indicator of culture. They are often seen for
example in school emblems, mottos, school infrastructure, uniform, teacher dress
code and daily timetable arrangements.
34
The second level in and Lake’s (1994) peeled onion diagram in Figure 3.2
refers to Norms of Behavior (sic), described as:
Rules or codes that indicate proper and improper action; they provide guides
for playing the organizational game. They describe what is really important in
the organization, what behaviour (sic) will get someone in trouble, and what
will get one ahead. In any organization there can be thousands of norms …in
other words norms cover a wide spectrum of behaviour (sic)… they can be
distinguished as to whether they guide the technical aspects of work or guide
social and interpersonal relationships. (Connor & Lake, 1994, p.51)
Levels three and four lie deep within the culture of an organisation, and are
identified as the Basic Values and the Core Assumptions. Basic values are explained
as shared ideals, which can be either implicit or explicit. Connor and Lake (1994)
believe that the values people share tend to be either performance-related values or
people-related values. People-related values refer to the mutually supportive values
of dependability, reliability and trustworthiness.
The core assumptions and perceptions presented by Connor and Lake (1994)
are at the centre of this framework, and represent the fourth and final layer. These
core assumptions are not always directly or easily acknowledged by those within an
organisation. In reality, they relate to how people reflect, perceive, think and feel
about things. These have been organised into five categories:
• nature of human nature
• organisation’s relationship to its environment
• nature of reality, truth, time, space
• nature of human activity, and
• nature of human relationships.
This study recognises that a reconstruction of a school as a learning
organisation needs to acknowledges all layers of an organisation’s culture if it is to
shift/change the core beliefs and values that sit at the centre of a school’s culture.
Therefore it is about reculturing and, in order to reculture a school, we need to
respect that:
35
Reculturing a school involves examining history and unwritten expectations
that have shaped it over time…Reculturing also focuses on school rituals and
ceremonies, shared vision and collaborative commitment. Reculturing a
school involves the creation of a learning community in the school to which
staff and students feel a sense of connection and belonging. (Veel, 2003, p.
22)
When examining the data in search for what reculturing a school as a
learning organisation might involve, it will be worthwhile to search for evidence of
connectedness and belonging, and the associated importance of relationships. These
core values are reflected in the key concept parallel learning relationships and it is
assumed that relationships are critical to two other associated practices, viz parallel
learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships. These concepts are
considered in light of Arbuckle’s (2000) model and are presented as an additional
point of emphasis; one that is so critically important that it is proposed as an
important addition to the original model. Therefore, the notion of parallel
relationships and its associated concepts are seen as critical for a successful learning
organisation, are presented in the following section.
3.05 A need for professional relationships and networks for leadership and
teacher learning
This study proposes a connection between the key concept of parallel
learning relationships with two associated concepts: parallel learning partnerships,
and parallel learning leadership. This connection is based on a belief that there may
be value in exploring the notion of relationships more deeply, in the discussions of
schools working as learning organisations to assist reform-driven teacher learning.
This connection, illustrated in Figure 3.3, presents the parent key concept of
parallel learning relationships and its connected concepts of parallel learning
leadership and parallel learning partnerships to be included in the reconstructed
model for developing a school as a learning organisation.
36
Figure 3.3. The Connection Between Leadership, Partnerships and Relationships
[Parallel Learning] Relationships
[Parallel Learning] Leadership [Parallel Learning] Partnerships
The concept of parallel learning leadership reflects the necessity for new
forms of leadership advocating new relationships between teachers and their
administrators. This mirrors the work of Crowther et al. (2002) for their notion of
parallel leadership:
Parallel leadership engages teacher leaders and administrator leaders in
collaborative action, while at the same time encouraging the fulfilment of
their individual capabilities, aspirations and responsibilities. It leads to a
strengthened alignment between the school’s vision and the school’s teaching
and learning practices. It facilitates the development of a professional
learning community, culture building and school-wide approaches to teaching
and learning. It makes possible the enhancement of school identity, teachers’
professional esteem, and community support and student achievements.
(Crowther et al., 2002, p. 140)
Parallel leadership, as described by Crowther et al. (2002), could be one way to
“unlock the skills of the school workforce” (Education Queensland, 2000, p.9).
While this description may read as a sure solution for school reform, the authors
acknowledge that this will require significant deconstruction of existing traditional
notions of leadership that exist currently in many schools.
Lingard et al. (2003), while accepting of the Crowther et al. (2002) notion of
parallel leadership, believe that this term implies separate purposes for formal leaders
and teacher leaders, and prefer the term dispersed leadership:
It is our view that dispersed leadership is central to what is referred to as
school organisational capacity building, focused on ensuring the best social
37
and educational outcomes for all students. We would emphasize here that we
are talking about dispersed educational leadership rather than dispersed
management. Intensification of busy work is not the same as dispersal of
leadership. (Lingard et al., 2003, p.54)
For the purpose of this study, then, the snapshots presented in the two narratives
have been examined for:
• parallel learning relationships
• parallel learning leadership, and
• parallel learning partnerships.
While not necessarily sharing exactly the same descriptors or definitions, the
underlying values that sit behind these practices are also obvious values in the work
of others including Lieberman’s (2000), Newman and Wehlage’s (1995) and
Proudford’s (2003) discussions of effective learning communities.
Following the findings of the research of Grundy and Bonser (2000) and
McNiff (2000), it would seem that specific relationships skills/practices may become
more prominent with the deconstruction and reconstruction of existing traditional
notions of leadership in schooling. If the school operating as a learning organisation
is the preferred response to reform agendas, then there would be value in developing
research that can document the place/significance of social-emotional
competencies/skills. Crowther et al. (2002) also believe that these skills will assist
teachers in developing the resilience, flexibility and collaborative teaming needed for
working in our knowledge society and in their schools as learning organisations.
Relational skills that are connected to building effective partnerships also fall
into the group of skills that Grundy and Bonser (2000) refer to as the new work
order. Grundy and Bonser (2000), referring to Gee, Hull and Lankshear (1996) in
discussions of new work order in school restructuring in Australia, state:
Gee et al. (1996) identify networking, cooperation and collaboration as
features of the ‘new work order’. Within schools, teachers have traditionally
prized their autonomy but more recently in line with the orthodoxies of the
‘new work order’, there has been strong advocacy of the need for school staff
38
to become more collaborative and to engage in team-based practices. (Grundy
& Bonser, 2000, p.8)
Grundy and Bonser (2000) ask whether it is desirable to apply the new work
order to schools. They point out that while their study showed a desire for collegial,
collaborative decision making, for example, the responses that came from the
principals were quite different from those that came from the teachers. This
difference in interpretation of what constitutes collaboration allowed the authors to
refer to Hargreaves (1994) concepts of contrived collegiality, which is
“administratively regulated…compulsory…[and] predictable”…and collaborative
cultures, which are “spontaneous…voluntary…development oriented…[and]
unpredictable” (p. 192-6). Hargreaves (1994) asks to what extent collaboratives are
possible, saying: “An important question arises concerning whether these business
principles can be applied to and by schools in public sector systems of education”
(Hargreaves, 1994, p. 192-6).
Hargreaves (2003) aligns contrived collegiality with what he calls sectarian
approaches or “performance training sects” (p.184). He compares the difference
between this method of delivering so-called success, with the success of professional
learning communities, concluding that performance training sects:
may sometimes provide a necessary platform for improvement in
circumstances of extreme adversity and low teacher capacity, [but]…Our
efforts and energy must be directed toward something higher than this…
something that embodies greater social and political ingenuity. (Hargreaves,
2003, p. 185)
This something that Hargreaves (2003) refers to could be schools working as
professional learning communities.
This section has presented the interdependency of the key concepts – parallel
learning relationships, parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships
– as important to this investigation. The less visible concept, parallel learning
relationships was therefore examined in this study by sifting the data for examples of
parallel learning leadership, and parallel learning partnerships. The following section
places these additional concepts within a proposed reconstruction of Arbuckle’s
39
(2000) framework for developing a school as a learning organisation. By placing
these additional concepts into a reconstructed model of Arbuckle’s (2000)
framework I have emphasised the importance of some of the less visible aspects of
an organisation’s culture. These less visible elements are generally connected to the
values, assumptions and beliefs that sit behind our everyday practice.
Figure 3.2, taken from the work of Conner and Lake (1994), illustrates the
central position these less visible elements have in an organisation’s culture.
Consequently this would support their inclusion within the proposed reconstructed
framework for this investigation. The following section therefore presents a proposed
reconstructed framework in Figure 3.3 that includes parallel learning rela tionships,
parallel learning leadership, and parallel learning partnerships. It also presents a
number of related sub-questions that have consequently emerged to assist this
investigation.
3.06 A proposed reconstructed framework for developing a school as a learning
organisation
In this section I examine the proposed reconstructed elements of parallel
relationship, parallel learning leadership and parallel learning relearning partnerships
and connect them to the frameworks of Connor and Lake (1994) and Arbuckle
(2000). The section proposes the reconstruction of Arbuckle’s (2000) framework as
one that has responded to the necessity for new ways of thinking about teacher-
leadership, teacher-learning and the business of leading for learning through
reconstructed parallel relationships, parallel learning partnerships and parallel
learning leadership. It illustrates how the deconstructed and reconstructed parallel
organisational and relational structures will assist in developing the professional
learning culture necessary for establishing a school as a learning organisation.
This self-study, therefore, examines the possible inclusion of the
reconstructed elements presented above in Figure 3.3 and explicitly positions them
within Arbuckle’s (2000) framework. This reconstruction is illustrated below in
Figure 3.4 The Reconstruction of Arbuckle’s Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture.
40
Working as a learning organisation, schools can build the capacity to deliver
the deeper cognitive learning, creativity, community, compassion and inclusivity
required for the knowledge economy and learning leadership for both academic and
social learning. My framework incorporates the four factors discussed so far. These
factors include schools:
• operating as learning organisations
• supporting communities of practice and parallel leadership
• working to change the culture of traditional paradigms through a process of
deconstruction and reconstruction.
Aubuckle’s (2000) Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture therefore has been
developed in this study to assist the reconstruction of a school as a learning
organisation and is represented below in Figure 3.4. This figure highlights the
following:
• shared beliefs, mission and vision
• organisational arrangements which are committed to learning through a
variety of infrastructure supports such as timetables, physical locations,
common meeting times
• conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy which are
committed to a discourse, and strategies that encourage professional
conversations for learning, and
• parallel relationships which are committed to reconstructed parallel learning
partnerships and parallel learning leadership that unlock the skills of the
organisation and support teacher learning and development; and parallel
learning partnerships and parallel learning leadership that are assisted by
social emotional competencies to nurture communities of practice beyond the
school boundaries.
By focusing on parallel collaborative relationships it is quite likely that less
visible (yet no less essential) relational skills can be unlocked and developed that can
assist, for example, the elements that could develop teacher communications,
empathy, networks and connections to emerge. A reconstruction that emphasises the
addition of social-emotional attributes, such as the concept of parallel relationships,
41
does not suggest that Arbuckle (2000) does not discuss or does not respect these
additional relationship elements/practices as essential. The reconstruction simply
gives more emphasis to the parallel concepts and consequently affords them a more
prominent position via a reconstructed framework.
Figure 3.4. The reconstruction of Arbuckle’s Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture6
This reconstructed framework will allow the data to be sifted through lenses
that will be looking for clues or connections to what may be said about parallel
learning relationships, parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships.
It will also allow this investigation to further the work of McNiff (2000) and her
focus on the importance of care and its connection to these practices and reculturing
for a learning organisation.
6 An reconstructed adaptation of Arbuckle’s original diagram which came from “Schools That Learn” by P.Senge, N. Cambron-McCabe, T. Lucas, B. Smith, J. Dutton and A. Kleiner, Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture, p.327.
Organisational arrangements
Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy
Parallel learning relationships
-parallel learning partnerships
-parallel learning leadership
Awareness and values
Skills and capabilities
Attitudes and beliefs
DEEP
LEARNING CYCLE
Shared beliefs, mission and vision
Domain of
Enduring Change (social domain; culture;
professional community)
Domain of Action
(organisational architecture;
technical domain)
42
McNiff (2000) explores an element of human relationships through her
interest in the importance of care/caring. While this study will explore relationships
via leadership and partnerships, McNiff (2000) goes deeper to explore care/caring
and its place in educative relationships. In her discussions she cites the work others
who have also investigated this area (Goodlad, Soder, and Sirotnik, 1990; Noddings
1992; Sergiovanni, 1996). While McNiff (2000) admits to not connecting care with
mainstream education until she had observed the management style of another
practitioner through a particular research study, she now offers, after reflection on
her own leadership, the following observations:
I had not yet made the conceptual leap to link education and management and
the need for care as the foundation of successful relationship, regardless of
context or profession. This came later, as I experienced how people
responded to my own attempts to care for them as a manager. I began to
appreciate that being a good manager is inextricably related to being a caring
and trustworthy person. (p. 28)
3.07 Chapter summary and the questions that have guided this study
This chapter has emphasised that, in order to bring about the cultural change
in a school (for both students and staff), a capacity needs to be built. In order to do
this, we first recognise the cultural elements through cultural deconstruction. This
study proposes that the layers/elements presented by Connor and Lake (1994) and
the reconstructed framework presented by Arbuckle (2000) would assist in this
process.
The chapter argues for the importance of analysing practice/stories for the
visible and less visible cultural elements (Connor & Lake, 1994) by searching
specifically for the Indicators, Norms of Behaviours, Basic Values and Core
Assumptions that connect to the endeavours of a practitioner. It also argues that these
endeavours (as a leader) aim to reconstruct relationships, partnerships, organisational
conditions and leadership. This study provides a close examination that has focused
on the relationship that these visible and less visible elements have with the existing
school organisational/management structures and organisational action in order to
shift core beliefs and values that sit at the centre of a school’s culture.
43
The fear of losing a culture of collaboration and risk-taking is frequently
connected to discussions of relationships/partnerships, organisational conditions, and
notions of leadership. For example, within his discussions on transforming culture,
Fullan (1991) believes that it is a necessity for leaders to be nurturing a culture of
collaboration and risk-taking to deliver successful reform. Similarly, Crowther et al.
(2002) and Hargreaves (2003) are supportive of the concept that Hargreaves, Earl,
Moore and Manning (2001) express as professional discretion, which recognises the
importance of maintaining and not losing the teacher’s space for collaboration, risk-
taking, spontaneity and creativity. As a result, these elements are essential to
formulating the questions that have guided this study.
The following questions, then, respect the importance of maintaining
collaborative practice, risk-taking, spontaneity, and creativity. They have emerged to
form the basis for this investigation.
• What does deconstructing and reconstructing a school as a learning
organisation involve?
• How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a
learning organisation take place in particular cases?
• What propositions can be elicited about the implications of reculturing a
school for teacher learning?
44
Chapter: 4 Building a Culture of Critical Reflection
and Action
45
Chapter 4 Building a Culture of Critical Reflection and Action
Practitioner research investigation/inquiry is the chosen research approach for
this study, reflecting a constructivist ontological position that there is no single truth
(McNiff, 2000). This study acknowledges that practitioner investigation can involve
a self-study, or a study of others, or both.
4.01 A case for practitioner research
The value of practitioner research, which some describe as worker research
(Collins, 1989; Garrison, 1989), cannot be understated. The practitioner/worker
researcher is closer to the workplace and, consequently, closer to the issues being
investigated. This phenomenon respects that the practitioner brings to research his or
her own special knowledge and that this knowledge arises from practice. Nowotny,
Scott, and Gibbons (2003), in their comparisons of traditional discipline-based Mode
1 knowledge and practice-based Mode 2 knowledge, provide a set of five
characteristics for the practice –based Mode 2 knowledge, saying that it is where:
1. knowledge is generated within the context of application (unlike ‘pure
knowledge’) which is then applied in new contexts;
2. knowledge is trans-disciplinary, developed by teams often brought together
for a specific purpose;
3. knowledge development occurs in a diversity of sites, and often
simultaneously in multiple sites;
4. knowledge is highly reflective, occurring in a dialogic relationship with its
context; and
5. knowledge is accompanied by novel and evolving forms of quality control,
brought about by the multiple understandings of quality and supervision that
accompany it. (Nowotny et al., 2003, pp. 186-7)
These descriptions of Mode 2 knowledge support the belief that practitioners
bring with them their special knowledge of their field. It also supports the belief that
the practitioner researcher, in thinking critically about their own practice, begins to
46
see through new eyes (McNiff, 2000) and is able to “offer a culture of critical
reflection and action” (Macpherson et al., 2004, p. 3).
This section argues the worth, rigour and value of a self-study and then
problematises what it means to undertake a self-study in the light of a personal
ontology. The narrative stories within this study are associated with my practice as a
teacher, leader and administrator and have been analysed for their visible and less
visible cultural elements (Arbuckle, 2000; Connor & Lake, 1994). The analysis
involved searching specifically for the Indicators, Norms of Behaviours, Basic
Values and Core Assumptions that connect to the endeavours of a practitioner to
reconstruct relationships, partnerships, organisational conditions, and leadership. As
well as allowing for the opportunity to make better sense of past experiences in light
of new experiences, other practitioners were invited to consider the findings of this
research in light of their own experiences. As a result these responses of others have
become part of the study and add an additional layer to the analysis.
4.02 Practitioner investigation: A narrative self-study
This practitioner investigation uses my narratives as data for this inquiry/self-
study. As a methodology, this investigation falls within a post-positivist paradigm
and draws upon personal experiences in the numerous practitioner activities
undertaken everyday in my various leadership and teaching duties. It consequently
required thinking and writing reflectively, historically and biographically (Bullough
& Pinnegar, 2001). Therefore, this study recognises that the knowledge brought to
practice is knowledge that has not been gained in isolation, but knowledge that has
been constructed from participation and interaction with others in a number of school
and professional settings.
By believing that knowledge is socially constructed, complex and always
changing, I hold that it is not discovered by the mind. Consequently, with
constructivist ontology, I am deeply committed to the view that what we take to be
objective knowledge and truth is the result of perspective. On this, Schwandt (1994)
states:
47
The constructivist or interpretivist believes that to understand this world of
meaning one must interpret it. The inquirer must elucidate the process of
meaning construction and clarify what and how meanings are embodied in
the language and actions of social actors. To prepare an interpretation is itself
to construct a reading of these meanings; it is to offer the inquirer’s
construction of the constructions of the actors one studies… Although we
may feel professionally compelled to use a special language for these
procedures (e.g. participant observation, informant interviewing, archival
research) at base, all interpretive inquirers watch, listen, ask, record and
examine. How those activities might best be defined and employed depends
on the inquirer’s purpose for doing the inquiry. Purpose in turn is shaped by
epistemological and methodological commitments. (p.118-119)
Specifically, I have investigated most closely my role to support others to
develop educative relationships. This research, then, has allowed me to theorise a
specific area of my practice that focuses on me as teacher- learner and leader charged
with assisting in the reculturing of two schools as learning organisations.
As a self-study, this research contains my narrative stories and also the stories
of others who have worked closely beside me, and others who have been interested
in my findings. My narratives are my primary data, and the responses of others who
may have either affirmed or refuted my claims are secondary data. For example, my
actions, practices and conversations as well as those of my colleagues have informed
my narratives. This strategy acknowledges that, as a teacher, manager and leader, I
do not work in isolation and therefore, as a researcher, I cannot examine my practice
in isolation. As a practitioner-researcher, then, my research acknowledges that
teacher practitioners have important stories to tell about their work, their schools and
their structures that support and inhibit teacher learning (Smyth, 1999).
My knowledge is situated in local culture and embedded in my organisational
sites. Just as I cannot ignore the impact, knowledge and practice of the other
practitioners who share my world, I have also acknowledged my own set of persona l
values, my beliefs and even my professional history. As such, I acknowledge that, as
a teacher, manager and leader charged with a significant curriculum reform
48
responsibility, I strongly believe that successful reform is closely associated with
teacher learning, renewed methods of leadership and theories of new
professionalism. These have been key drivers in my work and have emerged as
significant drivers of teacher reform in the literature presented in earlier sections.
This study has demanded a process of watching, listening, asking, examining
and recording my actions (Schwandt, 1994). For this reason, the research strategies
or procedures are best described as being closely aligned to aspects of the action
research processes, since the process has been about me trying to understand and
theorise my practice in order to improve the quality of my work with others.
Consequently, as well as important academic credibility, this self-study has allowed
me to develop a strong theoretical framework, as well as a commitment to self-
development. When discussing the social renewal outcome and the solid research
base of self-study, McNiff (2000) states:
Self-study is quite an established form of practical theorising in the teaching
profession…The approach is already evident in management and organisation
study…it needs now to be firmly imbedded. Managers and the people they
support need to produce their own theories of practice, and collectively
compile bodies of case study evidence that in turn constitutes a legitimate
managerial and organisational literature. (p. 57)
McNiff (2000) suggests that a narrative inquiry that takes the form of an action
research self-study sets a tradition of radical knowing through self-critique, saying
that it is “a form that requires new criteria and standards of judgement from within
the inquiry process itself” (p.87).
This study legitimately recognises that I bring to my practice, knowledge
gained not in isolation but constructed through my participation and interaction with
others in a number of school and professional settings (McNiff, 2000; Nowotny et
al., 2003). As such, this section has presented arguments for the worth and value of
the study and has been able to consider what it means to undertake a self-study in the
light of my ontology. The following section will address the issues associated with
ensuring rigour in this research by outlining more specifically the sources of data and
data analysis.
49
4.03 Sources of data and data collection
This study is situated within practitioner research, and so my practice forms
the data for individual narratives. The following section describes the primary data as
my narratives and the secondary data as various artifacts, and the responses of others.
As a self-study inquiry, based on narratives, it has consequently produced a living
account of personal practice. The construction of these narratives has been made
possible, in the first instance, by referring to my work/appointment diaries. The
diaries provided the prompts for various signposts of major events and projects. For
the details of the major events I referred to associated correspondence. The
associated correspondence included, for example, relevant emails, agendas for
meetings, project reports. These documents were artifacts that assisted in capturing
the details for each narrative. These were regarded as essential components of a
much larger picture. Each artifact was a small but essential part of the much larger
jigsaw puzzle.
In stating what constitutes my data, I am also mindful that “data is not
evidence” (McNiff, 2000, p.208). As suggested by Mc Niff (2000), if I am focusing
on accounts of specific areas or issues related to my practice, then there would be
some data that may be selected over other data because of its relevance or
significance. For this reason, it is important to present rationale/criteria that for
including some items and excluding others. The criteria for data selection were
related to:
• the development of a school learning culture
• my leadership
• my management of teacher learning
• inevitable constraints to my work
• my strategies for development, and
• evidence of strategies trialed and changed accordingly.
Consequently artifacts, such journal jottings, diary entries, electronic mail,
formal correspondence and procedural/policy documents supported the narratives for
this study. A summary of these documents and their archival codes is housed in
Appendix B (for those related to Narrative Number One), and in Appendix C (for
50
those related to Narrative Number Two). These artifacts are also listed in the matrix
in Appendix H against their specific narrative sections. Three examples of the types
of artifacts archived are presented in Figure 4.1, which follows.
Figure 4.1 Examples of Various Artifacts
Example A - A Memo Prepared for a Meeting Related to Building Learning Alliances With Student Teachers from a Local University
______________________________________
(Relates to Narrative Number Two: 7.03 – Focus on developing student learning through partnerships)
Meeting with University of >>>>>>> 10 Feb 2004 Aims of the Meeting:
1. To discuss in more detail our special ‘School Based Learning Program for both Teachers and Undergraduate Students’.
(Hopefully in the future this may connect to formal post-graduate work for teachers …but at this stage it will be a learning partnership for many that goes beyond the traditional supervisory role) Key questions at this stage include:
• How many student teachers, what year are they and in what time of the year will they be coming?
• What is different about this approach to practicum? • •
2. To discuss in more detail >>>>>>>>>>>‘Middle Years –Conference’. (This conference will allow staff to present best practices and some of our most outstanding school developments in curriculum, pastoral, leadership and management to their peers and university partners. The initial intention is for this to be a National Conference in 2005? ) Key questions at this stage include:
• When- proposing end of Term 3 – 16 and 17 September. • Does it involve an evening on the 16 with dinner and key note address• Does it involve only >>>>> audience with >> rep’s and key
undergrads? • Does it invite parents to certain sessions? • Does it invite some other sister schools - ie. Our >>>>>>>-Yr 6,7?
51
Example B – A Memo From a University Confirming a Year 12 Student’s
Choices of Units for the Accelerated Pathways Program
______________________________________
(Relates to Story Number One - 6.06. The trial of Accelerating Pathways for
Senior Students.)
52
Example C – A Journal Extract Kept in July 2001
Notes relate to Writing a Proposal for an Alliance Idea
(This Idea later became a major project between design educators of the
university and teachers from the school)
____________________________________
(Relates to Story Number One - 6.11 The Design Educators’ Post Graduate
Studies Project)
The two narratives therefore contain their first layers of analysis/reflective
dialogue and have been constructed using a variety of artifacts as their departure
53
points. Further layers of analysis follow the narratives using the proposed
reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) framework and the qualities of a school working as a
learning organisation as its key analytical tools.
In addition to the data that comes from the narratives (and their supporting
artifacts), this study also presents the data from the responses of a focus group of
participants who received a presentation of my first tentative propositions. In
addition to these responses there are also responses from six key participants. Both
sets of responses and the associated analysis are presented in Chapters 10 and 11.
These secondary data provide another level of confirmation, and have
assisted credibility through triangulation and subsequent investigation. These
measures therefore support the requirements for credibility and validity (Anderson
and Herr (1999). The closing Chapters 10 and 11 explore participant responses to my
interpretations of practice. Their perspectives on my analysis have been included
with their consent. By inviting participants involved along the way and at the end of
the analysis process, I have made my findings more transparent, disclosing my
interpretations and analytical processes and, in turn, provided ongoing evaluation of
my research. As a result this adds to the trustworthiness and authenticity of the
research.
This section has outlined the sources of data and the methods of data
collection for this self-study. In so doing, it has argued for both primary and
secondary data. The narratives are the primary data, and the responses of colleagues
and others and their artifacts, provide the secondary data. My narratives and their
secondary data are about monitoring practice and reflecting on how they seem to be
influencing practice.
4.04 Narratives as data
As stated earlier, personal narratives are the primary data source. The
narratives of others, as well as artifacts, are secondary data. These secondary data
affirm or refute significant sections of my narratives but as McNiff (2000) alerts us,
data is not evidence. For data to become evidence, analysis is required.
54
Stories of others, by others, does not necessarily make one a better
practitioner (McNiff, 2000). While learning from others’ experience can be powerful,
McNiff (2000) recognises the opinion of Laurillard (1993), saying that this is
“second order knowledge” (p.168). More powerful learning comes when we adopt
personal, practical epistemologies (McNiff, 2000; Schön, 1995).
Rather than stories about others, self-studies that use the stories of one’s
experience as data are more likely to change or have a direct influence on a
practitioner’s day-to-day practices. Further, as McNiff (2000) argues in her critique
of some of traditional interpretive research, these methods could reinforce a theory-
practice gap, and says:
No one ever changed a situation by telling stories of others’ experiences,
although the stories themselves might be the inspiration that people come to
act on and live by…social change…requires new methodologies and new
philosophies…new paradigms in which change is a central focus and people
become active agents in their own lives. Social cohesion arises from a
cultural milieu in which people tell their own stories of experience… We
listen and learn from the stories themselves and from the experience of
listening and empathising. We grow as we help one another to grow.
(McNiff, 2000, p.171)
The narratives of this study, therefore, reflect my practice as a transformative
process (McNiff, 2000). The secondary data will affirm and challenge these
narratives. These additional layers of data and their associated analysis are presented
as evolving layers and, as such, reflect analysis as an ongoing process. On this,
McNiff (2000) states:
You need to turn the data into evidence as an ongoing process. You need to
show how an earlier scenario transforms into a later one, and how the later
scenario then changes again…it is an ongoing transformative process…you
are aiming to change yourself, your understanding and how that might
influence your behaviour and attitudes, in turn to influence that situation that
you are part of. ... You can show unfolding of new understandings that grow
out of people working together in new and different ways, and their influence
on one another. (p.208 - 9)
55
My narratives are written to follow closely Schön’s (1995) belief in
reflection- in-action and reflection on the reflection- in-action. The description here
implies multi-dimensions and, for this reason, the narratives have been written with a
number of layers/dimensions. This layering/multi-dimension analogy follows closely
to the inquiry pattern of Clandinin and Connelly (1994):
Methods for the study of personal experience are simultaneously focused in
four directions: inward and outward, backward and forward. By inward we
mean the internal conditions of feelings, hopes, aesthetic reactions, moral
disposition and so on. By outward we mean existential condition that is the
environment…by backward and forward we are referring to temporality, past,
present and future. (p.417)
It is my professional learning, and teacher- learning in general, that has been
most dominant in my reflective thoughts, career directions and professional practice
in recent years. In order to continue this investigation in the context of a professional
doctorate, an additional layer of theory or rigour contributes to understanding my
investigative practice. Consequently, the move to reflective practice is one of critical
inquiry and research. The act of self- reflection that has emerged as part of my
professional practice is “central to the understanding of the nature of critically
grounded qualitative research” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p.147).
The layers of text within the narratives have captured, examined and reflected
on the complex, the uncertain, the unstable, the unique, and the conflicting moments.
The theoretical examination/analysis of these situations have been presented in and
around layers and represent Schön’s (1995) concept of the reflection- in-action and
reflection on the reflection-in-action cycle. The layers of text were designed to
ensure rigour, richness and depth. The emerging patterns, issues and tensions within
the layered narratives have informed the final comparative analysis and subsequently
contribute to the conclusions that have informed the implications of reculturing a
school for teacher learning.
When undertaking practitioner research, reflection needs to be critical
reflection. This is one element that make it rigorous research rather than aimless
contemplative reflection. Its value also lies in its closeness to the workplace. The
56
conscious effort to explore beyond the very first layer of my experiences is
emphasised by Long (2000) who argues that the term reflective practice has become
over-simplified and it is far more than thinking about things, saying:
Self-reflection is complex and involves understanding one’s own process of
coming to know, an appreciation of what happens when tacit knowledge
becomes explicit, and the transformation that takes place in the individual
during the process. (p.181)
As a practitioner attempting to reconstruct a school as a learning organisation,
this self-study respects the narratives for their visible and less visible cultural
practices (Connor & Lake, 1994). These elements were examined for their
connection to the notion of developing a school as a learning organisation. The
outcomes from this self–study are therefore able to indicate whether the proposed
modifications to Arbuckle’s (2000) model are appropriate and suitable for the task.
This section has outlined the more general characteristics of this study’s
research design to ensure the worth, rigour and value of this study. The following
section will elaborate further and outline the specifics of data analysis.
4.05 Data analysis
As discussed in section 1.01, generative transformational theorising (McNiff,
2000) and the process of inventing and reinventing (Ross et al, 1992) are aligned
with the theorising process of deconstruction and reconstruction. To assist this
theorising and the associated process of data analysis, the following sub-questions
emerged as a result of the literature reviewed for this study. These sub-questions ask:
• Can a proposed reconstruction of Arbuckle’s model for the reconstruction of
my school as a learning organisation encourage the teacher collaboration,
reflective teaching/teacher-theorising, spontaneity and risk-taking needed for
the development of a school as a learning organisation?
• What can be said about the insertion of the concept of parallel relationships
and the associated concepts, parallel learning partnerships and parallel
learning leadership into the original Arbuckle (2000) framework?
57
• What visible and less visible elements within an organisation’s culture (after
the work of Conner and Lake, 1994) were examined/altered to assist the
retention of these key elements of collaboration, reflective teaching/teacher-
theorising, spontaneity and risk taking?
In addition to presenting these questions as a guide for the analysis of the data
from this study, this section outlines the three phases of data analysis that were used
in the study. These phases have been supported by the identification of critical
incidents (Tripp, 1993; Ferguson, 2001).
4.05.01 Critical incidents
Tripp’s (1993) discussions of socially-critical research describes critical
incidents:
People often ask what a critical incident is and how to recognise one. The
answer is, of course, that critical incidents are not ‘things’ which exist
independently of an observer are awaiting discovery like gold nuggets or
desert islands, but like all data, critical incidents are created. Incidents happen
but critical incidents are produced by the way we look at the situation: a
critical incident is an interpretation of the significance of an event. To take
something as a critical incident is a value judgement we make, and the basis
of the judgement is the significance we attach to the meaning of the incident.
(Tripp, 1993, p. 8)
The critical incidents identified in this study have been interrogated and
benchmarked against the literature, before seeking confirmation and contestation
from participants and readers, and before making a number of propositions for
action. The complexity of the analysis process, while not using the thinking
strategies of Tripp (1993), has involved many of the underlying principles of his
methods. For example, the critical incidents as well as the points of emphasis that
others have brought to the data have been analysed with various attitudes, values and
perspectives in mind. In addition there has been constant questioning of justifications
and viewpoints, and numerous layers of comparative analysis and synthesis.
58
While the phases of analysis have not followed Tripp’s (1993) plus, minus
and interesting strategy, or his alternatives, possibilities and choices strategy, similar
interrogation has been achieved by including my reflective conversations or critical
voice. The process is also similar to Tripp’s (1993) approach in its multi- layering,
and therefore more than an aimless contemplative reflection. Such critical reflection
has been a rigorous process and, as such, will be valuable because of its closeness to
the school workplace. A diagram of the multiple layers involved in this research
process is presented below in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.2 Two Narratives of Two School Situations Presented in Multiple Layers ____________________________________________________________________
1st Layer Narrative No. 1 & Narrative No. 2
(Normal font- Chapters 6 & 7) 2nd Layer
My reflective voice (Italicized font in text boxes below narratives – Chapters 6 & 7)
(Interrogated critical incident analysis layer (Ferguson, 2001; Clandinin & Connelly, 1994; Schön, 1994)
3rd Layer Connections to the evidence
(Connecting references to Appendix B-Listing of Artifacts)
4th Layer Connections to the literature
(Deeper analysis chapter guided by six specific snapshots - Chapter 9)
(Mapped & scanned into a matrix containing qualities -characteristics of schools working as a learning organisation)
5th Layer Readers’ filters, confirmations & contestations
(Confirmatory layer- Chapter 10) (Involves triangulation & member-checking)
6th Layer A rejoinder, a response and some conclusions for now
(Final Layer - Chapter 11)
59
The reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) framework presented in Figure 3.6, and
the qualities and organisational arrangements for schools working as learning
organisations, identified in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2, were the key frameworks used to
assist these layers of analysis. This layering also respects the work of Huberman and
Miles (1994), who emphasise that data analysis involves three phases: data reduction,
data display, and conclusion drawing. These processes occur before, during and after
data collection.
Phase 1- Data Reduction:
This first phase of analysis involved data reduction and is similar to the
methods used by Bogden and Biklen (1992), Tesch (1990), Tripp (1993), Ferguson
(2001) and Potter (2000). This phase of data reduction categorised the data that
emerged from daily appointment diaries, correspondence, and other related artifacts
into:
• critical incidents, and
• innovative thinking.
• reflective conversations
Labels for categories and sections of the narratives were therefore generated from
this data and the related literature. This phase assisted the following stages of data
display.
Phase 2 – Data Display:
The second phase of analysis, involving data display (Huberman & Miles, 1994),
presented the critical incidents (Tripp, 1993; Ferguson, 2001) and innovative
thinking through two narratives. These narratives therefore present numerous
snapshots of my leadership in two different educational settings. In this way they
mirror the work of Ferguson (2001) by capturing, examining and reflecting on the
complex, the uncertain, the unstable, and the unique, as well as the conflicting
moments associated with teacher- learning and collaboratives during times of reform.
Use of critical incident analysis (Tripp, 1993) made it possible to “interrogate my
observations of key events” (Ferguson, 2001, p.87).
60
In addition to the actual narratives, this phase also contained my reflective
conversations. This second layer of interrogation was contained in reflective text
boxes. The layout of a typical page of a narrative is illustrated in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.3. An Illustration of the First Three Layers of a Narrative
6.05 An experiment that focused on undergraduate learning
During my early coordination days there were a number of unfinished tasks
in my previous position that needed to be completed. One was the
completion of the specific art curriculum outline for the senior students
at our school. In order to be an accredited program of study, this
school-based curriculum document had to acknowledge the
key principles of the then Board of Senior Secondary School Studies’
Art Syllabus document. It also required the recognition of everything
that needed to be retained in our existing practice….[section continues]
This inclusive team approach was a very different way of working for
the undergraduate teacher. More typically university students look on
from the sideline, or are cautiously appointed a section of the curriculum
to deliver in a specific timeframe to a safe group of students. This model
allowed this student to practice teaching but also allowed her the opportunity
to experience authentic curriculum development, and to work collaboratively
within the team in a capacity that acknowledged her strengths and
gave her a richer set of experiences as a result.
(Refer to Appendix B for a written response from a key undergraduate student)
This trial/experiment was certainly successful for all participants. This experience
also gave me the confidence and evidence that I needed to question some of the
practicums we offer our student teachers. The possibility of undergraduates having
more on-site learning than they did at the time was certainly taken on board by a
number of key personnel in the university, and this gave me the green light to pursue
this direction for my partnering connections that could assist not only the teacher-
learner but also the undergraduate learner.
1st Layer Narrative Text (Normal Font)
2nd Layer Reflective
Voice Text Box ( Italicized
Font)
3rd Layer Connections to the Evidence
(Bracketed Font) Connecting references to Appendix B–
Listing of Artifacts
61
The reflective thoughts that are presented in and around the narratives
themselves are presented as running parallel to the associated sections of the
narratives. This purposeful metaphor of writing with parallel text (or voice) signifies
the strong emphasis that has been placed on the notion of parallels in this study. It
illustrates the self- talk, conversation and thinking we often experience when reading,
hearing or writing a narrative. These reflections add a second layer of richness to the
narratives. This layering of data has allowed the reader to distinguish between the
researcher’s own experiences and first layers of analysis and reflection. In presenting
my narratives in this way I have provided readers with insights into my thoughts, my
learning and my evidence. The connections to evidence that can substantiate my
claims, provides an additional layer and has been achieved by connecting relevant
sections of each narrative to specific artifacts. (Refer to Appendices B and C.) As
Figure 4.1 illustrates there are additional layers of analysis and synthesis also evident
in the later chapters, which contain a deeper analysis of significant snapshots. This
deeper analysis was presented through close-up views of a particular group of
snapshots before a synthesis of first tentative propositions was presented for key
participants to consider. These layering techniques follow the work of Crotty (2001)
as well as Ferguson (2001).
This second phase of data display has also been supported by a large data-
mapping matrix provided in Appendix H and a number of smaller matrices that are
dispersed throughout the analysis chapters. These matrices have assisted in scanning
and mapping the data. They also preserve the wholeness of the data and provide a
wider snapshot, or big picture of the two narratives. In the first instance, each
narrative’s snapshots were selected and scanned against the key qualities of
Arbuckle’s (2000) framework. This framework assisted in pulling the first level
categories of the coded data into second level categories or themes. (Refer to
Appendix H – Mapping of Data.)
The data mapping techniques were useful tools for identifying significant
critical points and critical incidents (Tripp, 1993). The labelling/categorising has
been similar to the methods proposed by Bogden and Biklen (1992), but it is the
additional use of the matrices for data mapping that assisted the complex task of data
management, analysis, and organisation. This data display/management technique
62
assisted in finding a number of significant snapshots and therefore assisted the
following phase – drawing meaning from the data.
Phase 3: Conclusion drawing – Making meaning from data:
The third stage of the analysis, involved conclusion drawing and verification.
In other words drawing meaning from the data (Huberman & Miles, 1994). The
conclusion drawing techniques have involved the use of: comparison and contrast,
the noting of patterns and themes, clustering and confirmatory techniques.
The previous phase of data display allowed the numerous snapshots to be
scanned further. The process at this phase involved comparing and contrasting
elements of each snapshot and searching for patterns and clusters of qualities. What
emerged were six significant snapshots profiling with a set of the most significant
qualities/characteristics. The confirmatory technique used at this stage involved these
snapshots being shared with the key participants whom I identified as being
connected to a specific snapshot. The responses of these participants were presented
and analysed before presenting the key propositions in the final Chapter 11.
Additional confirmations and contestations were gathered by presenting my first
tentative propositions to a conference audience and key participants. These are
presented as Readers’ Filters in Chapter 10 and have been analysed before writing
my final propositions in Chapter 11. These three phases of data analysis are
summarised in the following Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 The Three Phases of the Data Analysis
Phase 1:
Data reduction
• Critical incidents, innovative thinking and reflective conversations were identified through a scanning of various artifacts. These artifacts related directly to my leadership of learning leadership and collaboratives. Therefore these artifacts provided the narratives with essential signposts and snapshots.
Phase 2: Data display
• The writing of a first layer of narrative text was presented
through two separate narratives. These narratives contain numerous snapshots of my leadership in two different school settings and are presented in Chapters 6 and 7.
• The writing of a second layer of text containing reflective
analysis was presented as italicised font in text boxes. These
63
boxes were written to visually interrupt and run quite parallel to the narrative text. These reflective/analytical boxes represent my reflective conversations or critical voice and also present as a metaphor for the key concept – parallel.
• The third layer of analysis was achieved by connecting each
narrative to a table summary of key artifacts and participant responses (Appendices B and C). These documents evidence/substantiate my thoughts and critical incidents or claims.
Phase 3: Conclusion drawing
• Additional layers of analysis were achieved through the scanning
and mapping stages. These are presented in Chapter 8. These analytical maps have assisted the identification and re-presentation of specific snapshots. They have also assisted in identifying the various qualities and characteristics of schools working as a learning community in Chapter 9.
• A readers’ filters in Chapter 10 present the responses of key
participants before presenting the concluding propositions in Chapter 11.
A final summary of how the various analysis phases (Huberman and Miles,
1994) evolve to the conclusion-drawing phase through the multiple layers is
illustrated in Figure 4.4 in a Summary of the Research Process.
64
Figure 4.4 Summary of the Research Process
Phase 1: Numerous Snapshots Captured from Two Settings Over Four Years Beginning of Phase 2: Story No 1 and Story No 2 Written
Phase 2 continued: Scanning No 2
Scanning for barriers that confronted characteristics and the reconstructed model’s key concepts .
Phase 2: Scanning No 1
Sections with obvious collaboration chosen and scanned using the four elements of the reconstructed Arbuckle model and nine characteristics for identifying schools working as a learning organisation.
Phase 2 continued Scanning No 3
Scan for significant findings.
Found significant snapshots with and without barriers .
Phase 2 continued Scanning No 4
Scanned for the most significant qualities according to Arbuckle (2000).
Found six snapshots that contained the same five qualities which were – reflective dialogue, collaborative norms of sharing, openness to improvement, deprivatization of practice, and supportive and knowledgeable leadership.
Re-presented the six snapshots as close-ups and examined in light of research questions to prepare first propositions.
Phase 3: Deeper analysis and synthesis- first propositions made
Readers’ filters gathered to respond to first propositions via the written responses of six key participants associated with the six close-up snapshots , as well as five written responses from an international focus group. These included: • First undergraduate partnership - Response A - from
student teacher graduate at School No 1. • Virtual partnership- Response B - from participating
teacher at School No 1. • Design Ed postgraduate studies partnership - Response C
- from participating teacher at School No 1. • Sharpened focus on curriculum leadership - Response D -
from Assistant Head of Faculty at School No 2. • Specific focus on teacher learning (Pockets of Practice)-
Response E - from participating teacher at School No 2. • Re-culturing through restructure and teacher appraisal-
Response F- from participating teacher from School No 2. • Focus Group Responses A, B, C, D & E – from conference
paper participants.
Phase 3 Continued: Concluding
propositions presented in light of readers’
filters
65
4.06 Credibility – validity/trustworthiness, generalisability and limitations
Credible research is generally associated with validity. Validity is concerned
that the evidence (which involves the analysis of data in terms of the research
questions) is not fabricated, therefore authentic and trustworthy, and thus credible.
For example, McNiff (2000) presents action research under the umbrella of more
contemporary paradigms and states that, in this paradigm, “newer terms such as
‘authenticity’ and ‘trustworthiness’ are substituted for validity” (p.133). These
imperatives have been critical to my work.
The findings of this study can be described as generative. As such, the
findings possibly can generate discussions in many different contexts. The value of
such discussion or dialogue is best explained by McNiff (2000):
These narratives that show the situatedness of the individual and how they
worked to improve their understanding in order to try to improve their social
situations…emphasise the individual accountability of practitioners and the
collective responsibility of nurturing learning from experience, and in this
way contribute to a new view of professionalism. …The lessons learnt from
the telling and sharing of stories travel far beyond the workplace, and have
significant implications for social renewal. (p.171)
When considering the credibility of a research study, then, one also must
consider how judgements of quality and rigour are made. Therefore, it has been
necessary to consider how my narratives and conclusions will be judged. What then
constitutes the criteria and standards for making these judgements so as to determine
validity and trustworthiness in my work? McNiff (2000) suggests that traditionalists
use different sets of criteria and judgement particularly normative criteria of
replicability and generalisability. Consequently, McNiff (2000, p.247) presents a set
of guiding principles in the fo rm of questions designed to assist the evaluation of
rigour within action research. For the purpose of this study and to assist in effective
self-evaluation, I have reflected on these guiding principles and conclude that:
• I have been able to theorise my practice to reveal a developmental process for
others and myself.
66
• I have shown the reality of my knowing- in-action, and my reflection on
knowing- in-action, and how I have used this reflection to modify my practice.
• I have shown how my own living constitutes a theory of personal-social
improvement.
• I have produced evidence for my theories through the reflections/responses of
others with whom I interact.
• I have validated my claims against the best critique of others.
• I have shown the evolutionary potential within my theories, which have
allowed me to revisit and rethink my practice and my reflection.
• I have shown the potential for influence within my theories for wider social
renewal.
Similar guidelines for evaluating rigour are presented by Anderson and Herr
(1999). These are listed in Appendix J: Criteria for Judging Overall Validity
(Anderson & Herr, 1999) and are summarised below as five layers/types of validity,
and include:
• outcome validity
• process validity
• democratic validity
• catalytic validity
• dialogic validity.
In discussions of validity, Anderson and Herr (1999) also emphasise the
value of multiple data-collection methods. They point out that this can contribute to
the trustworthiness of the data (Anderson & Herr, 1999). As discussed in Section
4.03, the sources of primary data and secondary data for this study allows for
multiple data sources, as well as multiple perspectives. This, according to van den
Berg (2000), is “making oneself accountable and making democratic and
epistemological sense” (p.86). This practice of relying on multiple methods is also
known as triangulation (Anderson & Herr, 1999). Triangulation assists in
overcoming threats to validity or trustworthiness. The notion behind the use of a
combination of techniques is that, if more sources are tapped for understanding, then
67
the richer the data and, therefore, the findings are more believable and thus more
trustworthy.
Trustworthiness can be observed as attending to as many of the following as
possible:
• prolonged engagement and persistent observation
• triangulation - use of multiple data-collection methods, multiple sources,
multiple investigators and multiple theoretical perspectives
• peer review and debriefing - external reflection and input on your work
• negative case analysis - conscious search for negative cases and unconfirming
evidence in order to refine the working hypotheses
• clarification of research bias - reflection upon your own subjectivity and how
you use and monitor this
• member checking - sharing interview transcripts, ana lytical thoughts, and
drafts of the final report with research participants to ensure that you are
representing their ideas accurately
• rich, thick description - writing that allows the reader to enter the research
context
• external audit - an outside person examines the research process and product
through ‘auditing’ your field notes, research journal, analytic coding scheme,
etc. (Glesne, 1999, p. 32).
The qualities presented here by Glesne (1999) substantiate my earlier questions and
guiding principles as frames of reference/criteria for guiding and judging
trustworthiness and authenticity. This section has discussed validity and
trustworthiness in ways that are respected as valid and credible for the practitioner
researcher.
4.07 Ethical considerations
Any research involving people and social institutions must involve ethical
decision-making. Zeni (2001) defines ethics as a “branch of philosophy dealing with
decisions about right and wrong actions.” (p.xv). Researching within one’s own
workplace demands many ethical considerations. Further, when the findings from
68
this workplace are shared beyond this community, there emerge additional
complexities. When considering the ethical rights associated with this study I have
respected:
• participants’ rights to confidentiality
• participants’ rights of access to data that involves them
• the importance of avoidance of harm to participants
• participants’ right to withdraw from the research, and
• the importance of honesty and protection from deception (McNiff, 2000).
At all times, I was aware of and worked within the rights of the researched
and the protection of the researched, viz. informed consent, confidentiality, and a
right to withdraw. While it has been the intention to protect participants, through the
use of pseudonyms, it is sometimes difficult to achieve complete anonymity for those
within the community who are closely associated with the participant. This is a
particular ethical matter for those involved in practitioner and insider research.
Issues of ethics for the practitioner researcher is so context specific and
complex that some would claim that it is even too difficult to make all ethical
decisions before one gets into the study. Therefore, while this study satisfies the
ethics review board and approval for this research has been granted, there has also
been an ongoing conscious respect for ethical rights of all collaborators as they
emerge and contribute to the findings of this work. For this reason, it has been
important to be making ongoing ethical checks at different points in the research. A
copy of the ethical clearance materials, cover sheets, and question/response sheets
that was prepared for this study is contained in Appendix J.
Practitioner researchers continually disclose personal va lues and the impact
of their study on their situation. The complexity of ethical consideration is further
illustrated below:
• Location: What a researcher brings to the inquiry – gender, race,
class, roles, and status in the institution. How do these aspects of
culture connect or divide a researcher from colleagues, students, and
other participants?
69
• Relationships: The human dynamics, friendships, and professional
responsibilities that may be threatened or enhanced by the research.
To whom is the researcher accountable?
• Interpretation/definition: How the researcher represents the subjective
experience of others in presenting multiple perspectives. How do
various participants define the issues?
• Publication: Texts, forms, and voices that bring the research to a
wider public. How does the researcher tell a complex story truthfully
and respectfully to varied audiences?
• Institutionalisation: Legal and procedural expectations in the
university, school, or other setting. What guidelines apply when
research involves more than one institutional culture?
(Zeni, 2000, p. xvii)
Every effort has been made to ensure the ethical practices are associated with
quality research. This study has also been guided by the teacher-researcher statement
of ethics presented by Mohr (2000):
• The teacher-researcher role. Teacher-researchers are teachers first.
They respect those with whom they work, openly sharing information
about their research. While they seek understanding and knowledge,
they also nurture the well-being of others, both students and
professional colleagues.
• Research plans. Teacher-researchers consult with teaching colleagues
and appropriate supervisors to review the plans for their studies. They
explain their research questions and methods of data collection and
update their plans as the research progresses.
• Data collection. Teacher-researchers use data from observation,
discussions, interviews, and writing that are collected during the
normal process of teaching and learning. They secure the principal’s
permission for broader surveys or letters to solicit data. They also
secure permission if they need to use data already secured by the
70
school to which they would ordinarily have access as part of their
teaching responsibilities such as standardised test scores.
• Research results. Teacher-researchers may present the results of their
research to colleagues in their school districts and at other
professional meetings. When they plan to share their conclusions they
consult with their local supervisor. They are honest in their
conclusions and sensitive to the effects of their research findings on
others.
• Publication. Before publishing, teacher-researchers obtain written
releases from the individuals involved in the research, and parent
permission for students under the age of eighteen years. The
confidentiality of the people involved in the research is protected.
Before publishing this study, therefore, it will be essential to apply for
and be granted ethical clearance required by my credentialing
university.
(Mohr, 2000, p.9)
4.08 Chapter summary
This chapter has presented a case for practitioner research
investigation/inquiry and the particular aspects of the research design specific to this
action inquiry self-study. This research paradigm reflects a constructivist ontological
position that there is no single truth. This chapter has argued the worth, rigour and
value of a self-study. It also problematised what it means to undertake a self-study in
the light of a personal ontology.
The chapter also outlined the data sources and the analysis mapping and
scanning that has taken place. A summary of this rigorous process was illustrated in
Figure 4.5. The research process has recognised that the knowledge brought to
practice is knowledge that has been gained not in isolation, but knowledge that has
been constructed from participation and interaction with others in a number of school
and professional settings. In addition to outlining a set of specific sub-questions that
assisted the analysis process and the specifics of three distinct phases of data
analysis, the importance of academic credibility has also been discussed.
71
Credibility was discussed by emphasising the importance of developing a
strong theoretical framework as well as a commitment to self-development. The
importance of authenticity and trustworthiness were presented with respect to issues
of validity. In these discussions, a number of guiding checklists have been presented
to assist in evaluating the validity and trustworthiness of this study. The use of these
checklists ensures that the evidence associated with the analysis of data in terms of
the research questions has not been fabricated and therefore is credible, authentic and
trustworthy.
The final section has highlighted the ethical considerations that are required
for any research that involves people and social institutions. The following three
chapters, Chapters 5 to 7, present an overview of the two narratives as well as an
explanation of their design and presentation.
72
Chapter: 5 Theorising Through Layers
73
Chapter 5 Theorising Through Layers
The two narratives presented in this chapter, and the following one, form the
primary data of this doctoral study. The first narrative captures a year of my work as
a school-university liaison officer in a large co-educational state high school, and
highlights relevant aspects of my previous years of experience as a leader of learning
in a variety of roles. This position was a result of a unique collaborative project that I
initiated between a large co-educational state school and a university in Queensland.
The second narrative is set in a different context. It captures my first two and a half
years of work as a curriculum manager in the Middle School of a large, private,
single-sex school in Queensland.
5. 01 Theorising through layered text
The two narratives that follow this chapter are presented in layers. Chapter 4
presented as multilayered analyses (see Chapter 4, Section 4.05 for an explanation).
The first three layers (of six), representing the multiple dimensions of this study, are
located within the narratives; the reflective boxes and the scholarly connection to the
evidence. Further to this, these layers fit within the three phases of data analysis (cf.
Huberman and Miles, 1994) (see Figure 4.2).
The layered narratives and their investigations involved both description and
explanation (see Figure 4.2) The description, is found in the earlier layers of the
narratives and then transformed into explanation in the final layers. These final layers
capture critical reflective analysis and reconstructions. Captured throughout these
multiple layers is the evidence which transforms ‘the data into evidence as an
ongoing process. [In other words] an earlier scenario transforms into a later one and
…the later one then changes again…[This is]…an ongoing transformative process’
(McNiff, 2000, p.208-9). The transformation evident in the layers of Chapters 5
through to Chapter 10 captures the change and development of my knowledge and
understanding, behaviour and attitudes. In this way analysis moves from description
to explanation.
74
The two narratives presented in the following chapter, represent two very
connected chapters in my working life. Together these two narratives reflect the
characteristics of action research (McNiff, 2000), which allow me to:
• show if those with whom I work can say that their learning journeys have
been improved as a result of my work with them
• theorise about my practice to show my learning as a developmental process
for others and myself
• show my knowing in action
• show my reflection on knowing in action and how I use this reflection to
modify my practice
• present evidence through reference to artifacts and responses of others who
may or may not be in sympathy with my work
• show the evolutionary potential for influence within my theories, which will
allow me to revisit and rethink my practice and reflections. This will be
evident in the Chapter 11: Readers’ Filters -Confirmations and Contestations
and Chapter 12: A Rejoinder, Response and Conclusions.
5.02 Selecting significant snapshots of my work to weave into my narratives
The selection of various snapshots that represent the critical incidents or
significant events (Tripp, 1993; Ferguson, 2001) of my work reveal “how an earlier
scenario transforms into a later one and how the later scenario then changes again
and so on, is an ongoing transformative process” (McNiff, 2000, p. 208-9). The
layers within each narrative, therefore, reveal how I continue to learn. In this way
they capture my understandings and how this influences my behaviour and attitudes
and new understandings.
A much clearer set of core beliefs, values and principles has emerged as my
narratives unfold. Those that have emerged from Narrative Number One have guided
the next part of my professional life. Consequently, the narratives connect and while
the second narrative was set in a new educational setting, it was still about
coordinating connections to assist teacher-learning in times of reform.
Chapter: 6 Co-ordinating Connections
75
Chapter 6 Co-ordinating Connections: Narrative Number One
The criteria I used to select the significant portions of my work for this first
narrative were quite straightforward. I knew that I wanted to write a narrative that
captured the project for what it was; a year of discovering and coordinating
connections between a school and a university. Consequently, a title emerged:
Coordinating Connections, Confidence, Contradictions, Control and Collisions in
Collaboration.
6.01 Coordinating university and school connections
7As I look back to the position I held as a links coordinator for a university
and school partnership program in its first year, I realise that I want to share more
than just the outcomes of this program with my readers. I want to highlight the
realities in carrying out some of the current reforms that are taking place in both
university and school curricula and management structures that advocate
collaboration, life-long learning and the development of learning communities. The
position allowed me to examine, for example, how, in reality, some of the
organisational management of the school and university subcultures can place this
rhetoric of reform initiatives and professional development ideals at risk. What my
experience will bring to the surface, for both university and school communities, are
examples of collaboration and professional learning that were at times difficult and
confusing. With persistence, reflection and analyses there have emerged significant
connections that have worked quite smoothly within the micro-worlds of these
bureaucratic organisations.
7 The second layer of text, presented here as italicised font within a text -box, sits so as to visually interrupt the story text. This re flective/analysis box represents my reflective conversations or critical voice.
1st, 2nd, & 3rd Layers of Analysis (Narratives; reflections;connections)
76
The focus on identifying potential connections between our school and our
neighbouring university began when assisting my Principal with our school's
Secondary School's Renewal (SSR) vision in the year 2000. During 1999 – 2000, a
specific number of Queensland state schools were invited to identify their distinctive
qualities/strengths so as to attract significant funding to their school and subsequently
boost their competitive edge.
Before this period of renewal, this inner-city coeducational pre-school to
Year 12 school was actually two separate Queensland State Government schools.
One was a small pre-school to Year 7 state school with approximately 200 students
and ten teachers, and the other was a Year 8-12 state high school with approximately
1150 students and seventy teachers. The SSR opportunity was able to assist the
amalgamation of these two state schools, and consequently develop three sub-schools
(a junior school, a middle school and a senior school) under the new banner of a state
college. My position as the School-University Links Coordinator began during the
year of planning the amalgamation and during a time when the high school's Year 8
teachers were participating in the state government's New Basics trial (Education
Queensland, 2001). For a number of Queensland state schools, the New Basics trial
was part of a curriculum initiative that required significant curriculum, assessment
and pedagogical reform/developments. Amongst other reforms, the trial demanded a
huge degree of commitment from teams of teachers who had to work closely together
to deliver a more trans-disciplinary approach to teaching and learning. A critical
friend, attached to the school, assisted in the development and implementation and
also assisted the collaborative skilling and reflective practices that this reform
demanded of its teachers. In addition to working with their critical friend, teachers
involved in the trial also participated in a vast amount of state funded professional
development.
As well as becoming a pre-school to Year 12 school, and participating in the
New Basics trial, another distinctive quality/characteristic of the school was its close
proximity to one of Queensland’s major universities. The possibilities that came with
a school and university co- location were recognised in the school’s SSR plans and
also in some of the grander plans of the university which was simultaneously
developing a concept of a university village inclusive of the amalgamated school
77
sites. The concept of an educational precinct was therefore being developed on two
fronts at the same time. As a result, there were general discussions regarding the
possibilities for partnerships between these two organisations occurring between the
school's Principal, and a number of key university and state government personnel
for approximately six months before I was placed in my Links Coordinator position.
Shortly after the submission of our school's SSR plan, my commitment to
coordinating partnerships that could benefit the staff and students of both my school
and the university prompted me to draft a proposal for my Principal's consideration.
The proposal outlined the need for a specific coordinator if we were to have any
significant development in this area. I acknowledged that relationships to date were
being left to the good will of a few and that they were quite informal and would
remain significantly underdeveloped if they were continually left to chance.
The Principal was very supportive of the proposal and brought together the
significant stakeholders. These included the university's Deputy Vice Chancellor,
Dean of Education, Dean of the Arts Academy, the school's business manager and a
representative of Education Queensland. The latter representative was considered to
be in a position to support and allocate significant funding to enterprising school-
based projects. However, while this representative espoused interest in collaborative
ventures, he wasn't forthcoming with any support or assistance. Nonetheless, a 'deal'
was done. The position was significantly funded by the Deputy Vice Chancellor and
resulted in some staffing adjustments within the school timetable. I was able to take
up a position that was known to all in the initial stages as the School-University
Links Coordinator.
While the State Government's funding aimed to boost the infrastructure of the
school's renewal vision, there was no specific funding allocated to assist the
development of more entrepreneurial ventures, like a partnership project with a
neighbouring university. Even though the Secondary School Renewal submission
articulated the possibility for some significant school-based/university-accredited
teacher development that could assist teachers state-wide, the funding priorities for
78
significant upgrading to existing teaching spaces was understandably more
imperative.
What is interesting at the stage of presenting the proposal to the Principal is
that I had no idea of other school/university partnerships nationally or
internationally. This was to come later when 1 considered that this project could also
sit within a postgraduate study. Since my enrolment for this study I have become
aware of a number of other school/university partnerships that aim to assist school
reform, particularly in the United States of America. In addition to school reform,
however, my interest during the year assumed that such partnerships could also
assist university reform and the re-culturing that is necessary to embrace the
principles of life-long learning for those involved in these organisations.
I believe that the full potential of what was possible in my placement may not
have been fully realised. I may have even stumbled across bureaucratic politics.
Perhaps the internal politics of both Education Queensland and the university itself
could not permit an 'outsider' to initiate/conceive of something that could be unique
for our state.
In looking back I recall being somewhat perplexed by the fact that as the
initiator of the concept, I was not able to speak to the ideas behind my proposal. I
was to learn later that the bureaucratic systems that exist within Education
Queensland and traditional university structures could not have allowed me this
opportunity. Perhaps this was the first evidence of collaboration by name and not by
reality/practice that I was to encounter.
The year began with a strange sense of not belonging. I no longer had my
position in my own school and I wasn't actually attached to any specific section of
the university. While the coordination position had been approved, the location,
accommodation, and supervision details hadn't been worked out during the
negotiations at the end of the previous year. Consequently, for the first month of my
appointment, I drifted back and forth from my school to various meetings within the
university, returning each day to a table in the middle of my old staff room. I had
forfeited my Head of Department position (and my desk) to a colleague and, while I
79
was more than welcome to stay, this was not the ideal solution. The issue of who
would accommodate me for the year was actually more about who will cover the cost
of a room, computer, printing and supervision. As time went on, it seemed obvious
that the budgets of various schools within the university may have been one of the
many factors that could potentially stifle much good will and creative initiatives.
While the start to the year was a little unsettling, by April I was located within one of
the schools of the university in an office that permitted on-line access to the vast
university community. I was supervised by a Head of School who had a successful
history of collaboration and was involved in some of the earliest discussions of
partnering.
On-line communications were an essential part of university culture, but for
me this was a very new world of work (and communications). It wasn't an essential
part of my teaching world at this stage, although this was soon to change as a result
of Secondary School Renewal, which recognised the importance of technology
infrastructure. While areas of the school had on- line access, essentially only a few
teaching staff, the Principal and a select group of administrators depended on it to the
same degree as the university.
As the year progressed, there was a remarkable increase in on- line
communications between numerous Heads of Department in my school and a
number of university personnel across three Faculties in the main. The on- line
networking was certainly assisted by my placement and the numerous connections I
was making on behalf of my school. In our time-poor world, this on- line
dialogue/discussion can sometimes be forgotten as a most valuable form of informal
networking.
6.02 An isolated vision
One obvious recipe for the success of any collaborative venture is having a
shared vision or goals. As I entered this collaboration, this critical factor was the one
thing that I could detect was not well developed. There was certainly the university's
financial support for my position, and words on paper in the form of the
Memorandum of Understanding that we developed as a result of the collaboration,
80
but neither my position nor the ideas offered in the memorandum were enough to
prompt thinking beyond day-to-day survival in lecturing practice. I discovered in
these early days that many of the essential personnel were unaware of my role.
Consequently, for the first few months, I made a conscious effort to introduce myself
on behalf of the school and the university.
In retrospect a simple introduction at the numerous Faculty meetings may have
improved the situation. What also is important to consider is that two of the three
faculties, that is the Faculty of Education and the Arts Faculty, where I worked
during the year were going through significant re-structure and re-visioning of their
own. The Deans of these Faculties were rarely available because of their evolving
positions/faculties. My supervisor was certainly supportive and helpful but while we
discussed the possibility of a more public launch of the partnership 'Memorandum of
Understanding’ for example, on several occasions nothing actually took place. I
believe that such public exposure could have assisted to overcome my concerns
regarding isolation.
6.03 Confidence in collaboratives
Working collaboratively may not be part of everyone's common
practice/culture and this may be why some who value shared visions and an openness
to continually learn more, may clash with those of the older traditions, in the ir
attempts to develop collaborative and effective partnerships. As a result, in the
attempts to collaborate within a wider circle of two bureaucracies, there have
emerged a number of contradictions between the espoused beliefs behind the reforms
of these organisations’ collaborative goals and the reality of their practice. Equally
important is the necessity to examine the origins of our confidence and experience in
working collaboratively.
Recently I was forced to reflect critically on this matter when preparing my
application for a new position in management of middle school curriculum. It was
during this reflective process that I established the fact that collaborative practices
may not be a strong skill for every teacher and indeed it may be why I had been
81
having difficulties with some of my more recent 'partners' in my school/university
partnership program. Consequently, there is a need for readers to understand from
where my personal confidence and commitment to collaboratives and learning
communities has come. Ultimately, this opportunity to search out and articulate
these connections has been central to the belief I have in my ability to coordinate the
curriculum of my current Middle School.
When I look back to my teaching (and learning) practice, I see a teacher
whose methodologies not only demanded student-centredness, student negotiation,
connectedness/contextualisation but also collaboratives. I was a visual arts
practitioner and whenever my repertoire of experience, confidence and skills was
insufficient to deliver learning outcomes, I would certainly connect with the people
who were more expert. I recall stating to a colleague once that I had no problems
with what I called ‘outsourcing’. This was the term I used to describe my special
learning partnerships. The term ‘collaboratives’ would be more familiar to others
perhaps.
My confidence to ask fellow teachers, to call on students to assist, to call on
my networks, to make links to outside experts, to get involved in community projects,
and engage professional artists for residences, was part of my everyday practice. It
was my way to ensure that I could engage the most disengaged learners, to extend
those whose ideas and skills needed more than I could provide and, of course, to
extend my own knowledge and skills at the same time. I remember some years ago
being approached by some of the school’s most ‘troubled students who wanted to
apply for some funding to undergo a special graffiti project. While I knew very little
about this art form, I certainly could see the benefits of connecting with the city’s
most significant young graffitists and engaging them to be my leaders and teachers.
My students were so engaged in this special project that they not only worked in
class time but many afternoons af ter school and also on weekends, with me their
teacher/facilitator, and, of course with their ‘heroes’ as their mentors.
Looking back, it was also my way of expanding the knowledge and practices
of personnel I worked with/managed. Within my Faculty of six teachers and
approximately 500 students, no one teacher ‘owned’ their class. While we were
assigned our classes to manage, we would recognise the strengths of one another
82
and direct the students accordingly recognising each individual's areas of expertise.
This collaboration between staff was not formally structured or scheduled, but it was
certainly part of our everyday practice. It has been by working within such a
community that I believe I developed the courage to work within much wider
learning communities.
What I realise now is that the very pedagogy that I took for granted, (one
based on collaboratives) is not necessarily the essence of everyone's practice.
Nonetheless, my confidence (and perhaps a little naivety), gave me the courage to go
wider and to involve others. What I was about to experience were significant
collisions that I now believe could have been caused by a community that needed to
be seen as being in control as much as they needed to be seen to be working
collaboratively.
It is hard to explain my thoughts in these early days at the university. There
were days that I felt quite relieved that I had been left to my own to create a number
of proposals and make decisions about who I should meet with, and yet there were
other days that I felt quite isolated and disconnected. These days were when I would
feel quite frustrated about the lack of communications between the Deputy Vice
Chancellor and the university Faculty Heads. It seemed that while I had been given
a position that was recognised by the university's Deputy Vice Chancellor this didn't
seem to make much of a difference to Faculties who had not budgeted for the
projects that I was recommending. This process was essential for the Faculties, as
they certainly didn't seem to have any excess staff to assign to any project that wasn't
in their annual budget. In fact the whole business of costing a project meant that
some conversations or even collaborative thinking couldn't take place. The
costing/contract process meant that most of the time I was receiving quite mixed
messages about the potential of our school/university collaboratives.
My two meetings with the Deputy Vice Chancellor left me with the impression
that authentic partnerships could develop from within this special educational
precinct and could contribute significantly to understanding the challenges that
come with the notion of life-long learning for every learner in this special learning
community. But what emerged from all of these contradictions was a greater need
83
for me to find projects that could assist all concerned and for the last four or so
months of my work I believed I had managed to achieve this goal.
Meetings with various Faculty personnel would often leave me with the
question, " Yes, all very well; but who pays?" or "What's in it for us?" When I look
back and think about the person who was appointed as my university supervisor
(note not my doctoral supervisor), she was often just as bothered and frustrated by
the 'bureaucratic nonsense’ that seemed to make the most practical and simple ideas
into the most overwhelmingly complex equations.
(Refer to Appendices B for the table of artifacts archived/included. The Artifacts for
this section have been archived under the Code: A – 6.03.)
6.04 In search of evidence to support my beliefs - an audit of the teaching staff
In searching for a strategy to overcome some of the barriers I could see
before me, I decided to take an audit of some of the formal and informal links that my
school staff had already established with their neighbouring university.
The audit survey gathered information from approximately seventy teaching
staff and focused on the connections that the school had had with this university over
the past years. It also gathered responses regarding the interest teachers had in
continuing further formal or informal partnerships. There was an overwhelming
response with respect to wanting to continue connections such as undergraduate
teacher supervision, but an even greater interest in the number of teachers who
wanted to supervise interns in their final year of studies. Teachers could see that this
student/teacher relationship was more of a professional learning partnership.
There was also significant interest in staff wanting to network with university
personnel who shared an interest in their particular discipline, as well as continuing
their own studies in post-graduate work. What this latter area of interest revealed
though was not surprising. There were teachers who stated that while further study
84
was something in which they were interested, they didn't believe that they could cope
with the pressures of work, family and study. A number of others, who believed they
had the time, stated that couldn't afford the financial commitment.
The audit also revealed that a significant degree of research by the university
was occurring in the Pre-school to Year 7 school. The connections here come with a
long history of collaboration. In fact, the pre-school arm of this school was a facility
conducted on the university grounds. The centre also conducts a community
playgroup that is not connected to the state government funding. This centre was also
a purpose-built learning centre for undergraduate teachers and was staffed by both
Education Queensland personnel and university personnel. The connections that this
pre-school to Year 7 school has had with the university have been longstanding. As a
result of this history, the university connections have continued beyond the fence of
this early childhood centre through to many of the classes in this small primary
school.
The audit also revealed that throughout any one year there would be
significant research projects occurring in this part of the school, which could involve
the staff, students and/or parents. There were far fewer research or university
connections with the high school (Years 8-12), but there had been a small number of
research studies involving this part of the school over the years. This phenomenon
may not be surprising if you consider that up until recently, when the primary and
secondary school were to amalgamate, few efforts were being made by either party
to collaborate. Consequently, the stronger connections to the university may certainly
have resulted from the attached learning centre.
A number of staff also spoke of key personnel with whom they felt
connected as a result of their own undergraduate or postgraduate studies. Others said
that once their specific contact moved on, their connection with the university was
lost. These teachers were certainly keen to develop further contacts.
The survey was able to confirm my belief that there was a significant number
of staff that valued either formal or informal relationships with our neighbouring
85
university. The audit also confirmed a longstanding belief that I had, that many staff
didn't see formal learning in the form of post-graduate study as critical to their
profession. This didn't necessarily mean that they weren't prepared to continue
learning, but that perhaps the learning that they do 'on the run' every day in their
roles as teachers is more than enough.
In light of the reforms that surround the curriculum of this and many of our
schools, this perception of learning and its potential connection to a university as an
agency of accreditation, is what challenged me to think more widely about
potentially different school and university connections. While there were indeed a
handful of 'traditional' post-graduate types in the staff of this school, there were
others who were participating in very significant, middle school curriculum reforms.
This was development and practitioner learning that I wanted to share with the
university, because this was also a relatively new curriculum focus for the
university’s undergraduate program as well. It seemed obvious to me that both
parties could benefit by building collaboratives in this area.
I was interested in reconceptualising the place of learning, because I
believed that the work-based learning of the teacher is what is of primary interest
and motivation to many of these teachers during this part of their careers. An
analysis of teacher curriculum development and implementation could reveal more
authentic methods of assessing/capturing evidence of teacher-learning as it occurs
on the run. Closely associated to these beliefs is also another that I had with respect
to how student teachers are managed in schools. As a result I found myself in a
position to suggest a slightly different approach to practice teaching for the
undergraduate. As it turned out I believe that this was a successful and timely
experiment.
6.05 An experiment that focused on undergraduate learning
During my early coordination days there were a number of unfinished tasks
in my previous position that needed to be completed. One was the completion of the
specific art curriculum outline for the senior students at our school. In order to be an
accredited program of study, this school-based curriculum document had to
86
acknowledge the key principles of the then Board of Senior Secondary School
Studies’ Art Syllabus document. It also required the recognition of everything that
needed to be retained in our existing practice. To assist in writing this document, I
involved a final-year undergraduate who was undertaking her practicum in our
department. Her brief was to record and write up the discussions that came out of the
review of our existing curriculum as we moved towards the new program framework,
and to assist in the development of the new work program.
The undergraduate's knowledge of the Senior Art Syllabus was gained from
her university course work, and was possibly greater than even that of the teachers.
However, the teachers drew upon a vast amount of practice and experience to bring
to their new curriculum document, but had very little time to fully understand the
specifics of the on- line curriculum templates and accreditation requirements. The
final-year undergraduate was also a confident writer and she was happy to become
the writer for the team’s thinking. I was the facilitator who had an extensive
understanding the syllabus requirements, and I also had the management skills that
enabled me to prompt a critical review of existing practice. The review of our
existing program and practice gave teachers the opportunity to articulate how their
practice and approaches were able to fit into the new syllabus framework. The
confidence and time to write into a web-based template was also within the strengths
of the practising teacher.
Historically, the typing of school-based curriculum documents has been done
by the school typing pool but, more recently, syllabus guidelines and program-
writing templates have been made available electronically, and have permitted
teachers to write directly into pages on- line. This approach to writing was quite
unfamiliar to these classroom teachers at the time, who were not working on- line
every day. It was, however, part of the everyday practice for the undergraduate
student.
This inclusive team approach was a very different way of working for the
undergraduate teacher. More typically university students look on from the sideline,
or are cautiously appointed a section of the curriculum to deliver in a specific
timeframe to a safe group of students. This model allowed this student to practice
87
teaching but also allowed her the opportunity to experience authentic curriculum
development, and to work collaboratively within the team in a capacity that
acknowledged her strengths and gave her a richer set of experiences as a result.
This trial/experiment was certainly successful for all participants. This
experience also gave me the confidence and evidence that I needed to question some
of the practicums we offer our student teachers. The possibility of undergraduates
having more on-site learning than they did at the time was certainly taken on board
by a number of key personnel in the university, and this gave me the green light to
pursue this direction for my partnering connections that could assist not only the
teacher-learner but also the undergraduate learner.
(Refer to Appendix B for the table of artifacts archived/included. A written response
artifact related to this area is published in Appendix F- under Response No. 1 and
with Archival Code WR-6.05.)
6.06 A trial of accelerating pathways for senior students
From the Principal's perspective, one of the most important outcomes from the
partnership agreement would have been to assist in the placement of senior students
in university studies while in their final year of secondary school studies. This had
already been possible for a number of years for our very gifted music students. For
example, another university had offered first year units of tertiary study to several
outstanding music students in their final senior year. But the university right next
door, at the time of my appointment was not particularly interested in the idea at first.
In pursuing this area I discovered that our neighbouring university had been
running a similar program but out of another campus. This program was offered
through a campus situated closer to suburbs containing families of lower socio-
economic status of families who were less inclined to take on tertiary level study.
The scholarships that this campus offered were funded by the university’s Vice
Chancellor to recruit students into specific areas of study being offered on that
campus.
88
The program already being offered at this distant campus had been running
successfully for three years and yet very few on the other two campuses had heard of
its existence. After making the necessary introductions, the programme's coordinator
was able to share valuable selection and support processes, as well as the successes
and failures of the seniors, who chose these pathways during their senior years.
The distinct difference between the university's campuses was not apparent to
me at first and of course I was left wondering why similar programs were not offered
on all campuses. When I realised that it was a recruiting exercise for the other
campus to increase numbers in specific Faculties, I understood the resistance I had
faced with respect to offering a number of star students to the university for a trial.
The Faculties that I was attempting to connect with had no recruiting problems and
no real reason to offer these opportunities to our students. However, this left me to
pursue the areas which may have been struggling, and therefore be more conscious
of the concept and subsequent programs that I would endeavour to base on 'quid pro
quo' agreements.
In addition to working with the Faculty of Education, my role also involved
finding positions for students in the Arts Faculty as well as the Faculty of Built
Environment and Engineering. The relationships that I had developed with a number
of colleagues in these two Faculties before taking on my coordination role were
strong and long-lasting and lent themselves to development and expansion.
Specifically, where once my areas of interest with these Faculties focused on the
visual arts and design, the relationships with these sub-schools allowed me to be
introduced to additional departments/sub-schools within these faculties. Within two
of these sub-schools I was able to trial the placement of our first two senior students
who wished to undertake a tertiary level subject while in their last semester of Year
12 studies. This trial assisted in adding valuable information to the knowledge I had
already acquired from the other campus program. The implementation of this trial
program was quite simple, once the enrolment issues were resolved. Even before we
had confirmed the waiving of fees with the Vice Chancellor's office, the sheer
goodwill and genuine interest of the associated sub-schools permitted three of our
Year 12 students to start their university studies in Year 12. One completed two units
in design/architecture, and the other started but didn’t complete her studies in music
89
education. Because I was able to present the fact that a similar program had already
been supported, the enrolment issues were resolved by seeking information from
Admissions on the processing of similar students on the other campus.
In the case of the student who studied the design/architectural units, there was
a genuine interest in the design abilities of our senior students generally. This
confidence in our students may have been as a result of our long-standing
relationship. In may also have been assisted by the Head of Department’s strong
support and respect for accelerated pathways. However, in the case of the music
student, the Head of the sub-school and Dean of this Faculty made it very clear that
although they recognised significant strength in the student's ability and the
excellence in this area of the school, they would only be making this one offer.
The trial brought to light a number of important recommendations that were
subsequently shared with an appointed coordinator of similar university programs
that developed shortly after my students had started. The most critical considerations
for our students included: the importance of having the right subject available for the
student; the student having the time to commit to the extra work; and the necessity
for having clear communications and support systems in place for the students.
In the case of the architectural/design student we could be sure that all of
these requirements were addressed. However, in the case of the music education
student, we could only offer a music technologies subject which initially seemed
fine, but demanded far too much after-hours’ work in the university laboratories. The
demands of extra-curricular activity on this student before she undertook the
university unit was an initial concern, and in retrospect, we should have been able to
anticipate the extra stress this unit would place on a student who was perhaps already
experiencing significant extra-curricula overload. The music student consequently
failed to complete the course, and felt too embarrassed to apply for a position after
finishing her senior year. The built environment/design student was able to complete
his course after overcoming some end-of-semester exam fears and was able to
continue studying in this area for his tertiary studies.
90
During the time that this trial was taking place, I was able to establish that
there were obvious sub-schools within the university that could benefit by linking
with a school that could provide some excellent students to their courses. After
meeting with the Dean of Education, for example, it was established that there could
be a round of offers for courses in the following year, but with a focus on areas of
education that needed assistance with recruiting. This focus led to finding suitable
male students for the early childhood and primary teaching areas; higher-achieving
students in the all teaching areas generally, but recognising the needs of mathematics
and science teaching areas in particular. Indigenous students, who wanted to
undertake studies in education, were also recognised at this time. By the end of the
academic year, I had placed several students in some, but not all of the areas, for
commencement in the following year.
The selection process for these students involved many hours of consultation,
presentation, personal interviews, reference checking and final deliberations. During
this time, I was given some administrative assistance from the university, my school
administration, and the newly appointed Education Liaison Officer attached to the
Faculty of Education. The most extraordinary outcome of this program was the
coincidental development of a similar scholarships’ program that was offered across
most Faculties of the university. The directives to the Deans indicated that their
participation was essential for the promotion of their university, and that they should
budget accordingly to start students for the following year who were still completing
their senior studies.
The procedures for selecting suitable candidates were established in
consultation with my supervisor and Principal. It was during this time that my
supervisor was assigned a work-shadowing colleague from the publishing section of
the university. The work-shadowing or mentoring process was a part of the
university's program to provide support for female employees. This person was
interested in the school-university partnerships program and as a consequence,
shadowed/assisted my work during this period. The fact that she was actually
supposed to be shadowing the Head of a School meant that we all agreed to meet for
updates on the project once a week for the four weeks. This was a positive outcome
91
for me, as I had never been able to meet with such regularity and focus with my
supervisor in all the time of the program. As a consequence, the intensity of focus
allowed this project (and aspects of others) to take shape much more quickly as the
end of my appointment approached.
The Education Liaison Officer's assistance was also helpful in providing
specific information about suitable units of work and enrolment details. She also
became the key support person for the candidates who were studying under the
Faculty of Education. Her position was new to the Faculty of Education and part of
this role was to assist with our school-university partnership projects. The officer
appointed had previous experience as a high school teacher and took up this new
position shortly after I had started in my position.
To some extent I believe that she would have felt quite overwhelmed with all
that her role required for the first six months. The position required a broad
understanding of all the schools in the Faculty of Education and most importantly, a
strong public relations role with the high schools in the community to assist in the
placement of the university's undergraduate teachers. There were a number of
occasions on which I was instructed by the Dean to work with the Liaison Officer
and share my ideas and project details. However, the depth of this person's thinking
and perhaps teaching experience at this stage seemed quite limited. Her lack of
authority and inability to make direct decisions frustrated me at times. Because of my
limited time, I preferred to speak directly to those who could approve projects or at
least give me significant guidance. After meeting with this officer on several
occasions I came to the conclusion that I couldn't be guaranteed that the essence of
what I was trying to develop was in fact understood. The lines of communication
were consistently frustrated.
(Refer to Appendix B for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area have been archived under the Code: A – 6.06.)
92
6.07 The virtual workplace project
The Virtual Workplace Project was a significant trial project that was
organised by the Faculty of Education and funded by a Federal Government grant. It
involved a number of Queensland school partners and basically, it aimed to bring
authentic, school, classroom environments to the lecture theatres of the university.
Special telecommunication links with the participating schools allowed a number of
classrooms to be video-linked to the undergraduates' lecture theatres. One of my
earliest duties as coordinator was to find a number of classrooms (and staff
participants) from my own school to be video- linked to the undergraduates’ lecture
theatres. As a result, I was able to link our two, key, New Basics teachers as well as
a teacher of English to the program. These teachers allowed specific classes to be
video-linked to the university and were also prepared to discuss with the
undergraduates the planning and preparation for their lessons. The live video- links
also allowed the teachers to participate in some post- lesson discussion. These
discussions allowed undergraduate students to ask questions directly to the teacher
via the telecommunications. The project was a great success and was able to bring
the theory and practice of teaching and learning closer together.
The Virtual Workplace Project team member, who oversaw the professional
development program of the project, was able to introduce teachers to the concept of
learning circles. This was our school’s reward for the school’s participation in the
Virtual Workplace Project. The participants could bring their professional
development needs to the agenda of the learning circle workshops. In addition they
could seek out experts in the particular field that could assist with their development.
In the first instance the professional contacts were supplied free to the school because
they were funded by the grant awarded to the university specifically for this program.
Incorporated into the program was an opportunity to continue with the learning
circles with the financial assistance of an additional successful grant application. The
services of the university consultant and other guest speakers could therefore
continue if the school was able to secure extra funding. I was able to assist in
applying for funding to facilitate further work in the learning circle arm of this
project via Education Queensland's Learning and Development program. The school
93
was successful in its bid and the learning circle work continued to a degree after I
had to leave my position the following year.
While it was most probably envisaged that the participating teacher would
have been involved with the university’s professional development workshops, this
was not the case. Only a very small group of teachers found the time to meet as a
group for the few afternoons that the workshops were offered. The teachers involved
were perhaps the ones who were involved in most aspects of development at the
school and were not generally representative of the whole staff.
It was exciting to be able to assist in writing our school into this program’s
application. As a concept it seemed quite useful for our school and certainly brought
with it a secure consultancy for the university. The initial stage of the program,
which allowed for the learning circle concept to he introduced, also seemed quite a
realistic method of developing teachers. In reality, the lack of response from teachers
has to be acknowledged and examined in light of teacher interest in professional
learning of this type. The resistance to the learning circle involvement was mostly
attributed to lack of time that teachers have to be involved in professional dialogue
that may not be meeting their most immediate personal needs.
The learning circle meetings were always provided with lovely food, but they
were also after school and they ran quite late into the afternoon/early evening. While
the small group of teachers involved weren’t pressured into participating, their
attendance was mostly in support of the Deputy in charge.
The earlier 'free' introduction to the learning circle method was also an example to
the university putting a 'quid-pro-quo' deal in place. It is only upon reflection that I
have come to this realisation and that is important in light of the fact that the
university's key workshop leader was also most receptive and supportive of one of my
later reciprocal proposals,' The Work-based Learning Project' and consequently the
one person who I left to continue this work when I moved on. (Refer below for details
of this project)
94
(Refer to Appendix B for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area are archived under the Code: A – 6.07. A written response artifact related to
this area is published in Appendix F under Written Response No. 2 and with archival
Code WR-6.07.)
6.08 Student exhibitions and workshops
Before taking up my position as a links coordinator, our school had been able
to exhibit our students’ work in one of the university gallery spaces. My objective
here was to provide our students with an exhibition space and to share their
achievements with the community. During my time as a coordinator, the teachers and
acting head of my department successfully continued this practice. In addition to an
exhibition of artworks, our design students exhibited the outcomes of a major school
community design project in the studios of the Built Environment Faculty of the
university. Similar efforts to share the talents of our students came with another
funded project that allowed a number of our talented Year 11 visual art, multi-media,
and dance students, to workshop over several weeks on Wednesday afternoons.
These special efforts to bring the talents and skills of students closer to the university
were certainly assisted by having my coordination position.
Additional workshops for our senior visual arts students, who wished to be
assisted in folio development, were also offered by the Arts Academy. The program
was short and potentially very sound, but the lack of time and coordinated focus
resulted in a number of students finding the offer very limited and lacking in
organisation. The program called on the services of some of the university's final-
year art-teaching students to assist in the practical workshops and was coordinated by
a senior lecturer. The involvement of the university students was aimed at giving
these student teachers experience with very talented high school students in studio
spaces, as distinct from the typical practice-teaching classroom. My input into this
program was in the initial design stages. The concept was prepared and delivered
within a very short period of time and in retrospect this, and the fact that many
lecturers were already very busy and therefore without time to assist their senior
colleague, may have been the weakness of this program.
95
The efforts of specific individuals who had already established strong links
with our school over the years also assisted these programs. Although these people
were just as time-poor as any other personnel in the university, they always seemed
to be able to maintain their connection with us. It seems then that
relationships/partnerships take time and perhaps years to develop trust/respect.
6.09 The courage to create substantial programs of partnering through stronger
relationships
In addition to establishing links with Faculty members involved in the
scholarships’ program for students to undertake in the next semester, a number of
additional professional partnerships/relationships had been established by the second
half of my year. These partnerships were with like-minded members of this
organisation's micro-worlds. They were contacts within the schools of various
university Faculties with whom I would meet to develop a number of significant
proposals and programs.
A School-Based Learning Proposal for Teachers and Undergraduates was an
example of one of the more complex proposals that wasn’t fully developed to the
implementation stage but none the less contains some of my thinking at the time.
Another proposed collaborative that could be delivered was the Design Educators
Post-Graduate Studies Project. These two proposed programs are briefly outlined
below and are examples of programs that can emerge from strong partnerships.
These programs are also examples of programs that would need the strength
of successful grant applications, direct payment by students or significant quid pro
quo arrangements. Each program required substantial collaborative development and
planning. Some are still in development and will continue to be sustained by their
relevant school and university groups.
6.10 The school-based learning proposal for teachers and undergraduates
The confidence to develop the school-based learning proposal was inspired
by the work I had done earlier in the year with our final year student teacher. It was
96
my belief that work-based learning could be something quite different from practice
teaching. The program proposed that the school offer fieldwork experiences that
could sit within the existing undergraduate program. For example, students could
assist in the organisation and management of sports carnivals, musicals, and other
arts events; assist with the management and distribution of teaching resources; or
assist in the management of such initiatives as the anti-bullying program; etc. These
opportunities allow the university student to work within areas of the school that they
wouldn't normally have the time or opportunity to do during their regular practicum.
In return for offering this opportunity to the university, the school was to
receive some university post-graduate studies units at no cost for the professional
development of teachers. If the teachers wished, they could fulfil the assessment
requirements of these units and have them count toward a post-graduate degree. The
sub-schools attached to the placements for teaching practice and the revision of the
existing undergraduate courses were quite interested in this program. The additional
quid pro quo arrangement, however, added a level of complexity that needed to be
resolved in order to do the costing for this project. For example, the numbers of
teachers who may be interested in post-graduate units needed to be established and
secondly, the school's list of potential field placements needed to be gathered.
The staff who were interested in formal post-graduate studies indicated this in
the audit conducted at the beginning of the year. Those interested were contacted.
Information regarding courses and units was shared with sixteen staff out of a total of
seventy surveyed. Personnel from the university were able to meet informally with
the group to give an outline of their courses and answer any questions. The teachers
were very pleased to be offered an opportunity to participate in this program. They
were excited by the prospect of being able to relate some of their existing curriculum
revision to the assessment program of some units. They also realised that while it
was important to identify the units they wished to study, the program still needed to
have the Dean’s approval. Teachers were quite aware that their involvement in the
program would require them to play a special supervisory role with a university
student on work placement within the school. After several weeks of waiting to hear
if this program could go ahead, only two teachers remained interested in
participating. Time may have frustrated some, but a number of the teachers when
97
pushed to committing to formal study, decided that their personal/family lives could
not cope with this decision.
The school as a whole was very interested in the field placement concept and
so too was the university. In retrospect, the complexity came when trying to fit
placements into the program of teacher professional development. Again and again I
wanted to be able to put a deal together that could encourage teachers to participate
in university courses. Another idea I had at one time was to attach/match
undergraduate intern learners with teacher post-graduate learners. Perhaps my
obsession with opportunities for teachers' formal learning opportunities developed
out of some kind of guilt. I sometimes felt that in having a Master’s Degree, and then
undertaking a doctoral study while being given an opportunity to work offline in my
coordinator's position, placed me in a more fortunate position than others. Perhaps I
believed that by placing some of our staff in courses, free of charge, I would receive
some kind of approval from my peers.
The latest discussions that occurred regarding this program were also
considering a voucher system by which the school or the teachers involved might be
able in receive credit for a particular number of units of study, to use as they wish.
The development of this proposal was left in the hands of some of the university
personnel involved in the earlier planning and discussions. To date I am unsure as to
the developments. I think that in reality it would be better to take out the expectation
to reward the school or teachers with units of study, as it would surely be enough to
get the extra assistance of undergraduate students in the school workplace. This
leaves me feeling that perhaps my initial idea of matching the undergraduate
learner with the post-graduate teacher-learner may have been a more successful
concept to develop.
(Refer to Appendix B for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area are archived under the Code: A – 6.10.)
98
6.11 The design educators’ post-graduate studies project
Interest in Design Education as part of the high school's Visual Arts and
Applied Technology Department's curriculum had been developing over a number of
years. Along the way, some contacts with the Built Environment/Design sub-school
of the university had already been established. During my appointment I was able to
suggest that investigating the professional development needs of our teachers could
support the interest that the university had in working with teachers in these areas
throughout the state. As a consequence, six of our teachers in the Visual Arts and
Applied Technologies participated in a ten-day field trip with the Built
Environment/Design lecturers and their first-year undergraduates. The field trip
required them to participate firstly as students and then as teachers of Design. This
collaboration was able to assist in developing ideas for post-graduate units of
study in Design Education and also assisted in developing the school’s art and
design teachers’ understanding of Design Education.
(Refer to Appendix B for the table of artifacts archived/included. A written response
artifact related to this area is published in Appendix F - under Response No. 3 and
with archival Code WR-6.11.)
6.12 Moving on
As my year came to a close, I was quite concerned about finding funds to
secure the position I held for at least another year. It was too embarrassing to
consider asking the university to fund the position for yet another year. In addition I
also realised that the Deputy Vice Chancellor, who was the most supportive of the
position, was out of the country for several months and not returning until the New
Year. As a result, I applied for a grant through Education Queensland's Learning
and Development Program. The application was written on behalf of my school and
submitted by the Principal. It requested funding to manage the existing programs
and to continue the development of the significant work that we had accomplished to
date. The application was approved for funds to engage consultants for the Project-
based Learning Proposal but funds to engage an employee of the participating
school were not approved. This was quite disappointing for both my Principal and
99
myself. I had my position in my school to return to but I felt a need to move on and
confident enough to accept another challenge with a new position in an independent
school.
6.13 Connecting the narratives
It was Proudford (2003), in her discussions of reculturing and schools
working as learning organisations, who emphasised the importance of schools
creating professional learning communities by design rather than by default. It was
this important emphasis that best summarises the direction and shaping of my second
narrative Coordinating Connections—Confidence, Contradictions, Control and
Collisions in Collaboration.
My second narrative is set in a different context. It is the narrative of my first
two-and-a-half years in a new role as a curriculum manager in the Middle School
that was part of a large, private, single-sex school in Queensland. Upon reflection, I
can now say that, as a result of writing my first narrative, I came to realise the
essential values that I now hold as critical to my curriculum leadership practice. For
example, as Narrative Number One suggests, it would seem that I have always
valued the importance of building relations and establishing connections for my own
learning and teaching. Understanding these to be an essential component for my
professional growth gave me the confidence to nurture similar relationships for
professional learning for a school community. What I did not realise at the time was
that much of the current curriculum and school reform literature reflects similar
values and argues strongly for professional learning communities to lead reform and
associated teacher learning.
Still a narrative about ‘Coordinating Connections, Confidence, Contradictions,
Control and Collisions in Collaboration’, but a new chapter in my life:
My second narrative reflects this purposeful transition in my role. Most
importantly, it is still a narrative about coordinating connections—confidence,
contradictions, control and collisions in collaboration. Once again it evidences the
core beliefs and values that surfaced from the work in my first narrative. It is also
essential to understand that this second narrative reflects a period of practice and
100
research when I was specifically connecting my review of the literature to my daily
work. As such, the literature that surrounded my practice and consequently my
narratives focuses on the areas of narrative inquiry, action research and self-study
methodologies, as well as the literature associated with the leadership and teacher-
learning connected to curriculum reform and school capacity building.
The associated investigative elements that assist in capturing the snapshots of my
work for ‘Narrative Number Two’:
Specifically this second narrative reflects a transformative process, and it was
written with these specific investigative elements in mind. These elements have
surfaced from the writings of Narrative Number One, and the associated literature
that was being reviewed at the time and since. As a result, these investigative
elements have assisted in identifying, selecting and organising the significant
snapshots of my practice that will inform this second narrative. These key
investigative elements have included:
• snapshots of my practice that related to the deconstruction and reconstruction
of a school culture. These snapshots reflect the features of the school
operating as a learning organisation
• snapshots of my school community practice that related to the reconstruction
of communities of practice and the significance of parallel teacher-leader
relationships to assist parallel learning partnerships and parallel learning
leadership.
The narrative is not a blow-by-blow recollection of all events but it is a narrative that
allows for further exploration of my leadership and how I can improve my practice in
times of reform.
Chapter: 7 Confidence With Collaboratives
101
Chapter 7 Confidence with Collaboratives: Narrative Number Two
The following narrative captures my work and my leadership role over a
three-year period in a different school setting. It was the private boys’ school that I
had moved to after my work as a school-university links coordinator. While a new
and very different setting, the narrative has still focused on coordinating connections,
confidence, contradictions, control and collisions in collaboration.
This second narrative first examines how important it was for me to build the
credibility and trust in this second school, and to identify the important collaboratives
and teaming that I established to assist shared visions. This narrative also emphasises
how I have assisted in developing a number of organisational structures and
communities of practice through curriculum leadership designed to assist teacher
learning. The narrative captures three years of work and finishes at a time when my
position was reshaped and a number of new relationships and teams were about to
begin.
7.01 Building new credibility and trust in a tough culture – the beginnings of a
cultural deconstruction and reconstruction process
Before I arrived at the school, a number of working parties were formed to
investigate the relatively new and emerging national principles of middle schooling,
with the hope to imbed many of these principles within their faculty-based
curriculum structures. These working parties allowed many new opportunities for
leadership and ensured a critical mass of keen middle schooling advocates to emerge
and develop across the school.
After a year of research and some significant changes to parts of the school’s
physical infrastructure, a middle school precinct for boys in Years 7-9 was
established. It had its own Head of Middle School, and an equivalent Head of Senior
School was established to manage the boys from Years 10-12. There was also a Head
of School for our external campus. The Head of School for the external campus
managed the Middle School learning- in-context programs as well as the outdoor
102
education programs for the whole of school. During this period of restructure,
several form teachers were appointed to work as key middle school pastoral carers.
These teachers were also core subject teachers and were important in building the
curriculum and pastoral bridges between the external campus where our learning- in-
context program was delivered and the normal middle school program. Together,
these appointments meant that there were some significant changes for the general
school staffing. Until this time, the school administration team had held very senior
positions, managing and administrating the pastoral and academic programs of the
whole school from the top.
By the end of my first term I had realised that the restructuring was
significant in light of this school’s history. By the second half of my first year, I also
saw a need for further appointments and a need for significant support infrastructure
like information technology and a reconstruction of some of the timetabling
traditions to ensure the potential of this Middle School.
Reflecting on some of the organisational changes that were embedded before
I arrived, like the appointment of the first Head of Middle School and the several
form teachers, I now understand the tensions that these administrative changes
seemed to have caused with others in the school. For example, there were many
times in my first few months where I found that I was being faced with a number of
unnecessary hurdles to jump over. Almost every day for example, I would receive an
extra teaching period to supervise. These supervisions were appointed according to
your allocated teaching load and the extra time that you may have for preparation
and correction time. It seemed that while my position and workload was considered
to be very comprehensive by those in the Middle School, others who were less aware
of my work, (and perhaps not in favour of the new administrative structures), deemed
my load as being too light and therefore worthy of attracting extra duties.
Unfortunately for me it was the latter group of administrators who were also
charged with delegating the ‘daily extras’.
These extra lessons each day, combined with quite a significant teaching load
in my first year of appointment, was disconcerting and at the time very
103
overwhelming. I knew there was little that anyone could do to change the attitudes
of those who were less receptive to the changes and that for the interim I had to
continue doing the best I could with the time that I had. The invisible divide between
the sub-schools that I was experiencing indirectly was not only evident through my
extra teaching periods every day, but also through the resistance to allow significant
middle school professional development opportunities. This was quite significant. On
many occasions I attached this resistance to a small but significantly powerful
number of administrators who couldn’t accept the pastoral or curriculum
restructures that came with the introduction of our Middle School.
I recall discussing these early days with the Headmaster after my first year
and he said very confidently that I had earned enormous respect from many across
the school for doing what I did in my first year and while he knew how hard my
relocation had been, he could see it was necessary in this very new and tough culture
(and powerful sub-cultures). I recall that he said that he would always argue for
administrators to be teaching in his school to maintain their credibility with the staff,
students and parents. He was correct. The credibility and learning that came from
being attached to a class and a form group was enormous. I had the opportunity to
work as a religious education teacher, where I experimented in moving what had
traditionally been a teacher-driven curriculum to a more student-centred, project-
based approach to learning. This was well received by the coordinator for this
curriculum area who could see that there was certainly room for improvement and
we agreed to make some significant changes to the whole course. For the first time it
seemed he had someone on his team who was willing to assist him to make some
changes. He had a partner in his quest for change.
The role I played as a form teacher also showed me the intense connection
the role has to have to the parent group. I had been a form teacher in previous
schools but this school’s structures and expectations were significantly different. The
form teacher at this school was essential for tracking attendance, behaviour and
academic improvement/decline. The parental contact was significantly greater than
for any other form teacher’s role that I had experienced in my twenty years of
teaching. Parents were aware that all form teachers could be contacted directly by
104
phone or email at any time during the school day. This contact was seen as essential
for communications regarding academic and social progress or concern.
In addition to a long history of curriculum management from the ‘top’, the
school had had a long history of a vertical house system as their key pastoral care
structure. For many still today who head these houses and only teach senior school
students, there seemed to be too much tradition to forego.
My position was new and the road wasn’t only rocky at times but not
particularly well-defined. In retrospect, this wasn’t surprising because at this time in
Queensland there weren’t many middle school deputies. On many occasions, this
meant that I had to take the initiative of what needed to be discussed with the
Headmaster and my Head of sub-school. In retrospect this was a fortunate position
and suited my creative nature. I was conscious, however, that while my brief wasn’t
exactly crystal clear, I needed to be sure that my beliefs were aligned with the
intentions of my Head of sub-school and the Headmaster.
Consequently it was important in the early stages of my first year to arrange
a meeting with the Headmaster to check the future directions that were in my mind
were aligned with the whole school vision.
The following points, therefore, were articulated by the end of my first month
in a meeting that I arranged with the Headmaster at that time. The key points for our
discussions sought his views on:
• technology-supported, project-based learning. This meant some significant
changes in teacher pedagogy and also required that we have technology-
supported learning environments
• authentic assessment methodologies, supported by portfolio assessment and
potentially digital portfolio methods in the longer term, and assistant heads
as learning leaders.
It was at this meeting that I became aware of the significant groundwork and
research that had taken place before the Middle School was established. All the
papers from the working party were shared with me. This was very helpful in
105
understanding the connections and history of key people in the establishment of the
Middle School and of course an awareness of those who were not involved was also
interesting to consider. The Headmaster’s response to the directions that I had
outlined was positive and he agreed that these were aligned with the initial ideals of
the early middle school working party.
I also recall in my first year making no apologies for my advocacy for middle
schooling. This was generally needed when I could see that some of the staffing or
resourcing decisions were less than considerate of the Middle School. Later I could
see that if I continued with such gusto, we were in danger of creating a new type of
silo effect. In retrospect, I also recall the important leadership the Headmaster
played in assisting the Middle School to move foreword with respect to staffing and
timetabling. He and the Head of the sub-school were instrumental in placing the
Middle School with as much staffing priority as the Senior School and respected that
our staffing needed a ‘certain type’ of teacher rather than using the teachers who
remained after the staffing of the Senior School had been decided.
The original Head of the Middle School had retired at the end of my first
year. The newly appointed Head of Middle School was very competitive by nature.
His commitment to setting specific goals for his Middle School was encouraging but
in retrospect, however, they were goals that seemed quite sub-school specific and
with little articulated reference to whole school direction. These Middle School goals
were set with the Assistant Heads of Faculty in mind. Others in the Middle School
would not have been aware of them until more recently when they became more
overtly articulated in the staff appraisal system.
The Assistant Heads of Faculty held new and valuable positions in the sub-
school structure and were able to sharpen the focus on pedagogy and assessment for
their specific Key Learning Area (KLA) in the Middle School. They were able to
assist in moving our vision from an isolated rhetoric into a practised reality. Before
this there certainly was a culture of competitiveness and little evidence of alignment,
teaming or collaboration within the Middle School. What it did reveal, however, was
how critical these positions were and how important these new learning partners
were for the heads of the various faculties. A new team of leaders was therefore
106
created to assist the development and implementation of middle school curriculum.
The management of this team was my responsibility and has been significant in
creating a community of practice; a culture of learning leaders with shared visions
and values.
(Refer to Appendix C for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area have been archived under the Code: A – 7.01.)
7.02 Avoiding an isolated vision yet again…strength in collaboratives and teams
In addition to the team of Assistant Heads of Faculty, the leadership roles that
came with the positions for form teachers were also supported by addit ional teaming
structures to assist the focus on pastoral and academic development of the students in
each form. These structures allowed teams of three forms to be managed by one of
the three form teachers. (Later these forms were grouped into two groups of three
and one of two). One form teacher in each team was appointed as team leader. These
leaders with the assistance of the other two form teachers in each team, certainly
assisted the administrative and inevitable behaviour management/pastoral duties that
came with the Middle School in its first few years. The matrix/table that I created to
specify the form teachers and co-teachers of each form was initially designed to
assist the staffing of these positions. It soon became known as The Middle School
Staffing Matrix and is used to quickly identify all the teachers in any one team, or
year level, by form and by subject area. It assists integration possibilities by
providing the teachers with a quick summary of all teachers in their learning team.
As such it has proven to be a very valuable resource for many reasons, but mostly
because it presents the best holistic picture of staffing in the Middle School.
In these initial stages, however, this team leader/form teacher structure still
left the curriculum to be managed by the Heads of Faculty. The management of
curriculum by Heads of Faculties is not an uncommon model for many of our school
structures in Queensland. This balkanised curriculum management/leadership
structure however, was altered slightly though, with the introduction of my position
and the others that came a little later in the form of Assistant Heads of Faculty.
107
Some Heads of Faculty saw my appointment as the Middle School
Curriculum Coordinator/Deputy as supportive and with huge possibilities. Others, I
am sure, would have seen it as quite unnecessary, and therefore a number were
possibly quite sceptical. I felt reassured, however, by the support and vision that
came from my Head of sub-school and school’s Headmaster. They saw my role
necessary for the next phase of the middle school development and believed that I
could effect the changes they envisaged for pedagogy and assessment.
The key question therefore that many would ask in my first year therefore
was: ‘How did the curriculum roles of the Heads of Faculty connect with mine?’
After working closely with many Heads of Faculty in my previous school and as the
school-university links coordinator, I knew that there were significant benefits in
having the subject specific knowledge that comes with Heads of Faculty, but I was
also conscious of the obstacles this model creates for a shared understanding of
learning and teaching practices.
After spending considerable time throughout the first year of my appointment
getting to know the key areas of concern and future middle school direction for each
individual faculty area, I concluded that there were extreme variations in the degree
of middle school curriculum management and leadership by these key personnel and
certainly no collective vis ion to assist our alignment. With the exception of one Head
of Faculty, they all taught in the Senior School and were happy for things to remain
that way. There were enormous senior schooling pressures that seemed to take
priority for many and little time for the renewed middle school emphasis that we
needed for teaching and learning in the middle years’ program.
Regarding the conclusions of my findings, I also recognised very early that
my position was not to say how, the how of teaching, should take place, but to find
the examples that existed and showcase these for all to consider. Therefore, I saw
my role as someone who could build forums and relationships for sharing and
reflecting on practice so as to better understand our own and other’s practice. At first
these were relationships with a core group of teachers who were willing to take some
risks with their teaching and be supported in doing so. This simple goal evolved
slowly and it was most probably based on building trust and credibility with those
108
whose practice was certainly worthy of celebration and sharing. What emerged was a
critical mass of teachers with similar visions and passion for learning and teaching.
I knew that there were many who if given the chance had so much to share
about their practice. I respected that this school like many others would have
potentially powerful pockets of practice that needed sharing and bringing to the
surface. I also knew that there needed to be opportunity for more leadership and
collaboration. Therefore, without changing the timetable structures or curriculum
subject choices, I proceeded to allow for others to lead and assist others by
encouraging collaboratives for learning. What was now in place were horizontal
and vertical learning teams, where we had teachers of subjects talking and reflecting
across the year levels (vertical) and also teachers talking across the curriculum
(horizontal teams), looking for overlap and potential integration. This is what I
mean by horizontal teams. These teams of teachers also come together when
necessary to discuss the children they share. This allows a strategic team approach
to any behavioural/pastoral issues where teachers hear from one another about what
works and what may not be working. Also it allows our form teachers to see the
whole picture. The form teacher has a critical eye on all the results that come in from
the various teachers and can inform parents generally, as well as in the specific
areas they teach.
My priority then in my second year was to continue to find powerful pockets
of best practice and bring them out into the open. This allowed significant learning
leadership to emerge and for teaching practices and pedagogy to be made more
overt and explicit. Some of these practices included giving leadership for imbedding
information technologies into a wider number of classrooms, allowing
transdisciplinary learning to be move beyond the Social Science, English,
Mathematics and Science areas and to be led by a Design Technology project based
on making a cooking device which uses alternative energy. Another pocket of
expertise sat within our Drama faculty. These teachers seemed to be much further
advanced in their knowledge and understanding of the Queensland Studies
Authority’s outcomes approach to planning and assessment. It made sense then to
have these teachers share their practice with others in their school. This started to
109
bring our teaching principles out into the open, thus empowering others by tapping
into their personal quests.
After my first year in this role, it became obvious to me and the Head of
Middle School that, while the team leaders were a significant support pastorally and
administratively, the sub-school needed to have its learning programs managed more
explicitly than was possible by the Heads of Faculty. There were new outcomes-
based syllabi to be implemented as well as a renewed focus on project-based
integrated learning. As a result the School Council and Headmaster approved the
appointments of the new positions of Assistant Heads of Faculty to support the
Heads of Faculty roles. These people could give the middle school curriculum the
teaching and learning focus it seemed to be missing.
My leadership practice was reassured and supported also by the work that I
was doing with a number of outside consultants in these first two years. One
consultant, who was engaged to assist our understanding of boys learning and our
understanding of the social-emotional development of our boys, was also interested
in how well our middle school principles and goals were articulated and how we
assisted our teachers to own these. He too could understand the importance of teams
of learning leaders and the necessity of this for cultural change.
While his initial work was with the social emotional development that our
pastoral care/form teachers could develop, the outcomes of his work moved closer to
recognising that our curriculum was also in need of serious leadership. At one time I
recall wondering if the position of team leader could carry both the pastoral and
curriculum roles. In retrospect this would have required too much of one person.
What was realised then, was that one staffing structure was necessary to support the
pastoral development of our boys. It could hold within it form teachers who could
look across the learning of their boys, but it couldn’t assume that we would have
enough of these teachers who could also work as subject expert/curriculum leaders.
110
The contribution of the existing team leaders was significant in the first phase
of the Middle School’s development. They were key personnel in facilitating the
operation of dual campuses and the connection needed for our pastoral focus.
However this model was lacking in the leadership of curriculum.
The necessity for whole school alignment and shared commitment to all
reforms was something that was critically important for the next stage of this
school’s development. It was a big school and I was charged with the management
and leadership of only one small corner. Developing an alignment and shared
understandings within the Middle School itself and widening the understanding and
respect for the middle school program across the school, became a priority for me
and more recently, for others new to our school.
This has become evident in the past year for others and in particular for the
new Headmaster who has now proposed a number of significant restructures to take
the school through to a more whole school alignment with more shared visioning,
alignment and teaming. This will be the beginning of the next phase of development
for our school.
7.03 A sharpened focus on curriculum leadership while finding opportunity for
teacher-learning through new organisational structures and communities of
practice
What was clear after a year and a half was that there were benefits to learners
if we could minimise the number of teachers that they had and, where possible, allow
the same teacher to teach two or more of the key subjects. Also, if we could make
this teacher the form teacher there would be additional advantage. The timetabling to
permit this as a priority was finally in place by my second year. It was based on these
key staffing principles and is now the starting point for staffing the whole school
timetable. In addition, it was realised that each of the faculty areas needed to have
common planning time to allow for subject specific meetings to occur as part of the
teaching day. These meetings have allowed the Heads of Faculty and Assistant
Heads of Faculty to develop their specific goals with their staff throughout the year.
On most occasions they serve as the best opportunity for ensuring common
111
understanding of curriculum, but more recently many have used every second
meeting (or a good portion of each) to share practice through moderating samples of
student work or to deliver some significant professional development.
Together all three initiatives: the appointment of the Assistant Heads of
Faculty, the timetabling to reduce the number of different teachers for middle
schoolers, and the common meeting/planning time have assisted in sharpening our
focus on the learner, learning, teacher development, communities of practice and the
curriculum. An additional change that took place in the Middle School during the
second year was the newly created position of a Deputy Administration and Student
Services. This position has taken much of the behaviour management duties away
from the team leaders.
Before these specific changes, the attention given to improving student
learning outcomes in the Middle School was more evident in some Faculties than
others. There was certainly an interest in challenging traditional approaches to
teaching and learning in subjects like English and Social Sciences, as these two
Heads saw great possibilities for the benefits of reduced assessment loads that came
with integration of their two Key Learning Areas. This was not a universal belief
before the appointments of Assistant Heads of Faculty. The Head of Mathematics
had explored new constructivist approaches to Mathematics, but the implementation
of his research and theory did not seem to take place until the appointment of his
Assistant Head of Faculty. The Science curriculum, even though significantly
advantaged by being one of the subjects to receive some of the earliest Queensland
Studies Authority syllabus revisions and some of the best facilities in the state, didn’t
seem to move as quickly. Their Assistant Head of Faculty seemed to require more
support and direction with respect to how they could shift the teaching culture to
more inquiry, project-based learning.
In contrast, the Head of English Faculty and his Assistant Head of English
have kept their staff up to date via the web-based drafts of their new Queensland
Studies Authority syllabus. Their involvement with local and statewide networks has
kept them connected to the changes in the English syllabus. This involvement has
been extensive. In saying this, however, while the English staff have been kept up to
112
date and supported with perhaps more development than most other disciplines, there
were still staff who have not been delivering the curriculum or the pedagogy that was
required. More recently though, with the more rigorous moderation practices and
staff appraisal processes starting to take shape, this Faculty has been able to apply the
accountability pressures that are required to ensure credibility and quality in our
schooling. I have argued, in setting these accountability processes in place, for them
to be directly aligned with the current reforms in curriculum, pedagogy and
assessment.
The key elements in the goals for the Middle School for pedagogical change
involved a curriculum which was more student-centred, more integrated and more
open-ended to allow for differentiation, more authentic approaches to assessment
and which made significant moves toward internal moderation to assist in reliability
and validity of assessments. The action plans for each of the Assistant Heads of
Faculty of course varied according to the professional development needs of their
faculty staff. Some were faced with resistance and little experience in curriculum
leadership. Some were able to work more openly and collaboratively with their
Heads of Faculty while others faced barriers and some clashes with respect to core
beliefs that underpinned their discipline’s principles of teaching and learning. In one
area in particular I would go as far as to say the barriers may have been as a result
of professional jealousy and that the existing Head of Faculty found it difficult to
share the leadership of his department.
The amount and type of support that I have had to give to each Assistant
Head has been varied according to the leadership confidence and experience. Some
have been quite connected to significant networks for support and were able to use
these to advance their goals. Others needed to be given some ideas about potential
contacts and how these networks could assist their particular staff development
goals. This has led me to ask, ‘What drives teachers to stay in touch and up-to-date?
Why do some need the permission to network and others need the push? When do
you take on board the learning needs of your colleagues/Faculty rather than your
own? To what degree do leaders need assistance in this area of facilitating the
learning of their colleagues? Why? If the Assistant Head of Faculty is faced with a
113
great deal of resistance to change, then does this cause the lack of drive? Is there
any correlation between the practices of leaders who have been involved in a senior
schooling panel experience and the leaders who show more networking leadership in
the Middle School? Why do some make the time and others have to be given the time
and told to make these relationships for development a priority?
The management and leadership of the Assistant Heads of Faculties was my
responsibility and ensuring that their specific action plans were aligned so as to
deliver our sub-school goals, was the prime focus of our fortnightly meetings. This
fortnightly meeting time was also complemented by a whole of team meeting on a
monthly basis. During these meetings we could ensure whole group
understanding/direction and take time to reflect on each other’s achievements.
One of the major tasks for the group was to ensure that I had a complete copy
of all curriculum documents for each faculty and that all teachers within their Faculty
also had their copies. Surprisingly, this had never been done and consequently the
focus on improving these formal documents was increased.
The next major goal for all of these learning leaders was to establish the
degree of development that was necessary and most urgent in terms of the latest
Queensland Studies Authority’s new syllabus documents and their implementation.
The first yearly action plans of each of these Assistant Heads therefore were quite
comprehensive and in many cases quite ambitious. Their leadership was received
well by most and the additional layer of focus that they could give to curriculum
planning, writing and moderation in their first year was powerful.
I believe an important part of making the progress that they did was having
our fortnightly meetings. This was always to a set agenda and allowed me to listen to
what they considered to be their most urgent areas of need and for me to assist in
giving the necessary support. Sometimes this support was just to act as a sounding
board and assist the reflection that was needed for growth and development. On other
occasions it was to assist planning the professional development that we were having
as a whole group or as individual Faculties. Having a set number of items to discuss
114
always ensured a focus and alignment with all. It also allowed for a clearer
articulation of where we had come from and where we would be expected to be by
the next time we met.
The initiative to move to the Assistant Head of Faculty positions has certainly
assisted in moving the leadership from the top to be more about teachers being led by
their fellow teachers. Allowing the curriculum planning, assessment and pedagogy
change to be led by those closest to the classroom and supported by the
administrators, could be seen as challenging some of the more traditional models of
curriculum management. Bringing leadership closer to the classroom and combining
it with a timetabling philosophy that respects the importance of both integration and
specialist delivery has been worth celebrating. What has been interesting to observe
is the openness to new ideas and sharing ideas that worked and rejecting those that
did not work. However, making the time for the sharing of ideas to take place within
the existing time structures has been purposeful and necessary.
One essential priority goal for all Assistant Heads of Faculty has been to
ensure that student samples are moderated and curriculum implementation
monitored to ensure the consistency, rigour and quality of our curriculum. This
practice of internal moderation was not an explicit and consistent routine until this
last year. While these accountability measures have long been operating in the
Senior School because of the state moderation sampling, they were not well
established in the Middle School. The closer relationships that these Assistant Heads
of Faculty have established with their fellow subject teachers have been a positive
outcome of the moderation goal. The process has demanded that some of the
scheduled common planning times have had to be used to assist this process. This
process has therefore brought with it more conversation and sharing of practice and
consequently more teacher learning through communities of practice. This form of
collaborative teaming to ensure the rigour and standards of the curriculum may also
assist us to identify those teachers who may be in need of support.
The relationships that I have established with the Assistant Heads of Faculty
have shown that collaboration can bring learning for all and significant professional
115
development. As a team we have assisted in developing new methods of reporting
and recording student data and have shown some significant leadership with
integration and identification of essential skills for life-long learning. These cross-
curriculum developments have been successful because they have had cross-
curriculum input and come from our internal leaders who are closest to the
classroom. The strength of this connectedness cannot be underestimated.
It is a teaming model that sometimes doesn’t allow us to know where we are
going until we get there. And upon reflection this must be disturbing for some who
have been used to knowing exactly what they should be doing and how and when
they should be doing it. The unforseen developments have been exciting and
sometimes intense to manage and lead. Many of our new directions and refined
visions emerge in our whole group meetings, but also in our one on one meeting.
Because the individual meetings take place in set times within the fortnight, by the
last meeting it is essential to summarise our developments. Interestingly, this
evolution process sits quite comfortably with the team of leaders provided I have
communicated the developments to all at the end of the fortnight.
In many ways it has been like working with an artwork. The initial ideas are
there and the work evolves and takes shape. It is not necessarily preplanned, and the
outcomes can often never be articulated at the start. I remember an aspect of
Eisner’s (1973) work that acknowledged this as an essential component in creative
process, similarly Wolf (1988) in discussions of this artistic learning called it the
‘invisible learning’. Eisner (1973) argued that these unforseen objectives are
potentially lost if we pre-specify everything up front. I have always been suspicious
of ‘safe’ arts’ practice that may be delivered through ‘recipe’ as opposed to a more
open-ended processes. This learning still requires core content and processes to be
covered, and the teacher needs to be organised, resourceful, supportive and most
importantly, flexible. The learner needs parameters, feedback, reflection time and
closure.
I now find myself being able to make a connection with this my preferred
style of teaching that emphasised the opportunity for the invisible and the
unpredictable, with my support and management, and now with my leadership of
116
these learning leaders. This business of working toward the unknown could be
difficult for some teachers, just as it may have been for some of my students over the
years. Some are better at taking risks and running with an idea. For some the ideas
have to be triggered and supported but not given, or the essential creative learning
skills remain underdeveloped. In all cases each of these folk have brought with them
their own passions and skills, and I have seen that it has been in my role to allow
these Assistant Heads of Faculty the licence they need to create and the support they
need to develop. This encouragement has moved us to new and faraway places.
In this sense then, these learning leaders have been working in ‘working and
learning roles’ just like I have been since my beginnings with the Middle School. And
this may be what new leadership demands. At times this unknown territory though,
has meant that no one fully understands the extent of our roles while they are
emerging and in action. This has therefore brought with it excitement but also
tension. While these roles have their specific position descriptions, they have been
evolving roles and as such will need to have a critical reflection period to review the
journey we have come so far. I recall doing this for myself and taking the time to
share it with my Head of sub–school and Headmaster in my first year. It allows
celebration and future challenges and directions to be identified. For this reason I
am using the last term of their first year to assist these learning leaders to reflect on
their action plans and leadership and this will assist in formulating their goals for
the year ahead. Some of their reflections will be included in the data presented in
this study.
The models of leadership that have been used in the past have encouraged
balkanisation and little knowledge-sharing. Close relationships with and between
learning leaders is one way of capturing the internal strengths to support those who
need their ideas to be challenged or developed. This has been one of the most
positive outcomes this year. What I have witnessed on many occasions is the sharing
of ideas and expertise. The conversations have been about a willingness to share
ideas, and many have been challenged to review their direction and thinking by
listening to the ideas/reflections of others.
117
At this stage though I would argue that while the relational/collaborative
leadership model that I have managed to maintain through fortnightly meetings with
each individual, and monthly as a whole team has allowed for huge shared
developments to take place, it takes time. I will be interested to hear what each
Assistant Head has to say with respect to their year and the time issues. I have
argued quite strongly for some years now that staffing and time allocations in our
schools generally are based on older management models and not the newer
methods of working collaboratively. Collaboration and relationships take time; time
that the keen and motivated give priority, to but in the interim other work slips
behind.
If these models aren’t in place, then the alternative creates ‘very busy silos’.
Development is balkanised and in isolation, potential whole school development
would be slow and investment in teacher-learning expensive. If Heads of Faculty
have historically experienced a model of management that supported isolated
visioning, then I expect that working in the way that I have been advocating with
these Heads of Faculty may be quite different and perhaps difficult for some. My
first thoughts are that the Assistant Heads of Faculty are the new leaders with
willingness and openness for learning. The cultural change that may be required of
the Head of Faculty may involve significant reculturing for some.
(Refer to Appendix C for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area are archived under the Code: A – 7.03. A written response artifact related to
this area is published in Appendix F - under Response No. 4 and with archival Code
WR-7.03.)
7.04 A specific focus on teacher-learning – making it more than rhetoric
It wasn’t until midway through my second year that I had began to implement
any significant relationships of the kind I had carried out in my previous position as a
school-university links coordinator. In addition to establishing teams of teachers to
improve the development and implementation of our school curriculum, the interest
that I had in developing teacher- learning via undergraduate partnerships and finding
learning opportunities/partners for teachers were also starting to develop.
118
In the first year of my appointment to the school, the previous Headmaster
would often state publicly that the area of teacher- learning was priority expenditure.
He allowed one of his key administrators to lead a working party to investigate
university courses that could deliver some of the specific learning needs of our
teachers to align with the surveyed needs of staff at the time. With the arrival of the
new Headmaster and the resignation of the appointed staff member to lead this
program, the priority for teacher development was still high but the new Headmaster
could not agree to the same focus areas. Consequently, when he asked the general
staff who would be prepared to continue the work on teacher development, I
volunteered my services. After meeting with the Headmaster regarding his
expectations, I asked if we could broaden our vision for this program and accept that
it could involve more than formal courses for some with a particular university, and
be inclusive of set of alliance principles that I arranged under the title of Professional
Learning Alliances. The Headmaster was very happy with the broader concept and
agreed that this was the way forward.
The professional readings that I had been exploring over the past two years
assured me that the investment in teacher learning was something that would bring
significant improvement in our student learning and that therefore this school’s
commitment to teacher development and learning was essential. The professional
learning alliance program insisted on collaborative leadership practices that
demanded, as a group of leaders, that we move beyond curriculum management to
curriculum leadership. This was a small but major principle that would require
reculturing for some who have managed from a distance; giving directions and
directives rather than working ‘along side of’ their teachers. These principles of the
alliance program insist that leaders are learners as well, and that working as teams at
the micro and macro level will extend and enrich all parties.
The belief and practice of working in teams and being open to learning has
been clearly emphasised by the new Headmaster as he reshapes his administration
leaders for next year. My collaboratives with the Assistant Heads of Faculty and
other sub-groups of teachers in the Middle School shows clearly my preference for
this leadership style, but I am left wondering if this will be the style of others who
119
have been working in more top-down paradigms, and to some extent I am anxious
about this and the assumed collaborative skills that the new structures will demand
for some in the team. It also raises the question of whether all leaders like to share
their knowledge and skills or whether they see benefits from keeping it to themselves
or to a limited few. Do schools encourage or reward those who seem to practise the
top down methods of leadership/management? Are the rewards explicit or implicit?
Does it require a confidence to take risks as well as a confidence to move from the
knowledge expert model?
It would seem then that learning for students and for teachers is quite similar.
From my experience I would argue that learning is about a journey in building
relationships, establishing connections, and comprehending the interdependences of
our lives. This requires the ability and strength to take time to listen and care.
These seem to be the ingredients that I have attempted to focus on when establishing
my learning relationships with the Assistant Heads of Faculty. Could this be the
ingredient missing in previous learning structures that have been less about
sustainability and more about instant results? Could this then be connected more to
re-culturing? It also raises the question of whether we can ever create this culture
without changing the existing teaching loads of teachers and administrators. Then
this of course would impact on the economic costs of running the school.
The alliance program recognises that additional partnerships can develop
through our appraisal system, critical friendships, mentoring programs,
undergraduate practicum placements, teachers undergoing formal studies, co-
teaching, and shadowing.
The key initiatives that have already grown out of this set of principles to date
include:
• a memorandum of understanding with a local university
• two staff members taking up further formal studies as part of the
memorandum, one of whom will assist the development of other pastoral
carers’ counselling roles, and the other will assist the new developments in
middle school mathematics
120
• a network of the school’s Assistant Heads of Faculty working closely with
the Queensland School’s Authority to assist in middle school syllabus
implementation
• two cohorts of undergraduates working in close partnership with their
supervising teachers One of these cohorts will assist in writing a chapter of a
text that will feature some aspects of middle school teaching and learning.
The undergraduate placements up until this time were managed by one of the
Senior School deputies and essentially did nothing more than place the student
teacher with an interested teacher supervisor and that was all. I was interested in a
much more comprehensive relationship that could have broader possibilities. These
initiatives were of interest to the Head of Middle School and as a result, I was
permitted to make contact with two of our city’s major universities to seek their
interest in some special relationships for teacher and undergraduate learning. The
response from both has been very reassuring with one university being specifically
interested in the opportunities we could provide for their middle school
undergraduates and the potential learning opportunities this gives their supervisors.
The other university committed to a broader range of teacher- learning relationships
supported by a special memorandum of understanding.
What I was proposing through these learning alliance principles, were
broader interpretations of teacher learning and the various ways the school and I
could support and administer these opportunities. In addition to the special learning
partnerships that successful undergraduate programs can bring, I believed that
formal studies and/or significant networking opportunities could bring mutually
interested partners together and that both partners could benefit by the relationship.
What is learning for the teacher? Almost every day the teacher’s world is
challenged if not by new areas of curriculum content, then by new ways to
accommodate the push for transparency/accountability. For example, the demands
schools now make for more transparency in the area of teacher planning and
assessment, tracking of learning and parent communications has increased the daily
121
demands on the teacher who is already trying to keep up to date with changes in
curriculum, practice and new technologies.
The alliances proposal also recognises pockets of practice within school that
are at varying stages of development and the benefits that can come for all, when we
connect interested parties to share this practice. The idea of learning alliances for
teachers was also triggered by my concern for finding time for teacher learning. The
number of days that schools can give to teacher development is very limited. The
number of lessons teachers can miss to attend workshops in school time is limited.
The limited time at the end of the day for teachers who are also managing sporting
groups and family, makes formal university studies quite difficult. Therefore, if the
learning was brought closer to the work places and visa versa, and if schools could
assist the financial costs for those who give their own time for university study, then
this could make teacher-learning quite manageable and achievable. If formal
university courses were recognised as being aligned with the direction of the
teacher’s Faculty or school goals and seen as making a valuable contribution in this
respect, then this could give teachers the incentive to go this extra mile. This has
already been the case for a number of teachers this year.
The alliances proposal also grew out of my continued interest, and the work
with critical friendships and networking. It recognises therefore, the importance of
external and internal alliances that explore the most fundamental aspects of our
work as teachers, so as to create a professional culture of continuous inquiry. The
program recognised the earlier work by a previous administrator that focused on
teacher-learning but perhaps wasn’t capturing the importance of learning from one
another within the school. It insists that schools recognise the power of the expertise
within their organisation, and commit to leading the school so as to allow teachers to
work together. In many ways the commitment to these changes then, have been seen
in some of the timetabling of common planning/ meeting times for Faculties and the
manner in which other meeting times are managed, so that they are emphasising
sharing and reflecting rather than merely administrative matters.
In short, the alliance program argued for ‘learning alliances’ not just within
the fences of the school, but also beyond the school fence. It argued that successful
122
professional alliances would assist our teachers as learning leaders and in
consequence, facilitate teachers to become the effective reflective practitioners that
are necessary for effective curriculum reform. It therefore presented a model of
teacher development that went beyond the aims of the previous ideals for teacher
professional development, and advocated one that emphasises wider partnerships in
learning – professional learning alliances.
(Refer to Appendix C for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area are archived under the Code: A – 7.04. A written response artifact related to
this area is published in Appendix F - under Response No. 5 and with archival Code
WR-7.04.)
7.05 Reculturing through restructure and a renewed teacher appraisal system
In the last term of my second year, a new Headmaster to the school arrived
and was taking twelve months to review a number of structures and programs in the
school. Among others, the areas of curriculum management and pastoral care
structures were under this review. The outcome of his review saw recommendations
for changing my curriculum management position in the following year. His changes
recommended that I would be working across the two sub-schools and that there
would be little to no change in the pastoral care structures.
While he was very happy with my work in managing the Assistant Heads of
Faculty and the degree of teacher development I had managed to deliver, he
remained concerned about the fact that we were not seeing equivalent reform in the
Senior School. He also believed that we were creating quite distinct silos by having
the curriculum managed by different people in each sub-school. Before the end of his
first year his recommendations were in place and ready for the following year.
In addition to this restructuring, the Headmaster also insisted on the
introduction of a new teacher appraisal process. This new process brought with it the
necessity for the new Headmaster to articulate the school’s key goals for learning and
teaching and the opportunity for the curriculum deputies to clearly define what the
teachers’ professional characteristics would have to be in order to achieve these
goals.
123
The process of working with the other deputies of the Preparatory and Senior
School to refine these characteristics was a new process. What it did reveal was that
there seemed to me more interest in the potential for this document to transform
teaching practices from the Preparatory School deputy and myself. The lack of
commitment from the senior school deputy may have been an indication of this
deputy’s personal opposition or it may have been a reflection of someone who didn’t
believe that there were any issues with our teachers’ practices. Whatever the reason,
it was not made clear.
The participation by our staff was essentially voluntary and in the end the
Senior School deputy had to follow the characteristics when carrying out his
appraisal trials. How closely he followed procedure we will never know, because the
Senior School administrators carried out their appraisals individually while the
Middle School and Preparatory School did them with two administrators working
with each appraisee.
The trial did reveal that this system would assist to align personal goals with
Faculty and sub-school goals. In turn, these goals are aligned to the school’s goals
for teaching and learning. This is a positive step. It places the reasons for concern out
into the open. Student survey data is used and samples of student work, class visits
and data from the relevant Head of House or Faculty is also accessed. This data
works along side of the reflections made by the teacher him/herself and if there is a
reason for concern, then there is a process of support/management to be followed by
the supervising party with the teacher.
The initial trial has been useful in that it asked for volunteers to go first. The
feedback about the process was gathered and a number of recommendations will be
made for our future reference. The question of time needed to manage the process in
a consistent, positive and professional manner was one of the concerns raised by the
administrators. A second concern related to the lack of understanding most teachers
had of their Faculty and sub-school goals. Was it that they couldn’t recall them or
were they something that weren’t articulated for all to follow? What we found was
more of the latter and this was not surprising since this year was the first time that we
124
saw clear alignment with school and sub-school goals. I feel sure now that the
appraisal system will assist in giving even more purpose for faculty goals.
Within the appraisal process, not only is the Head of Faculty asked about the
teacher’s commitment to faculty goals but also about their teaching practice and
student work generally. This assumes that these leaders have been frequently visiting
and/or sampling the teacher’s work throughout the year. While this may be
something that might be occurring in some Faculties, it is not widespread in the
Middle School. To move a number of Heads of Faculty to align with this assumption
will mean some cultural change. The practices of the Heads of Faculty vary and are
currently being managed more closely through more specific action plans and
performance review. What the trial has confirmed in the eyes of the Headmaster, is
that the practice of leading teaching through positive supervision, class visits,
mentoring, sampling etcetera will not be something that will be the role of the Head
of Faculty alone, but also other school administrators including me. Once again this
will demand a significant cultural change for many who have been working quite
autonomously and with little supervision and accountability.
Similar to what is often said of a student’s end-of-year report card, the
teacher appraisal report ideally should not be unearthing anything we do not already
know. The learning leaders and managers and teachers themselves should already be
aware of any areas of concern and are hopefully working toward some solutions and
professional development.
The appraisal trial raised a number of concerns for me as a learning leader.
In particular I need to discover how we can assist teachers to be gathering
information/feedback informally throughout the year to evaluate and reflect on their
own practices. Secondly, how do we respond to feedback when it only comes at the
summative stage? Above all, I believe that the appraisal system has the potential to
assist teachers to become reflective practitioners who are concerned about their own
learning and development. If teachers are working in a culture of accountability, we
need to assist them with more collaboration and openness to learning that can come
from their own reflections and those of others about their practice. This can include
125
peer and student feedback being part of the world of teacher-learning and then when
it becomes part of an appraisal system, it will be less of a surprise.
A further question that I ask is, ‘Can an appraisal system that is supported by
a renewed understanding for teacher collaboration and professional learning culture
be less stressful for all concerned, that is for both the appraiser and the appraisee?’
If the appraisal system is not supported by such cultural change, then the system
that will be attempting to change practice may in fact create a barrier to collegiality
and collaboration. An effective appraisal system has to recognise in the most positive
way the areas we need to develop as professionals, and equally validate and
celebrate excellence, expertise and experience. It was not surprising to see the
participants of the trial focus only on their weaknesses. As leaders we need to belong
to a community of practice that doesn’t avoid the articulation of concern but not at
the cost of celebration, recognition and reward. This ideal reflects one of the most
successful discipline techniques we can use with our students, that is, the power of
positive feedback.
(Refer to Appendix C for the table of artifacts archived/included. Artifacts related to
this area are archived under the Code: A – 7.05. A written response artifact related to
this area is published in Appendix F - under Response No.6 and with archival Code
WR-7.05.)
7.06 The creative tensions that come with change, but still coordinating
connections – confidence, contradictions, control and collisions in collaboration
The courage and confidence it took to step away from a school and work
between it and a university, was small compared to the courage I needed to take the
next step right away from the state school system that I had occupied for twenty
years of my life. I knew the state school culture quite well and I knew that the private
system still followed the same Queensland curriculum directives, but what I hadn’t
realised was the work I have had to do to regain my sense of belonging and how
important this was before I could make any substantial change.
126
This was a new world and with it came a new, tough and ‘settled’ culture.
This second narrative therefore continued to capture the importance of connecting.
My life in this second setting was therefore still about coordinating these connections
and these eventually moved to be more than the connections that I needed for my
own growth, to broader connections that we needed to make for the growth
development of the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment reforms that I had been
charged to manage.
This narrative, like the first, also demanded a confidence in my core beliefs
about teaching and learning and the associated teacher- learning that these values
demand. Without knowing your own core beliefs, your confidence can be taken away
by those who know no other world than a world of control. Consequently, with this
transition has also come tension and contradiction. Contradictions are easy to spot as
are their associated tensions and collisions. Again, these are easy to identify and
therefore easier to overcome, when you and your school know what you believe and
hold as essential to successful learning and leadership. This narrative has captured
some of my collisions and tensions and connects them in the most part with poor
communications, inadequate time and poor relationships.
The tensions that have come with change or leading change, have also been
shared, but from the tensions have grown opportunity for new and creative solutions.
This narrative has shown how in leading change, I have found that I have had to
appreciate from where people have come, what they are keen to retain and what they
are prepared to give up. This is a deconstructive process and requires caring, relating
and communicating. It is therefore about inquiry and investigation through
relationships and reflection. Pulling apart my new world had to be done carefully,
respectfully and thoughtfully and in consultation with the teams of people who are
close and connected. But it can’t be left in pieces. It must be reconstructed and this
reconstruction emerges slowly and collaboratively. Each part of the reconstruction
demands your understanding and relationships to be checked. As such the process of
deconstruction and reconstruction is a learning process and one that is constantly
mindful of the learning that is going on at the same time. This is the world of the
educational leader working in a school as a learning organisation. It is never linear,
often stressful, and always messy but frightfully rewarding when achievements are
127
brought out into the open for all to share. For this reason it is creative and similar to
my own art making. It respects that the tensions that come with change can be the
creative tensions you need for progress.
128
Chapter: 8 A Sifting Process
129
Chapter 8 A Sifting Process
The narratives presented in Chapters 7 and 8 are associated with the critical
incidents of my practice as a teacher, leader and administrator, and they have
provided the primary data for this inquiry. Specifically, this study has allowed me to
theorise these critical incidents (Tripp, 1993; Ferguson, 2001) in a specific area of
my practice that focuses on my work in two different school settings. In so doing,
the results of this action-inquiry self-study should be of interest to other practitioners
who are leading schools in times of reform, but it will not be making generalisations
that can be simplistically transferred to other contexts. This chapter explains how
data have been sifted and organised to ensure a rigorous analysis. The following
chapter presents the results of the analysis process.
8.01 The framework for data analysis
The current reform imperatives and related arguments for rethinking school
leadership are key drivers for this study’s focus on reculturing schools as learning
organisations. Chapters 2 and 3 expressed concern for school leaders charged with
leading not only student-learning but also, in many cases, teacher- learning as well.
Schools that operate as learning organisations or learning communities are more
likely to survive ongoing educational change.
Generally, the issue of curriculum reform has been examined in the context of
more general organisational reform. Specifically, it explored the notion of schools
being recultured or reconstructed to work as learning communities/organisations
(Stoll et al., 2003; Senge, 1990) and, consequently, as communities of practice
(Wenger & Snyder, 2000) in order to provide a more sustainable method of
improving the social and academic learning outcomes of students. The focus for the
study, therefore, is to connect the idea of developing schools as learning
communities/organisations with the notions of developing learning leaders and
building school capacity (Hargreaves, 2003; Lingard et al., 2003; Stoll et al., 2003;).
This process recognises a necessary process of critical incident analysis
(Tripp, 1993; Ferguson, 2001) and reshaping involving cultural deconstruction and
130
reconstruction. This deconstruction and reconstruction process was aligned to
generative transformational theorising (McNiff, 2000) and the process of inventing
and reinventing (Ross et al, 1992). It was also related to what Macpherson et al.
(2004) emphasise: the importance of schools adopting a culture of critical reflection
and action. As such, the dynamic and creative process of deconstruction and
reconstruction was argued as being central to school cultures that work as authentic
learning organisations/communities, and was presented as a process that can assist
schools in making the cultural transformation processes that come when meeting the
challenges posed by a transition to curriculum reform initiatives. By working as a
learning organisation, schools then can build the capacity to deliver the deeper
cognitive learning, creativity, community, compassion and inclusivity required for
our knowledge society.
A deconstruction and reconstruction of Arbuckle’s (2000) Triangle of
Design, Circle of Culture model for schools operating as learning organisations
(refer to Figure: 8.1) was used as the key framework for the analysis of the data for
this self-study. Arbuckle’s (2000) nine key qualities of a school operating as a
learning organisation were also presented earlier and these were used to scan and
organise the data. These are presented again Table 8.1.
A detailed exploration of the various constructs that have contributed to the
proposed notion of parallel relationships has been presented within Chapter 4. The
concept parallel relationships brings together the idea of partnerships presented by
Lieberman (2000), the notion of communities of practice by Wenger and Snyder
(2000) and the Crowther et al (2002) concept of parallel leaders. This reconstruction
uses parallel partnerships as a parent concept and connects it with the elements of
parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships. Together these three
recognise the importance of new relationships for teacher- learning and reflect
relationships that represent reconstructed professional learning alliances. This
reconstruction advocates new relationships between teachers, between administrators
and teachers, between administrators themselves, and between schools and their
communities.
131
The reconstruction of Arbuckle’s (2000) model also explicitly emphasises the
importance of conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy and
therefore reconstructed Arbuckle’s (2000) Methods and Tools component of the
original diagram. Arbuckle’s Domain of Action triangle was reconstructed as a
square. In summary, the four key elements that underpin the proposed reconstructed
model include:
• Shared beliefs, mission and vision across the school
• Organisational arrangements that are committed to learning through a
variety of infrastructure supports such as timetables, physical locations, and
common meeting times
• Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy, that are
committed to deconstruction and reconstruction processes for critical
reflection and action
• Parallel relationships that are committed to parallel learning partnerships
and parallel learning leadership that unlock the skills of the organisation and
support teacher learning and development and are assisted by relational skills.
Figure 8.1 The Reconstruction of Arbuckle’s ‘Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture’8
8 An reconstructed adaptation of Arbuckle’s original diagram which came from “Schools That Learn” by P.Senge, N. Cambron-McCabe, T. Lucas, B. Smith, J. Dutton and A. Kleiner, Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture, p.327.
Organisational arrangements
Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy
Parallel Relationships Parallel Parallel learning learning leadership partnerships
Awareness and values
Skills andcapabilities
Attitudes and beliefs
DEEP
LEARNING CYCLE
Domain of
enduring change (social domain; culture;
professional community)
Shared beliefs,
mission & vision
Domain of action
(organisational architecture;
technical domain)
132
8.02 The analysis process
The four key elements of this reconstructed framework were used to sift
through the layered narratives and examine each narrative’s domain of action
(Arbuckle, 2000). The sifting focused on finding a number of quality/characteristic
indicators that could support or contest the reconstructed framework. These
quality/characteristic indicators were chosen because they represent norms of
behaviour, basic values and core assumptions (Connor & Lake, 1994) that Arbuckle
(2000) identifies as the qualities/characteristics of a school working as a learning
organisation. These are listed below in Table 8.1. (This same table has been
presented earlier as Table 3.2.) In summary, the key quality/characteristic indicators
(Arbuckle, 2000) that were used to analyse the narratives were:
• reflective dialogue
• unity of purpose
• collective focus on student learning
• collaboration and norms of sharing
• openness to improvement
• deprivation of practice and critical review
• trust and respect
• renewal of community
• supportive and knowledgeable leadership
Consequently, the key elements of the reconstructed model and the quality
indicators were essential to the analysis process. These tools were used to scan,
identify, select, organise and sift through the relevant snapshots of my narratives and
related literature. The associations that emerged as a result of this process therefore
inform the analysis and my first tentative propositions and responses to the research
questions that drive this study.
133
Table 8.1 The Qualities/Characteristics of a School Working as a Learning
Organisation9 - Used for the Mapping and Analysis
Reflective dialogue
Members talk to each other openly and reflectively about their situations and challenges; their subject matter, the nature of learning, their teaching practices, and their own thinking – their attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of the world.
9 From: Arbuckle, M. (2000). “Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ”. In Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton and Kleiner , Schools That Learn , London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, p.327.
134
8.03 The scanning and mapping of data
By using the quality indicators and key elements of the reconstructed model
as lenses, each relevant section of each narrative was scanned three times. The
sections considered as the most critical incidents for this study were those where the
practice contained examples of collaborative endeavours.
The first scanning mapped the ‘significance’ of each quality indicator and
key concept. A second scanning was conducted to gauge and map any ‘barriers’, that
may have confronted these quality indicators and key elements. The third scanning
marked the qualities with a ¡ to indicate an important learning with respect to any
one of the four key elements. The significance or barrier coding labels are presented
in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2 Coding Labels for Significance of the Quality Indicator and Barriers Experienced
Significance of the quality
indicator
Barriers to the quality
indicator • Low/Not Significant
• Few/No Barriers
• Significant
• A Number of Barriers
135
To assist the scanning process, a large matrix spreadsheet was designed to
capture the connections and plot/summarise the barriers and levels of significance.
The matrix illustrates how sub-headings of each narrative and each narrative’s focus
points were mapped against the reconstructed elements and the quality indicators.
(Refer to Appendix H). After the two narratives were mapped into the matrix,
sections of the narratives were deconstructed further as close-up snapshots.
The sets of qualities for selection were:
• the qualities that were mapped as ¡ indicated an important learning against
those marked as significant and with very few to no barriers.
• the qualities that were mapped as ¡ indicated an important learning against
those marked as significant and with a number of barriers.
Therefore, the results of this analysis and mapping informs the first tentative
propositions of this study with respect to schools working as learning organisations.
As outlined earlier, these first propositions were then presented to several key
participants who were involved in the various close-up snapshots. Each participant
received the relevant portions of the narratives that made reference to them, for their
reading and oral responses. The participants who have been chosen have played a
significant role in the close-up snapshots of the narratives. These participants have
also been identified on the matrix along with related artifacts. A summary of the
participants’ responses is presented in Chapter 10 Readers’ Filters – Confirmations
and Contestations, and these provide a filter for my work as well as any additional
key points of departure.
8.04 The most significant quality indicators that have emerged from the mapped
data
With reference to the larger matrix in Appendix H, the Table: 8.3 presents a
summary of the most significant qualities mapped against the related sections of the
two narratives. Each quality is tagged as being with very few/no barriers or with
some barriers. The most significant quality indicators that emerged from the
narratives were:
136
• Reflective dialogue – “members talk to each other openly and reflectively
about their situations and challenges; their subject matter, the nature of
learning, their teaching practices, and their own thinking – their attitudes,
beliefs and perceptions of the world” (Arbuckle, p.327)
• Collaborative and norms of sharing – where there is “a strong professional
community encourages collective endeavour rather than isolated individual
efforts. Faculty members say, “It is important not to hide ideas”. They see
sharing of ideas and approaches as valuable, instead of as “stealing another’s
intellectual property” (Arbuckle, 2000, p.327)
• Openness to improvement – where teachers taking risks and trying new ideas
is encouraged and expected. As a teacher noted, “We are never criticized for
trying something new, even when it doesn’t work out as intended’ rather than
simply coping, “Colleagues push one another to examine what they are doing
and improve” (Arbuckle, 2000, p.327)
• Deprivatization of practice - where “teachers’ responsibilities extend beyond
the classroom. They share, observe, and discuss one another’s practice on a
daily basis. Feedback on performance is a major means of learning”
(Arbuckle, 2000, p.327)
• Supportive and knowledgeable leadership – where “strong professional
community doesn’t just happen. It requires deliberate attention by leaders
across the system. Indeed, the single most strategic thing that school leaders
can do is to create conditions that foster professional community: a culture of
interaction and reflective dialogue” (Arbuckle, 2000, p.328).
137
Table 8.3 A Summary of the Most Significant Qualities
Reflective dialogue
Collaborative and norms of sharing
Openness to improvement
Deprivatization of practice
Supportive & knowledgeable leadership
Few
/No
Bar
riers
Bar
riers
Few
/No
B
arrie
rs
Bar
riers
Few
/No
B
arrie
rs
Bar
riers
Few
/No
B
arrie
rs
Bar
riers
Few
/No
B
arrie
rs
Bar
riers
Chapter 6.03 Confidence in collaboratives
3 3 3 3 3
Chapter 6.05 An experiment that focused on undergraduate learning
3
3
3
3
3
Chapter 6.06 A trial of accelerating pathways for senior students
3
3
3
3
Chapter 6.07 The virtual workplace project
3
3
3
3
3
Chapter 6.10 The School based learning proposal for teachers and undergraduates
3
3
3
3
3
Chapter 6.11 The design educators’ post graduate studies project
3
3
3
3
3
Chapter 7.01 Building new credibility & trust in a tough culture
3
3
Chapter 7.03 A sharpened focus on curriculum leadership
3
3
3
Chapter 7.04 A specific focus on Teacher learning
3
3
3
3
3
Chapter 7.05 Reculturing through restructure and a renewed teacher appraisal system
3
3
3
3
138
The five quality indicators: Reflective dialogue, Collaboratives and norms of
sharing, Openness to improvement, Deprivatisation of practice, and Supportive and
knowledgeable leadership, have emerged as being the five most important qualities
because of their frequent occurrence as important learnings. These five quality
indicators will be used in the following chapter as lenses to guide the deeper analysis
of six significant snapshots.
Chapter: 9 Focusing With a Sharper Lens
139
Chapter 9 Focusing with a Sharper Lens
The previous chapter showed how the data have been sifted and organised.
This chapter now presents the results of the analysis using the three key sub-
questions to guide its presentation and first tentative propositions. It begins by re-
presenting the close-up snapshots of the data that relate specifically to the five most
significant quality indicators. These include: Reflective Dialogue, Collaborative
Norms of Sharing, Openness to Improvement, and Deprivatisation of Practice, and
Supportive and Knowledgeable Leadership. This exploration of the most significant
indicators inform the first tentative propositions of this study and consequently assist
by asking:
• What can be said about the reconstructed emphasis on conversations for
learning and the insertion of the element of parallel relationships and its
associated elements, parallel learning partnerships and parallel learning
leadership that have been added into the original Arbuckle (2000)
framework?
• What can be said about the proposed reconstructions of Arbuckle’s (2000)
model for the reconstruction of a school as a learning organisation? Does it
capture the teacher collaboration, reflective teaching/teacher theorising,
spontaneity and risk taking needed for the development of a school as a
learning organisation?
• What visible and less visible elements within an organisation’s culture (after
the work of Conner and Lake (1994)) were examined/altered to assist the
retention of these key elements of collaboration, reflective teaching/teacher
theorising, spontaneity and risk-taking?
This chapter therefore represents a level of reflection on reflection-in-action
(Schön, 1995) and mirrors a deeper theorising deconstruction and reconstruction
process. It follows the notion of generative transformative theorising (McNiff, 2000)
and a similar construct of inventing and reinventing (Ross et al, 1992).
4th Layer (Connections to literature-guided by six significant
snapshots)
140
9.01 Narratives as snapshots that hold special moments and significant qualities
The narratives of this study are presented as snapshots of my leadership over
a period of four years. In this way they are similar to the family snapshots we collect.
The total collection would not be able to capture every moment of every day of every
child’s life. Instead albums or boxes of photographs often will focus on key moments
or milestones but miss many other precious moments. If we look at them
collectively, however, we can follow the development and growth of our children’s
lives. Through family snapshots we capture some of the celebrations and specific
moments in family history. In this way, our snapshots become visual summaries of
our lives. The narratives as data for this study present similarly. They are a written
summary of four years of my leadership in two school settings.
Family snapshots will often capture the additional people who come into our
lives presenting clues about the relationships we might have with these people as
well as the places we visit on holidays. Like works of art, photographs can be read
or interpreted differently by each individual viewer, and it is quite likely that the
interpretations will vary depending on the relationship that the viewer has with the
person. Similarly I have captured/taken the shot and this familiarity with the context
and the participants captured in each provides a specific lens through which to make
sense of the snapshot. As a collection, the narratives equate to approximately four
years of snapshots. The enduring subject is my leadership in times of curriculum
reform.
Like a family member trying to record one’s family history from the box of
family snapshots, the snapshots in the narratives have been chosen, captured,
collated, interpreted, and interrogated for their most significant qualities. That certain
qualities emerged more frequently than others depends on my interpretations of the
moments I chose to capture. On this, Schwandt (1994) states:
The constructivist or interpretivist believes that to understand this world of
meaning one must interpret it. The inquirer must elucidate the process of
meaning construction and clarify what and how meanings are embodied in
the language and actions of social actors. To prepare an interpretation is itself
to construct a reading of these meanings; it is to offer the inquirer’s
141
construction of the constructions of the actors one studies… all interpretive
inquirers watch, listen, ask, record and examine. How those activities might
best be defined and employed depends on the inquirer’s purpose for doing the
inquiry. Purpose in turn is shaped by epistemological and methodological
commitments. (pp.118-119)
In this way, the critical incidents that I chose to record in the narratives, as
well as those that were not recorded, indicate the key assumptions, perceptions and
values I attach to leadership for change and reform. As Crowther et al. (2002) point
out, “people seeking to achieve organizational change need to uncover and examine
the assumptions that guide their work” (p.109). Our core assumptions and
perceptions are not always directly acknowledged by those within an organisation,
but in reality relate to how people reflect, perceive, think and feel about things
(Tripp, 1993; Connor & Lake, 1994).
Therefore, the sections that follow re-present close-ups of a number of
snapshots. These are written as short descriptive passages. Analysis then
deconstructs the snapshots and their layers further. To assist in this interrogation,
these qualities are then layered against the related literature presented in earlier
chapters. This interrogation will consequently examine:
• the significance of the five specified qualities
• the relationship between the significant qualities, teacher-learning, and
schools operating as learning organisations, and
• responses to the proposed reconstructions of Arbuckle’s (2000) model for
schools working as learning organisations which involved an emphasis on
conversations and the addition of parallel relationships.
9.02 The re-presentations of six significant snapshots
The following sections, which have come from both Narrative Number One
and Narrative Number Two, were selected because each contained all five significant
qualities. The six sections represent the selected snapshot close-ups:
• An experiment that focused on undergraduate learning –
Chapter 6: Section 6.05
142
• The virtual workplace project –
Chapter 6: Section 6.07
• The design educators’ post-graduate studies project –
Chapter 6: Section 6.11
• A sharpened focus on curriculum leadership while finding opportunities for
teacher-learning through new organisational structures and communities of
practice –
Chapter 7: Section 7.03
• A specific focus on teacher-learning – making it more than rhetoric–
Chapter 7: Section 7.04
• Reculturing through restructure and a renewed teacher appraisal system –
Chapter 7: Section 7.05.
The re-presentations of each selected snapshots are presented below.
#Close-up snapshot: No. 1 from Narrative Number One
In section 6.5 An Experiment that Focused on Undergraduate Learning, I
discussed the alliance between a group of teachers and an undergraduate student to
reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the existing Senior School art curriculum
in light of new syllabus guidelines for review of programs. Teachers met as a group
in their scheduled faculty meeting time. I led the meetings as the key facilitator.
Teachers spoke freely about their teaching and learning and were encouraged by
teaming that respected the student teacher’s ability to capture their words and
thinking in the revised curriculum document.
This was a very early example of the type of parallel learning partnership that
can be nurtured through the alliances between the experienced and less experienced.
It is also an example of a learning alliance that can be forged between a school and
an external partner such as a university. By working as the key facilitator, I was able
to lead a process that recognised the student teacher’s ability to capture these
teachers’ conversations about their learning in print. The collaboration allowed all
parties to work in parallel. Considering the revised syllabus directions and demands,
each practitioner reflected on the strengths of their existing curriculum and the areas
143
needing refinement or discarding when reconstructing their Senior School curriculum
documents. Their reflections and new curriculum directions were then captured in
writing and published for all to share.
# Close-up snapshot: No. 2 from Narrative Number One
In section 6.7 The Virtual Workplace Project, I represented a much broader
collaborative/alliance. It allowed the classroom practices, the planning and the
thinking behind teaching practice to be captured via a video link. This Virtual
Workplace Project was supported by pre- and post-video conferencing/conversation
with undergraduates watching and listening from within their large university lecture
theatres. The teachers’ reflective practices were supported and strengthened by the
questions that came from the university undergraduates before and after the lessons.
The additional learning circles that came as ‘an extra’ in this trial project also
provided teachers an opportunity to meet as a group with a facilitator to reflect on
current reforms/issues.
The enthusiasm and observed involvement by the teachers participating in
both arms of this project varied. The enthusiasm and involvement of the learning
circle teachers was less than those directly associated with the virtual links to the
undergraduate students. The conversations in the learning circle group where the
reflections were not so directly impacting on their practice, and where the time to
meet was into the late afternoon after school had finished, may have been the reason
for less involvement and enthusiasm. The funding and the leadership required to
support this venture was quite significant. It required equivalent management and
leadership commitment from both the school and the university. This may have been
critical for the success of this program. Other projects, which were without similar
funds or collaborative leadership, were difficult to deliver alone and, in many cases,
almost impossible.
# Close-up snapshot: No. 3 from Narrative Number One
In section 6.11 The Design Educators’ Post-Graduate Studies, I highlighted
an alliance between art and design teachers at the high school and design lecturers
144
from a university. The partnership brought these educators together to reflect on
learning and teaching with new improved learning outcomes. This project could not
have developed without the participants’ openness to improvement, collaboration,
sharing and reflective dialogue. The project required members to talk openly and
reflectively about their practice and challenges. The university personnel wanted to
know more about managing their teaching and learning, and the art and design
educators from the high school setting, wanted to know more about design problem-
solving. The project was supported by strong collaborative leadership.
Both groups received funding support via a special university grant, which
aimed to assist teaching skills of the university personnel. The funding allowed
teachers to be released and also supported the special retreat where these educators
worked together to deliver a specific collaborative unit to undergraduate design
students.
Both groups of practitioners, from the school and from the university, were
involved in the delivery of this unit and were able to observe one another’s practices.
This allowed discussion and reflection on the similarities and differences in their
understandings of design education as well as in their pedagogy. This alliance
illustrates a parallel learning partnership that resulted in powerful interaction that was
supported by reflective dialogue and learning opportunities for all.
# Close-up snapshot: No.4 from Narrative Number Two
Section 7.3 A Sharpened Focus on Curriculum Leadership’ illustrates how
learning alliances, when supported by school structures, can encourage professional
relationships that operate as collaboratives, powered by reflective dialogue and
teacher- learning. It also illustrates that teacher-theorising can become part of an
organisation’s routine leadership practice, particularly when leadership is parallel,
structurally supported and working as a learning alliance or professional learning
partnership.
This close-up view of a snapshot presented in Narrative Number Two
recognises two teacher-teaming models that are best described as vertical and
145
horizontal. These vertical and horizontal teams of teachers were responsible for
leading the middle school learning in a large independent boys’ school.
The horizontal teams were made up of a class/form teacher and their
respective subject teachers. To reduce the number of teachers that a middle school
student may come in contact with, each form teacher taught between two and five
subjects each week. The number of subjects each teacher taught to their specific
class/form class varied. Generally, it was about five subjects for a Year 7 teacher,
approximately three subjects for a Year 8 form teacher and about two for Year 9.
Therefore, form teachers also possibly taught their fellow teachers’ form groups,
which meant that they collectively contain rich data on middle school learning. This
collective knowledge was supported by conversations between these teachers that ran
horizontally and vertically. Horizontal conversations were evident when each form
teacher conversed with fellow teachers of his/her form. The conversations of this
group were generally about learning development, integration possibilities and
curriculum overlaps, and their students’ social-emotional development, rather than
the specifics of their course content and assessments. That they teach across two or
more subjects and worked closely with the other teachers of their students on their
learning line allowed for teacher-driven subject integration. These teachers were
supported by their co-location and by the school’s information technology networks.
The parallel learning partnerships that emerged from these alliances
contained opportunity for conversations about the social-emotional development of
learners that can be connected to the learning development of each student. In
addition these conversations had the potential to strengthen teacher- learning that
came from collaboration and reflection.
Additional parallel learning partnerships for these teachers came with their
involvement in vertical teams. I considered these teams as vertical because this best
represented these teachers as they came together in their subject groupings.
Therefore these teams were organised via subjects. Their subject meetings
encouraged conversations about the scope and sequencing of their course work; its
delivery and assessment. Specifically appointed Assistant Heads of Faculty led these
conversations. I was responsible for leading these learning leaders as a group,
146
working to our shared vision and mission. Therefore, their learning leadership was
driven by the curriculum goals for their sub-school as well as their goals for their
particular subject area. As a learning leader, the Assistant Head of Faculty was
mindful of parallel learning relationships and the conversations for learning that
these vertical teams could support. Conversations were supported by student work
samples and assessments, and led teachers to share best practice with a focus on
pedagogy as well as the related course content and assessments. School structures
that supported these learning alliances included:
• teachers having scheduled time for collaborative subject-specific planning
and review with their Assistant Head of Faculty
• monthly meetings of all Assistant Heads of Faculty to reflect on their sub-
school and faculty goals as a group, sharing their learning, frustrations and
future directions
• a fortnightly one-on-one meeting time with the Assistant Heads of Faculty
and me as a manager/leader of learning to monitor and support progress and
development.
This section of Narrative Number Two illustrates that my leadership of these
leaders was critical for parallel learning leadership to develop.
Both the vertical teaming of subject teachers and horizontal teaming of
teachers of a particular form group, illustrates that with structural support and
parallel learning leadership, it is possible to assist teams of teachers to come together
with a purposeful agenda of sharing practice and knowledge. This leadership uses the
notion of collaboratives to encourage the reflective dialogue that is needed as vehicle
for professional growth.
# Close-up snapshot No. 5 from Narrative Number Two
Section 7.04 A Specific Focus on Teacher-Learning once again addresses the
development of teacher learning via undergraduate partnerships. Teachers were
encouraged to work together to present a number of investigative stories, which
represented very small pockets of practice, and to share their reflections and
learnings with their colleagues during a faculty meeting and also in collaborative
147
written work. These pockets of practice illustrate how opportunities can be found in
our schools to support teachers in their investigative, reflective practice and in doing
so support teacher- learning in times of reform. This snapshot illustrates examples of
the teacher and intern learning that can emerge from reflective practice. They
demonstrate how leaders/administrators can support and encourage reflective
practice by building/supporting professional learning alliances. The pockets of
practice are in themselves artifacts from a special parallel learning partnership that
emerged from our undergraduates and their supervising teachers’ mentoring
program. By mentoring a student teacher and working together to investigate a
pocket of their practice, these practitioners become more reflective of their own
practice and more willing to share their learning/observations with others.
# Close-up snapshot No. 6 from Narrative Number Two
Section 7.05 Reculturing Through Restructure and a Renewed Teacher
Appraisal System revealed a snapshot that captured the reculturing and professional
learning that can potentially evolve from a renewed teacher appraisal system. This
system had been trialled in the school and was about to be introduced throughout the
whole school. The snapshot illustrates that accountability measures have the potential
to bring about a clearer sense of whole school direction and purpose, as well as
teacher- learning alliances that come from parallel learning partnerships.
This snapshot presents a teacher review process that has the potential to
reshape practice by supportive and knowledgeable leadership and supervision, but
needed a shared commitment and understanding by all involved. The school
leaders/administrators were the key appraisers that needed to commit to knowing
exactly what it was that they would be investigating. Firstly, both the appraisers and
the appraisees needed to be aware of the agreed standards or explicit standards
criteria. In addition, during the appraisers’ visits to classes and the teachers’
reflections of their own practice, both parties needed to ask whether they would we
be looking at teaching, or whether they would be looking at teaching through
learning and student engagement. In doing so they needed to consider how we know
what we know about our practice?
148
Therefore, this snapshot captures the question of how we come to know more
about our practice and what we bring to the conversations about our
practices/repertoires of teaching. For example, can we come to knowing more
deeply, through a partnership with the appraisee, if we look together at the learning
and teaching, so as to gather the richest possible data? In addition, this process,
which is still in its early stages, does seem to be raising some questions that relate to
professional learning. For example, it is possible for such a process to enrich the
professional conversations between administrators and teachers? If it is, then is it
possible, for these parallel conversations to be deep and reflective enough to trigger
growth and development in the practices of the teacher and/or the
administrator/leader? There certainly seems to be potential for powerful learning for
both the appraisee and the appraiser.
The parallel learning partnership identified in this snapshot showing the
building of the strong parallel learning relationships needed between administrators
and teaching staff in order to build school capacity. This type of alliance requires
reflections on learning and teaching in order for deep conversations about learning
and teaching. These conversations are best supported within agreed
benchmarks/standards. A learning development plan can then be developed, one that
is an agreed plan between administrator and teacher. The process, however, needs all
involved to be conscious of the anxiety and fear that comes for some who are not
experienced in reflective self or peer assessments. These conversations about
learning and teaching should be far reaching and assist administrators also to become
more reflective about their leadership and school organisational structures, and
supports that impact on learning and teaching.
9.03 The five significant qualities presented in close-up snapshots and their
relationship to teacher-theorising and my personal leadership values
The descriptors for each five significant qualities were outlined earlier in
Table 8.1, presenting the qualities of a school working as a learning organisation
(Arbuckle, 2000). While this table presented the five qualities of Reflective
Dialogue, Collaborative Norms of Sharing, Openness to Improvement, and
Deprivatisation of Practice with their own descriptors, the separation of these seems
149
somewhat artificial. What has become quite evident after the scanning the data is that
these qualities actually have many characteristics in common and, as such, are
significantly interrelated. For this reason, it is difficult to discuss one without making
reference to the other. Similarly, it has become very obvious after analysing the
scanned data further, that the final significant qualities, Supportive and
Knowledgeable Leadership would seem critical to the success of the others.
The recognition that these sections contain all five significant qualities also
suggests that these snapshots contain evidence of teacher-theorising as a social
phenomenon. It also suggests that these have been critical for a community of
interests (Ross et al. 1992). This aligns with the notion of the importance of
professional practice researchers in today’s schools to assist in the development of a
culture of critical reflection and action (Macpherson et al., 2004). Macpherson et al.,
(2004) state that schools need to be “critically- informed, politically-activist and
action-oriented … a transformative reconstructive interrogation and investigation
into our lives as professional practitioners” (p.98). This proposition is explored
further in sections that follow.
The less visible elements of an organisation’s culture are also essential to
examine and consequently develop, if true cultural change is to occur (Connor &
Lake, 2004). The data presented in these snapshots does reflect the less visible by
bringing to the surface my key assumptions and values. These less visible elements
will be explored more fully in later sections after examining more fully, the more
visible relationships between the significant qualities, teacher- learning and schools
operating as learning organisations, then second, I . This is the focus of the following
section.
9.04 The relationship between the significant qualities, teacher-learning and
schools operating as learning organisations.
This section explores the relationship between the significant qualities and
how these qualities connect with the notion of teacher- learning and schools operating
as learning organisations. There is significant evidence from scanning of data and the
close investigations of six specific snapshots to suggest that several significant
150
qualities are evident in a variety of contexts when the leadership is supportive and
knowledgeable. Arbuckle (2000), in discussions of the importance of the supportive
and knowledgeable leadership for schools operating as learning organisations, states:
Strong professional community doesn’t just happen. It requires deliberate
attention by leaders across the system. Indeed the single most strategic thing
that school leaders can do is to create conditions that foster professional
community: a culture of interaction and reflective dialogue. (p. 327)
The close-ups snapshots illustrate how collaboration and norms of sharing
within a strong professional community can encourage collective endeavours
(Arbuckle, 2000). It is possible not only to deepen teacher-learning but also the
learning of other partners that come with effective parallel learning partnerships and
parallel learning leadership. (The co- learners in the cases presented were
undergraduates and university teachers.)
By reshaping or reconstructing traditional leadership practices to form
learning alliances or communities of practice (Wenger & Snyder, 2000) for
practitioners, we can begin to develop a culture of critical reflection and action in
schools (Arbuckle, 2000; Macpherson et al. 2004; Ross et al. 1992).
An examination of these snapshots, therefore the real possibility of reflective
teaching and teacher-theorising when coupled with a commitment to Collaborative
Norms of Sharing, Openness to Improvement and Deprivatisation of Practice. This
outcome, however, also seems more likely when special learning alliances are led
and supported by supportive and knowledgeable learning leadership.
By investigating the contents of each snapshot more closely, it has become
apparent that my leadership for curriculum reform cannot be divorced or separated
from my leadership of teacher- learning. Leadership must recognise the value of
critical friendships, professional relationships, and alliances that teachers make as
practitioners. These learning alliances are essential for practitioners to be reflective
about their core business: learning and teaching. They give the practitioner the
confidence and knowledge to question and critically theorise their own practice. This
151
in turn allows for whole school development/organisational learning (Senge et al.,
2000).
Learning alliances are based on collaborative parallel learning relationships
and demand renewed curriculum leadership models. As such, they insist that as
curriculum managers move beyond the administrative roles often associated with
management, to roles that lead relationships and collaboratives (Lingard et al, 2003).
The teacher learning that comes with leaders being involved in leading the
collaborative planning and moderation practices, for example, can illustrate the
powerful learning alliances that can be supported within school structures. Also
within the school fence there are examples of practice that also illustrate the notion
of learning alliances these would include: the existing teacher appraisal systems,
mentoring programs, co-teaching and shadowing for example. Additional alliances,
may come by our partnerships with external organisations beyond the school fence,
such as our university partners, credentialing authorities, critical friendships and
industry partners.
The following sections consider the relationships between the significant
qualities, teacher learning and schools operating as learning organisations in light of
the proposed recons tructions to Arbuckle’s (2000) framework that has been central to
the questions that have driven this study.
9.05 The proposed reconstructions
The first key sub-question that has driven this investigation asks: What can be
said about the reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) framework with its emphasis on
conversations for learning and the addition of the element of parallel relationships
and its associated elements? This question is explored by referring not only to the six
close-up snapshots, but also the more general layers of analysis presented as text
boxes within with the original narratives.
152
9.05.01 The proposed emphasis on conversations for learning
There has been an emphasis on leadership, and organisational structures that
have supported an emphasis on making the time for conversation for learning in a
number of close-up snapshots. Generally these reveal that it is possible for learning
leaders to:
• reflect on their/my learning leadership in my one-on-one scheduled meeting
time each fortnight
• meet as a larger group to talk across their subject/disciplines, sharing their
progress and concerns with respect to the shared and faculty specific goals
• meet with their subject teachers in small group meetings in school time to
moderate and share program implementation.
These snapshots align with Proudford’s (2003) documentation of the
professional teacher learning that emerges from district panels of senior schooling
teachers coming together to discuss student work samples. Similarly the QSRLS
Research Team’s (Lingard et al., 2001) final report argues for assessment literacy
and the learning communities that come with conversations centred on aligning
pedagogy with assessment tasks.
The snapshots from Narrative Number Two also reveal that an organisation
that supports similar moderation practices in their middle years teachers, by
supporting internal learning alliances, is possible. However these snapshots also
reveal that these alliances may also require specific funding/resource allocation to
support the associa ted leadership positions. Resource/funding allocation may
therefore support reduced teaching loads and necessary financial remuneration.
Connecting learning leadership and teacher appraisal to whole school
beliefs and shared contributions will demand conversations for learning. Learning
leadership that focuses on conversations for learning involve working with learning
leaders such as traditional Heads of Faculty. These learning leaders could have, as
their performance measures, parallel leadership qua lities. This is in addition to their
management and curriculum development attributes. Similarly teacher appraisal
153
models can be reflective and managed as a way to provide learning for both school
administrators and teachers through reflective critical ana lysis.
These first steps toward focused conversation about learning and teaching can
be approached through student outcomes and assessment data (Proudford, 2001;
Lingard et al., 2003). These conversations are partnerships between learning leaders
and teachers, and aim to improve student learning outcomes and the associated
teaching and assessment practices. These could be quite affordable first steps for
teacher- theorising.
The addition of Conversations for learning and shared approaches to
pedagogy to Arbuckle’s (2000) model acknowledges the importance of methods and
tools. For example, Arbuckle (2000) considers that a number of specific methods and
tools are essential for teaching and for supporting learning environments. In so
doing, she emphasises conversation, reflection and action as being key outcomes for
teachers when using specific types of methods and tools, offering collaborative
assessment, conferencing and quality school review as examples.
My reconstruction of Arbuckle’s (2000) model placed the act of conversing
about learning up-front. The strengths of teachers coming together to discuss
learning through student work samples, and assessment standards, are also advocated
by Lingard et al. (2003) and Proudford (2001). Conversation for learning was
discussed earlier in light of reflective practice and connected to professional practice
research (Macpherson et al. 2004). Here conversation for learning was associated
with collaborative action research, which requires a reflective discourse within a
community of interests. While school organisation can work against teachers
theorising their practice (Macpherson et al., 2004, McNiff, 2000; Ross et al. 1992)
these critical processes are essential when seeking organisational change. Therefore
this requires constant examination of the organisational assumptions of school policy
and the associated core values of leaders/administrators. It requires specific efforts to
be made to create special alliances or partnerships that can assist teachers’ reflective
conversations and consequently their professional learning. The section that follows
examines this notion of learning alliances based on parallel relationships
154
9.05.02 The proposed emphasis on learning alliances based on parallel
relationships
The proposed reconstruction of Arbuckle’s (2000) model for schools working
as learning organisations emphasises additional attention given to relational
leadership and proposed that the model include parallel relationships. A detailed
exploration of the various constructs that have contributed to the proposed notion of
parallel learning relationships has been presented within Chapter 3. The concept
parallel learning relationships is also presented with the concept of parallel learning
partnerships presented by Lieberman (2000), the notion of communities of practice
by Wenger and Snyder (2000) and the Crowther et al. (2002) concept of parallel
leaders. This reconstruction therefore uses parallel learning relationships as a parent
element and connects it with the elements of parallel learning leadership and
parallel learning partnerships.
This proposal to emphasise relationships is aligned with Hargreaves (1994)
who argues that school improvement, curriculum reform, teacher development and
leadership development are all seen as “dependent on the building of positive
collegial relationships for their success…[and] …among many reformers and
administrators, collaboration and collegiality have become the keys to educational
change” (Hargreaves, 1994, p.187). Similar conclusions have been reported in
Queensland School’s Reform Longitudinal Study’s final report (QSRLS Research
Team, 2001) which specifically states:
An investment in teacher social capital is both necessary and where targeted
effectively in combination with particular enabling approaches to school
leadership, sufficient for improved pedagogy and outcomes. (p.120)
The layered narratives and this more focused analysis of close-up snapshots
highlight a core belief in the importance of developing teacher intellectual and social
capital. The QSRLS Research Team (2001) emphasise this when they state:
An investment in teachers, in their expertise, in their professional judgement
and networks, and in their intellectual development…[is]…necessary for
productive pedagogies and productive outcomes. (p.119)
155
Alliances for student learning have been discussed by Pitman et al. (2002) in
their report on the review of senior schooling in Queensland. However, it is the
alliances for teacher- learning that can come from critical friendships, networks and
professional learning communities that predominantly drive the concept of parallel
learning relationships that I proposed in the reconstructed model. Lieberman (2000)
presents similar arguments for learning networks based on her own work and the
work of others like Newman and Wehlage (1995). For example, Lieberman (2000)
promotes the notion that networks, partnerships and collaboratives external to school
can also support successful school reform. Similarly, Proudford (2003) advocates
that teachers have developed their learning leadership from working in cluster school
networks.
The learning alliances illustrated in the narratives and highlighted in the
close-up snapshots presented above, recognise that an organisation that works
together, learns together, and that there is strength and powerful learning when
leadership can assist practitioners to work as a learning community. The close-up
snapshots also indicate that significant qualities, of such a community include:
Reflective Dialogue, Collaborative Norms of Sharing, Openness to Improvement and
Deprivatisation of Practice.
This study respects the need for schools being recultured or reconstructed to
work as learning organisations (Senge, 1990) and consequently, as communities of
practice (Wenger & Snyder, 2000) in order to improve the social and academic
learning outcomes of their students. The focus of this study has connected the idea of
developing schools as learning organisations (Arbuckle, 2000) with the notions of
developing learning leaders (Crowther et al., 2002; Lingard et al. 2003) and building
school capacity (Lingard et al. 2003; Hargreaves, 2003). By building school
capacity, schools can deliver the deeper cognitive learning, creativity, sense of
community, compassion and inclusivity required for our knowledge economy and the
learning leadership for both academic and social learning.
The several close-up snapshots reveal that leadership can assist learning
alliances and that alliances can support the culture of dynamic inquiry that we need
to reculture our schools as learning organisations for the improvement of our student-
156
learning outcomes. The following section presents the dynamic nature of learning
alliances that are reflected in many of the close-up snapshots and presents a
theoretical flowchart that captures the dynamic inquiry in action.
9.06 A culture of dynamic inquiry
Figure 9.1 illustrates teacher-learning/development through the commitment
to professional learning communities.
Figure 9.1 Leading Learning Alliances for a Professional Culture of Dynamic
Inquiry
We can lead learning through professional learning communities
For both the student and the teacher…learning is about a journey in building relations,
establishing connections, and comprehending the interdependencies of our lives.
This diagram illustrates the process of building relations, establishing
connections through conversations for learning, and the importance of understanding
the independencies of our lives as professionals, for effective teacher learning, and
for improving student outcomes. It illustrates in a very simple way, a far more
complex and dynamic process of reculturing. In this way Figure 9.1 is a summary of
a more complex chain of events. In an artist’s mind this diagram is like a thinking
sketch, that is a thumbnail sketch of a far more complex piece of artwork.
Teacher-Learning
Student Learning Outcomes
Professional Learning Alliances focus on
Critical friendships and special learning relationships that explore the most
fundamental aspects of our work… creating a professional culture of dynamic inquiry.
To improve
through
157
The following flowchart in Figure 9.2 has grown from the thinking in Figure
9.1 and presents in more detail a theoretical framework for the dynamic inquiry
process in action. This theoretical framework will be benchmarked against the
findings in the following chapters. It will be considered for its ability to capture this
process in action and will be adjusted in line with the refinements that may be
necessary for the reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) model.
At this stage I believe the flowchart captures the complexity and
connectedness of the events, and the relationship between the following elements:
• school leaders reculturing their schools as learning organisations, model and
support collaborative practices
• collaborative practices are based on parallel relationships
• parallel relationships respect learning from these alliances
• alliances can be seen in parallel learning leadership and parallel learning
partnerships
• partnerships encourage conversations for learning and shared approaches to
pedagogy
• conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy encourage
reflective practices
• reflective practices challenge and refine collective beliefs, mission and vision,
that are inquiring
• inquiry can reconstruct/transform assumptions connected to practice
• reconstructed assumptions can assist creative thinking
• creativity supports/understands the value of risk-taking and spontaneity
• which in turn sparks change and the next cycle of inquiry to continue.
158
Figure 9.2 A Culture of Dynamic Inquiry
The network of events illustrated in Figure 9.2 captures some practices made
visible at this stage of the study. This flowchart therefore, is an illustration of a
school working as learning organisation, capturing the cycle of inquiry that can assist
schools during times of reforms and enduring change.
In this way, the culture of dynamic inquiry also reflects an action-research
process that allows assumptions to be questioned and reshaped, realigned and
reconstructed. This process of thinking- in-action and reflection on thinking- in-action
is explained by McNiff (2000):
As soon as we reach an answer it generates another question. We are never
static…learning is a process of disorganizing stable positions and
encouraging variety…each moment represents our present best thinking, yet
is open to change as we refine and improve our ideas. (p.200)
Unless assumptions are effectively examined on a continuing basis, then actions
cannot be assessed and aligned to changing goals and circumstances (Crowther, et al.
2002).
School leaders reculturing their schools as learning organisations model and support collaborative practices
Collaborative practices are based on parallel relationships
Alliances can be seen in parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships
Parallel relationships respect learning from these alliances
Partnerships encourage conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy
Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy encourage reflective practices
Inquiry can reconstruct/transform assumptions connected to practice
Reflective practices challenge/refine collective beliefs, mission and vision, and are inquiring
Reconstructed assumptions can assist creative thinking
Creativity supports/understands the value of risk-taking and spontaneity
Which in turn sparks change and the next cycle of inquiry to continue.
159
The fear of losing the important space for teachers’ collaboration, risk-taking,
spontaneity and creativity as key drivers for reform seems to be frequently connected
to discussions of relationships and partnerships, organisational conditions, and
notions of learning (Fullan, 1991; Hargreaves, 2001; Crowther et al., 2002). This
study therefore now presents not only a reconstructed model of Arbuckle’s 2000
framework but also a flowchart of the dynamic inquiry process that would be in
action during the reculturing process. The proposed flowchart therefore recognises a
number of less visible but no less important elements as part of its dynamic.
At this point I propose to examine the place then of enabling leadership for
learning alliances and a professional culture of dynamic inquiry and therefore
whether the proposed parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships
have a purposeful place in the reconstructed model.
9.07 The assumptions and beliefs behind my practice
To illustrate the assumptions and beliefs behind my practices in action I
looked more broadly at the close-up snapshots in their totality. All close-up
snapshots clearly contained examples of collaboration but there was a need to
uncover the core beliefs, assumptions and perceptions that may have guided the
work. Such an examination assisted in understanding why collaboration, reflective
teaching or teacher-theorising, spontaneity and risk-taking may or may not have been
evident. This closer examination also sought information about core assumptions and
beliefs by examining the snapshots that profiled as significant and with either very
few/no barriers, and those that profiled as significant and with a number of barriers.
In Narrative Number One in section 6.10 School-based learning proposal for
teachers and undergraduates and then in Narrative Number Two in section 7.01,
Building New Credibility and Trust in a Tough Culture, I have recognised that both
of these had all of the five significant qualities mapped as being significant, however,
while all were, significant, they were also all, with barriers. In both snapshot
reflections I discuss the difficulty of working with other leaders who did not share
my same passion, vision or priority. This led me to ask myself where we were
misaligned? That is, what was it that my co- leaders in both contexts didn’t seem to
160
understand or value to the same extent as I did? What emerged were three personal
priorities/ values:
• that school leaders/administrators share similar notions of schools working as
learning organisations and commit to such principles
• that the teacher learning that comes from leaders and teachers working
collaboratively is as valued as more formal learning opportunities
• that learning alliances require collaborative leadership and organisational
support in order to progress on reform demands.
The snapshots that were mapped as significant and having a number of
barriers illustrated experience where core assumptions and beliefs were possibly not
well known or shared by others in the organisation (Connor & Lake,1994). It seems
essential, therefore to examine the less visible elements of an organisation’s culture,
so as to develop them if they are essential for cultural change. If barriers are to be
overcome then the challenge for leaders in schools seems to be one of ensuring that
they develop or articulate the key values more clearly when working with others. In
instances then when key values are understood and shared then the more risk-taking
and spontaneous behaviour can be accepted. This may explain the uneasy and
sometimes lonely place I wandered into during parts of Narrative Number One.
However, I believe the lessons learned from analysing these barriers for tensions and
collisions in my collaboratives reinforce the importance of examining the extent to
which we have shared values and visions.
The collaborations that come with less tensions and collisions therefore seem
to be the collaboratives that have fewer barriers. These are quite likely to be
collaboratives that have shared values and visions. The analysis of snapshots also
reveals that if we understand our key values and assumptions, through critical
reflection, then we understand the collaborations that seem to work and those that
seem to face barriers. This understanding brings the professional growth, teacher
learning and confidence in collaborative as discussed by Hargreaves (1994).
In Narrative Number Two, Section 7.04 I wrote specifically about feeling
comfortable in working toward the unknown, stating:
161
It is a teaming model that sometimes doesn’t know where it is going until we
get there. …The initial ideas are there and the work evolves and takes shape.
It is not necessarily preplanned, and the outcomes can often never be
articulated at the start. I remember an aspect of Eisner’s (1973) work that
acknowledged this as an essential component in creative process…Eisner
(1973) argued that these unforeseen objectives are potentially lost if we pre-
specify everything up front.
9.08 Some tentative propositions
What has emerged by examining the key assumptions and beliefs attached to
the collaborations within the significant snapshots, is a model of enabling rather than
disabling leadership for schools to work as learning organisations. What has also
emerged is the proposition that schools and teachers will cope with the ever
increasing demands of curriculum reforms, if:
• schools work as learning organisations
• schools enable teachers to work as learning leaders
• administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous and
collaborative practices
• there are shared beliefs, mission and vision, organisational
arrangements/support, conversations for learning and shared approaches to
pedagogy, and parallel relationships.
This would allow schools and teachers to build collective strength and confidence
(Hargreaves, 1994).
Misguided notions of collegiality however, can also exist. Some aspects of
collaborative practices are not what they seem to be at first glance. Hargreaves
(1994) suggests, for example, that collegiality can be contrived and over-structured
or designed. He uses the example of collaborative cultures that if they are restricted
to safe practices of sharing resources and planning together without reflection on the
value and purpose of what they do, or without challenging them, then, “cultures can
in these instances degenerate into comfortable and complacent cultures…[and]…be
reduced to congeniality” (Hargreaves, 1994, p.195).
162
The practices illustrated in the two narratives were often risky and
courageous. The narratives and their reflections indicate that the lessons learned from
earlier, less successful collaboratives, are what have strengthened those that came
later. The strength and creative courage that comes from working collaboratively
rather than merely congenially, is reflected in the work of Gee, Hull and Lankshear
(1996), Grundy and Bonser (2000), McNiff (2000), Crowther et al. (2002). While
collaboratives strive for more than congeniality, the importance of strong relationship
skills can not be overlooked for developing the courage to be resilient, flexible, and
collaborative.
9.09 The key elements that have been examined/altered to assist the retention of
collaboration, reflective teaching/teacher-theorising, spontaneity and risk-
taking
The key visible and less visible elements that were examined/altered would
have been:
• shared commitment to the notion of a learning organisation
• notions of teacher-learning
• organisational and relational structures that support learning alliances
• ‘enabling’ leadership from the administrative level.
These elements are apparent in the proposed reconstruction of Arbuckle’s
(2000) model whose reconstructions have been interrogated throughout the narratives
themselves and then throughout this specific chapter. The reconstructed elements are
presented in Table 9.1. The four elements are the cornerstones of the reconstructed
model. The four key elements of the reconstructed model are therefore re-presented
here and are inclusive of the visible and less visible elements outlined above.
The key values and assumptions that are inherent in the reconstruction of
Arbuckle’s (2000) model therefore propose that:
• school leaders/administrators share similar notions of schools working as
learning organisations and commit to such principles
• the teacher- learning that comes from leaders and teachers working
collaboratively is as valued as more formal learning opportunities
163
• learning alliances require collaborative leadership and organisational support
in order to progress on reform demands.
These assumptions are behind my practice, which has been less about
hierarchical micro-management and more about leading, learning and enabling
leadership (Lingard et al. 2003) to take our organisations away from controlling
organisations to learning organisations (Senge, 2000)
Table 9.1 The Key Elements of the Reconstructed Arbuckle (2000) Model
A school that leads the learning of its students and its teachers commits to…
• Parallel relationships, parallel learning leadership and parallel learning
partnerships. It is a leadership that is supportive and enabling where the principal is at the centre of the school rather than at the top (Louis et al. 1996) and there are layers of leadership.
This element has been added to Arbuckle’s (2000) original group of three elements. Its inclusion was proposed in the initial stages of this study and the propositions thus far would confirm that this addition is warranted and adds strength and credence to the model.
• Organisational arrangements are the means by which schools make resources
available. These include structures that support: time and space for teachers to meet and talk; interdependent teaching structures; physical proximity; ease of communications; rotating roles for diverse perspective; and overall enabling teacher empowerment. Guiding ideas, mission, vision and beliefs should guide organisational supports (Arbuckle, 2000, p.230). This element has come directly from Arbuckle’s three and there is no recommendation for change as a result of this study.
• Guiding ideas, mission, vision and beliefs are explicit statements written in simple
and direct language to describe a school’s principles, values, purpose and direction. They should be held as self-evident truths. They are not static and they live in the conversations and evolve as we reflect and talk about what is important to us. The talking makes the vision even clearer (Arbuckle, 2000, p.230).
This element has come directly from Arbuckle’s original three and there is no recommendation for change as a result of this study. The data has confirmed that shared and clearly articulated beliefs can be developed from nurturing parallel relationships. Reflecting Arbuckle’s (2000) belief that guiding ideas, mission, vision and beliefs developed and evolve best within a community of interests.
• Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy that can assist
teachers to become confident, reflective and inquiring practitioners through their conversations about learning. These can be assisted by the use of a variety of tools such as, teacher appraisal models, assessment conferencing/moderation of student work samples, or through various learning alliances within and beyond the school fence.
164
This element is a reconstruction of Arbuckle’s original ‘Methods and tools, which argued for designs/tools for assisting teachers with aspiration, reflective conversation and conceptualising complex issues. As a reconstruction it still acknowledges many of the original qualities but proposes that the placement of conversations be up-front and acknowledges their importance for professional growth. The reconstruction does not dismiss the benefits of tools like critical friendships, teacher appraisal models etc. but goes further to link conversation with other learning alliances.
9.10 Chapter summary – potentially powerful (almost invisible) outcomes of
‘enabling’ leadership
A school that operates as a learning organisation and invests in organisational
and relational structures can assist teachers to study their own work and that of
others. So what does this school look like? This study has identified some invisible
yet powerfully different elements of leadership that enable learning relationships and
learning leadership for teachers. Hargreaves (1994) argues strongly for these new
relationships, saying:
All forms of teacher culture are defined by particular patterns of
interrelationships among teachers...the relationships between teachers and
their colleagues are among the most educationally significant aspects of
teachers’ lives and work. They provide a vital context for teacher
development and for the ways that teachers teach…what goes on inside the
teacher’s classroom cannot be divorced from the relations that are forged
outside of it. (p. 165)
Similarly, the QSRLS Research (Lingard, et al., 2001) findings confirm that
there are certain kinds of approaches to school leadership and management that can
set in place “enabling conditions for improvement of pedagogy and student
outcomes” (p.116). However, there is a negative outcome with leadership that has a
strong managerial, micro-management focus that neglects a focus on pedagogy and
comes without “sufficient fiscal and emotional reinvestment in teacher
professionalism, in the development of a learning community and in improved
pedagogy” (p.119).
Is it therefore as simple as saying that a school that is working as a learning
organisation is a school that looks closely at how its teachers and administrators
165
work/relate with one another? One way to respond to this is to consider the
potentially powerful, (almost invisible) elements of enabling leadership. These
require significant commitments. One commitment is for schools to make time for
enabling leadership. This means making time for collaboration, which might include:
• making time for stories to be told
• making time for listening
• making time for reflecting
• making time for analysing
• making time for challenging, and
• making time for rethinking.
A second commitment is requiring leaders to more self-less and less task-
oriented so that the new directions can be explored and unforeseen spontaneous ideas
can be adopted. For example, meetings will be learning spaces where all engage in
listening, responding, reflecting and analysing one another’s stories. One outcome is
the feeling of support that individuals may have. Growing professionally as a
community of practitioners requires sharing common beliefs and understandings and
mission for student learning.
9.11 Moving on to a confirmatory readers’ filter level of analysis
This Chapter 9 sits within the deeper layers of analysis for this study and is
followed by Readers’ Filters – Confirmation and Contestations in the following
Chapter 10. Both chapters involve conclusion drawing and verification, and will
have drawn meaning from both the primary and secondary data (Huberman & Miles,
1994). The techniques used for this stage of analysis make use of
comparison/contrast, noting of patterns and themes, clustering, and the use of
metaphors and confirmatory techniques involving triangulation. The metaphor of a
readers’ filters for example represents the confirmatory techniques.
This confirmatory layer of analysis follows in the next Chapter 10. This
chapter presents, maps and analyses the participant responses to my first tentative
propositions and to my snapshots.
166
Chapter: 10 Necessary Filters
167
Chapter 10 Necessary Filters
This chapter considers secondary data. A number of written responses were
invited from respondents to serve as the confirmatory, triangulation and member-
checking steps for the analytic process. This step builds on my initial propositions.
10.01 The filters for my work – who were they?
The readers’ filters for this study reflect the triangulation, peer review and
member-checking techniques discussed earlier in Section 4.06. These filters have
come from the written responses of several key participants. The process therefore
involved:
1. Identifying one key participant for each of the close-up snapshots.
2. Inviting each of these participants to read and consider the first tentative
propositions presented within Chapter 9, as well as their related snapshot.
3. Invite each participant to respond with comments/reflections. (Refer to
Appendices E and F for copies of transcripts.)
An additional set of focus group responses was also gathered from five
participants who attended a thirty-minute conference presentation related to the
tentative propositions in Section 9.10 from my study. These tentative propositions
formed the basis for the presentation that was delivered to an international audience
of approximately fifty-five delegates. The title of the paper Building Teacher
Learning Alliances to Support Learning Leadership was accepted as a paper for
presentation at the Singapore Nanyang Technological University’s International
Conference on Education – Redesigning Pedagogy, Research, Policy, Practice. After
the presentation, the delegates were given approximately ten minutes to respond with
their thoughts, reflections and connections. Five written responses were handed in at
the end of the presentation. Many respondents were interested in continuing
conversations electronically and we exchanged contact details.
5th Layer (Confirmatory layer of analysis)
168
Refer to Appendix G for copies of:
• my abstract for the paper presented – a copy of the actual paper was given to
all delegates at the conference electronically and in hard copy to those who
attended the paper.
Refer to Appendices E and F for actual transcripts of the written responses –
Confirmations and Contestations with respondent code names/identifiers.
Refer to Appendix J for copies of:
• the participant information sheet
• the task – cover sheet for volunteer respondents
• the task – cover sheet for participant/respondents.
The responses from both groups of readers, the key participant insiders and
the distant outsiders will provide this study with a layer of member-checking and
will be scanned and mapped against my first tentative propositions. As discussed in
earlier sections, these filters also respect that varying perspectives on my narratives
will exist and that there is value in gathering these responses before making my final
propositions in the closing chapter. These filters have also assisted in securing a
number of additional points of departure from my first propositions. The closing
chapter presents these points in its concluding propositions as I respond to the key
research questions.
The names of all respondents have been withheld, although, the details of
their professions (where given) and their connection to my work can be found in
Appendix D. The outsiders are referred to by pseudonyms and as participants
A,B,C,D or E. The snapshot respondents (insiders) are referenced either by their
pseudonym or by their corresponding snapshot that is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6.
10.02 The reflections and responses of my readers mapped for analysis and for
asking, ‘What did they have to say?’
In addition to bringing to the study six specific snapshots of practice that
mirror examples of working as a learning organisation, the previous chapter closed
by making a number of tentative conclusions. It stated that parallel learning
169
relationships (which include parallel learning leadership and parallel learning
partnerships), as well as the specific emphasis on conversation for learning, as
proposed additions to the reconstructed model for learning organisations, did have a
purposeful place in the reconstructed model.
A mapping and scanning table similar to that used in mapping the two
narratives has been developed. Similar to the mapping of my primary data in the
earlier analysis sections, Table 10.1 has been used to map the key values reflected in
the written responses. Transcripts of the responses of the participants have been
included in Appendices E and F. The responses were interpreted for their core beliefs
and values and mapped into the Table 10.1.
The mapping assisted in establishing the degree of alignment between the
statements of the respondents and my first tentative propositions, and considering
what this meant for my conclusions. Where the key values and beliefs were
considered to be a noticeable extension of those presented in the first propositions,
this was noted and identified by an emphasis symbol. Where this occurred, the hash
symbol (#) or the star symbol (*) was placed next to the respondent’s idea or belief.
The hash symbol was placed nearest to the first extended idea and if a second and
different idea emerged in the same statement, then the star symbol was used to
indicate this second extended idea. These symbols were recorded in the
corresponding respondent’s column next to their assigned (3). If the same symbol
appeared more than once along the same line, this indicated that a particular point of
emphasis was made by a number of participants.
170
Table 10.1 Filtered Responses from Readers that Correlate with Aspects of the
Proposed Tentative Conclusions
Key points/values of the responses which
correlate with the key values reflected in the proposed tentative conclusions
Conference delegates’ responses
Snapshot
participants’ responses
A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6 Valued community of practice and learning
organisations to assist continuous professional
development and teacher learning.
3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3
Valued the concepts of partnering, teaming and
alliances for teacher development and learning. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Valued action research to develop reflective
practice, and believed that it could build the capacity
of teachers# through a cycle of learning
development supported by organisational structures.
3 #
3 3
Valued the concept of parallel learning partnerships,
parallel learning leadership, and the importance of
moving away from top down leadership practices#.
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 #
3
#
3 3
Valued new parallel relationships with trainees, and
believed that they can be reinvigorating for
teachers#.
3 3 3 #
3
Valued alliances and believed that these partnerships
rely on the enabling leadership/brokership#. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
# 3 3 3
Valued a model of professional development that
recognises a different culture of learning in schools
– one that understands the necessity of flexibility# to
accommodate the rate of change in the world of
work.
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
#
3 3 3
Values the importance of shared, clearly defined
goals that are strategic# for fruitful partnerships and
interlacing leadership structures*.
3
# 3
* 3
Values organisational arrangements that support
learning alliances, e.g. timetabled time to meet#,
opportunities to present*.
3 3 3 3 3 #
3
#
3
*
3 3
171
Values conversations about and for learning. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Values opportunities in the daily life of teaching for
taking risks (being creative), and having interactions
to share and reflect.
3 3 3 3 3 3
Values shared beliefs/consistency with school
leaders/leadership that models/values learning
organisation practices.
3 3 3 3
A general scanning of the values that seem to underpin the statements
made by the participants indicates many that align with the qualities/characteristics
of schools working as learning organisations, as described by Arbuckle (2000) and
discussed extensively in the previous Chapter 9. These qualities contain the core
values that underpin the first tentative propositions as presented in Chapter 9 and
therefore would indicate that there was significant alignment between my first
propositions and the respondents’ written statements.
Further scanning and analysis of this data reveals a number of points
worthy of further discussion and consideration. These will be presented and
discussed in the following sections and include:
• the additional points that are of emphasis
• several points of departure
• the values/beliefs that were evident in all respondents
• the values/beliefs that were evident in nearly all respondents’ statements
• the values/beliefs that only a few shared in statements as well as in a number
of points of departure.
10.03 Points of emphasis that emerged from the respondents’ statements
The respondents’ statements revealed a noticeable extension to, or emphasis
on, the ideas of those presented in the first tentative propositions and snapshots.
These are summarised in the Table 10.2.
172
Table 10.2 Points of Emphasis
Points of Emphasis Respondent/s
• Building the capacity of teachers through alliances Jane • Moving away from top down leadership models Jane and Terry • Valuing new parallel relationships for re-invigorating
teachers Terry
• Enabling leadership that can also be interpreted as a type of brokership
Len
• Understanding that a new culture for teacher learning will need to respect flexibility of approaches to accommodate the rate of change in the world of work
Len
• Being aware that the shared, clearly defined goals for collaboration need to be strategic…
Len
• Understanding that successful alliances rely on interlacing (perhaps this is what I mean by parallel)
Terry
• Understanding that school organisational arrangements need to accommodate the time for teachers to meet …
Len and Jane
• Valuing opportunities for teacher presentation of learning Terry
In all cases, the respondents are speaking from their teacher/learning leaders’
perspective. Their statements indicate strong support for the general
qualities/characteristics of schools working as learning organisations. Their
responses reinforce my tentative propositions, which state that teachers cope with
ever increasing demands of curriculum reforms if:
• schools can work as learning organisations, and
• allow teachers to work as learning leaders, by having
• administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous,
and collaborative practices, by committing to
• shared beliefs, mission and vision, organisational arrangements/support,
conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy, and parallel
relationships
Many points of emphasis relate to the role of administrators/leaders and,
specifically, the importance of their enabling leadership. Jane and Terry describe
working with a learning leader who emphasises the importance of building teacher
capacity. Both Jane and Terry are staff members of the same school number two. In
so doing, Jane and Terry both emphasise the importance of leaders who can support,
enable and model risk-taking spontaneous and collaborative practices. For example,
173
in Terry’s reflections on his role in working with a student teacher to investigate a
pocket of practice, he states:
By mentoring, the supervising teachers either revisited or drilled deeper into a
pedagogical practice. With their student teacher they learnt, rethought and
reflected. Similar to finding an old treasured book on the shelf, dusting it off
and conversing about its importance with someone else who had an interest in
the story, the mentor was reinvigorated and reminded of the value of this
story (or practice). (Respondent Terry – Story Number Two)
All respondents emphasised the value of enabling and capacity building
leadership. Jane emphasised in her observations of other leader types in her school.
This is evident in the following passage taken from Jane’s transcript:
I currently work with many different types of leaders: some are task masters
(they dish out tasks often via e-mail with no personal contact with you to
consider or hear your position, etc.); some are masters of promotions [and]
they meet with you offering you the challenge of a task and then once
completed, claim it as their own. They have fed your human need to be
needed/feel worth in the initial stages, but forget you once the task is
completed thereby failing to complete the conversation); others (often far too
few – because they are generally under attack) work alongside you every step
of the way. They recognise your basic desire to be challenged and nurtured,
encouraging you to take risks by offering you opportunities, supporting you
throughout the journey, sharing with you, listening and standing beside you,
seeing it through. (Respondent Jane–Story Number Two)
A similar emphasis on enabling/capacity-building leadership came from Terry:
Rather than merely focusing upon the curriculum tasks and mandating the
curriculum processes to be ‘enacted’, the curriculum manager must model the
learning alliances by establishing and maintaining collaborative
relationships. The mentioned renewal of curriculum leadership models cannot
ignore the administrative roles but it must prioritise the conversations and
reflections as tasks of equal or greater importance to other paper-based or
budget-oriented tasks. The new model of curriculum leadership does exist but
174
can easily be victimised or cast aside by the prevalence of the ‘old
authoritive’ leaders. (Respondent Terry–Narrative Number Two)
Both Jane and Terry also reinforce the importance of school
leaders/administrators being committed to the notion of schools working as learning
organisations. This comes through also in the response from George, who was also
from School Number Two. He indicates that the re is inconsistency in the styles of
leadership in his school.
Agree entirely with your summary. Only means to truly develop a great
school is to develop such a learning environment. Too often we are working
in isolation and often ‘re- inventing the wheel’. Resources much better utilised
when internal education via sharing is present. Administration must change
attitude to developing a shared vision. The handing down of a direction with
little ownership by the coalface immediately destroys the potential for such
change. (Respondent George–Story Number Two)
In a similar way to George, Len commented on the importance of
administrators sharing their vision and the alignment of strategic goals of partnering
between institutions. Len argues that alliances between institutions will only be
sustainable when there are, “clearly defined goals and interlacing leadership
structures” (Respondent Len – Narrative Number One). Terry, too, emphasises the
benefits that came with the opportunities to partner, reflect and present:
The work done in concert by staff and undergraduates came easily and was
enjoyable because of the shared goal and common belief each person had an
important contribution to make. In contrast it is difficult and infrequent for
such collegial unions to occur among our own staff, perhaps because there is
not often an opportunity to present to a public audience. All involved
(internal and external to the school) recognised the power of the sharing of
our approaches and the great conversations that all could participate in.
(Respondent Terry – Narrative Number Two)
The key feature of the respondents’ comments was the importance of teachers
learning from partnerships supported by shared commitment and enabling/capacity-
building leadership. Len goes further to add two points of emphasis that extend the
175
notion of an enabling/capacity-building leadership. Len presents the concept of
brokership as someone who is charged with working like an agent or a
broker/negotiator to bring the partnerships together. This concept of brokership
certainly supports the notion of parallel learning leadership presented in this study,
but extends to the role of a learning leader’s ability to also bring about/develop
parallel learning partnerships. Len emphasises this in the fo llowing:
In one faculty the collaboration and subsequent joint resource development
were pursued much more vigorously, again driven by the
leadership/brokership role, and in the case, by the enthusiastic support of
the faculty head. Where there was less recognition of mutual benefit at this
level, the relationship quickly faded. (Respondent Len – Narrative Number
One)
Len also refers to the concept of interlacing which is a weaving or lacing
together of ideas and goals. This concept fits with the notion of alliance, or a union
of idea for mutual benefit. The importance of mutual benefit was emphasised by Len:
In one faculty the collaboration and subsequent joint resource development
were pursued much more vigorously, …where there was less recognition of
mutual benefit at this level, the relationship quickly faded. (Respondent Len –
Narrative Number One)
Len also reinforced the importance of organisational arrangements to support
the new culture of learning in schools. He argued for organisational arrangements
and enabling/capacity-building leadership:
I support the idea of building learning organisations through flexible and
imaginative leadership. I feel the author in this report certainly exemplifies
the energy and passion required to drive such open-ended and system-
challenging change. The culture of learning in schools is changing and needs
further flexibility to accommodate that rate of change in the world of work.
The potential to cultivate networks and partnerships across schools, across
different educational sectors, professions and industry, is a key element of
new learning cultures. (Respondent Len – Narrative Number One)
176
Here Len suggests that the energy and passion of leaders also may play an
important role in building a school as a learning organisation. Emerging from these
responses by Len and others is a specific list of beliefs which include:
• belief in the value of schools working as learning organisations 310
• belief in the importance of organisational arrangements to accommodate the
new culture of learning 3
• belief in the value of enabling/capacity building leadership 3
• belief recognition of the importance of an alignment in strategic goals and
therefore mutual benefits 3
• belief in the importance of energy and passion in the leader’s mission#
• a belief in the importance of the brokership role that leaders can play to bring
partners together for learning. #
The responses in this second layer of data bring wider perspectives to this
study. Some qualities are similar to those already proposed in the first propositions,
but there are others that warrant further consideration and discussion. Those that
require this further consideration and discussion will be examined in the following
section. This following section will continue to scan/sieve the respondents’
statements for the questions or concerns that emerged and then compare the results
with the several points that emerged from the analysis in this section.
10.04 Some concerns/questions arising from the respondents’ comments
The statements that present as possible points of departure in this section
have been examined as statements that raise questions/concern. Once again to assist
the analysis process these have been mapped and summarised in Table 10.3.
10 To assist in the comparative analysis, a 3 will be placed next to the values listed in the following summaries of values that correlate with the articulated beliefs of this study. In addition a # has been placed against those which are new or hold a point of difference that will be examined for their contribution or contestation.
177
Table 10.3 The Respondents’ Questions or Concerns Filtered from Their Statements
Key points of their responses which correlate with aspects of the proposed tentative
conclusions
Conference delegates’ responses
Snapshot participants’
responses
A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6
A question related to issues of time for teachers to
meet for conversations about learning. 3
A question about what of those who don’t wish to
be a part of the process. 3
A question about the presumption that schools are
not currently working as learning organisations–
insisting that the existing propositions are perhaps
making blanket statements.
3
Questions related to the extent of parallel interest
at an institutional or systemic level unless it had
wider and more lasting mutual benefit. It would
seem that the tertiary institutions have ultimate call
here.
3 3
Questions related to the sustainability of
collaboration and joint resource development when
there is no recognisable mutual benefit.
3 3 3 3
A question related to working in isolation when
cementing relations between schools and the
tertiary sector as against more success when
working in clusters.
3
Questions related to sustainability of school and
tertiary learning alliances without leaders who are
appointed specifically to cultivate and drive the
liaison.
3 3 3 3
Questions related to the relevance and value of
leadership that doesn’t model the ‘learning
alliances’ that value the development/maintenance
of collaborative relationships
3 3 3 3 3
Questions related to some alliances that are not
with shared understandings/beliefs and how when
this alignment is not in place then, there can be a
rise in stress and suspicion/mistrust.
3 3 3 3
178
The presentation of the respondents’ perspectives in the form of questions has
been able to affirm some of the findings presented earlier when examining the
statements for points of emphasis. Whether couched more positively as points of
emphasis or as key questions, the outcomes seem quite similar.
As the mapping in Table 10.3 suggests, the key values that have emerged
from these questions include:
• a belief in the importance of shared beliefs and mutual benefits for
sustainability was raised when questioning the sustainability of alliances
without this in place, and specifically the difficulty of parallel interests being
maintained at an institutional or systemic level, unless it had wider and more
lasting mutual benefit 311
• a belief in the importance of a broker or specifically appointed leader to
cultivate and nurture partnerships was raised through questioning the
sustainability of school and tertiary learning alliances without leaders who are
appointed specifically to cultivate and drive the liaison #
• a belief in the importance of enabling/capacity-building leadership by
questioning other forms of leadership that don’t openly develop relationships,
and learning alliances 3
• a belief in the importance of schools working as learning organisations by
questioning the presumption that schools are not currently working as
learning organisations already 3
• a belief in the importance of organisational support was raised with concerns
for time 3
• a belief in the importance of considering those in schools who don’t wish to
be part of the process #
• a belief in the importance of recognising the ‘stress, suspicion/mistrust’ that
occurs when working in a school where some of the administrators don’t
necessarily commit to teachers working collaboratively and in learning
alliances. #
11 Once again, to assist in the comparative analysis, a 3 will be placed next to the values listed in the following summaries of values that correlate with the articulated beliefs of this study. In addition a # has been placed against those which are new or hold a point of difference that will be examined for their contribution or contestation.
179
10.05 The readers ’ filters – what was confirmed and what was contested?
This chapter has analysed the additional secondary data, which consists of
eleven responses from two different sets of respondents. The analysis was assisted by
a mapping technique similar to that used for scanning the primary data presented as
two narratives. The data from these respondents’ statements were examined first for
the points of emphasis and secondly for questions/concern. The values that emerged
from these scannings were then listed and the listings were then compared. As a
result it is possible to confirm that there is:
• a strong correlation between the leadership values that I have articulated through
my narratives and my earlier layers of analysis, and the values that are illustrated
in the statements from the respondents
• a number of additional points of departures rather than points of contestation
In summary, the values/points that correlate and are marked with a 3 in the
listings, are:
• a belief in the value of schools working as learning organisations 3
• a belief in the importance of organisational arrangements to accommodate the
new culture of learning 3
• a belief in the value of enabling/capacity-building leadership 3
• a belief recognition of the importance of an alignment in strategic goals and
therefore mutual benefits. 3
The values/points that present as points that need to be considered as points
of departure or points of difference and marked with a # and include:
• a belief in the importance of energy and passion is necessary for successful
learning #
• a belief in the importance of the brokership role that leaders can play to bring
partners together for learning #
• a belief in the importance of considering those teachers who don’t wish to be
part of the process #.
• a belief in the importance of recognising the stress, suspicion/mistrust that
occurs when working in a school where some of the administrators don’t
180
necessarily commit to teachers working collaboratively and in learning
alliances. #
The chapter that follows will consequently consider both the affirming set of
values and the additional points of difference/interest that have emerged through the
readers’ filters when presenting a rejoinder and response to these findings before
making its closing propositions.
Chapter: 11 Passion, Energy, Commitment
and Mission
181
Chapter 11 Passion, Energy, Commitment and Mission
This concluding chapter presents my final theorisation of what it means to
reculture a school as a learning organisation by considering the first tentative
propositions in light of the findings from the readers’ filters presented in the previous
chapter. The following research questions have guided this study:
• What does deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a learning
organisation involve?
• How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction take place?
• What propositions can be elicited about the implications of deconstructing a
school as a learning culture and characterised by educational/learning
leadership?
The chapter moves from its concluding responses to these questions, and then
highlights the significant theoretical, methodological and practical contributions of
the study. Finally, this chapter closes with recommendations for further research.
11.01 What does deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a learning
organisation involve?
This study recognises that any deconstruction and reconstruction of a school
as a learning organisation is first a reconstruction of core beliefs and values. These
beliefs and values are reflected in a school’s culture and are inclusive of visible and
less visible elements.
By examining my own values and the values evident in the statements of the
respondents, I have been able to answer the first of the research questions, which
asked: ‘What does deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a learning
organisation involve?’ and conclude that the deconstruction and reconstruction of a
school as a learning organisation involves schools having:
• shared commitment to the notion of a learning organisation by all
stakeholders
6th Layer (Final layer of analysis)
182
• reconstructed/wider notions of teacher learning
• organisational and relational structures that support learning alliances
• enabling/capacity-building leadership from the administrative level.
This set of guidelines has adjusted earlier first propositions to emphasise
enabling as capacity-building. The analysis has also revealed that this
enabling/capacity-building leadership is a key to the process of reculturing a school
as a learning organisation. The data from participants would also indicate that this
notion of leadership has also been a primary focus for answering the second of the
key research questions, i.e.: ‘How does a process of deconstruction and
reconstruction takes place?’
11.02 How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction take place?
The analysis of data from the narratives and data from the respondents
confirm the central role of the enabling/capacity-building leader in the process of
deconstructing and reconstructing a school as a learning organisation. The data also
affirms that this would represent a shift away from schools being controlling
organisations to learning organisations (Senge, 2000). The additional points of
difference/interest that emerge from the analysis of the respondents’ statements also
suggest that the process of deconstruction and reconstruction would be assisted by:
• realising the energy and passion that sits behind the enabling/capacity
building leadership
• realising that this will require a need to move from top down leadership
• realising that enabling/capacity-building leaders can also work as brokers or
agents to assist in establishing parallel learning partnerships
• realising the important role enabling/capacity-building leaders play in
developing/supporting flexible and more imaginative school organisation to
support the time needed for learning alliances
• realising the importance of having goals aligned, strategic and parallel, to
achieve mutual benefit from learning alliances.
I therefore affirm that enabling/capacity-building leadership is correctly
placed as the key to answering the second of the research questions. This question,
183
which asked: How does the deconstruction and reconstruction process take place will
therefore be answered by saying, the deconstruction and reconstruction process takes
place when the school community understands:
• that school leaders/administrators must share similar notions of schools
working as learning organisations and commit to such principles
• that the teacher- learning that comes from leaders and teachers working
collaboratively is as valued as more formal learning opportunities
• that learning alliances require enabling/capacity-building, collaborative,
energetic and passionate leadership in order to progress on reform demands.
11.03 What propositions can be elicited about the implications of deconstructing
a school as a learning culture and characterised by educational/learning
leadership?
The study has found that the implications of deconstructing a school as a
learning culture are characterised by educational/learning leadership. Teachers will
cope better with the ever- increasing demands of curriculum reforms, if
• schools can work as learning organisations
• schools allow teachers to work as learning leaders
• administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous and
collaborative practices
• there are shared beliefs, mission and vision, organisational
arrangements/support, conversations for learning, shared approaches to
pedagogy and parallel relationships.
• that by enabling/capacity-building leadership for learning alliances, a
professional culture of dynamic inquiry can evolve with a renewed focus on
conversations for learning.
11.04 Significant contributions and lessons emerging from this action-inquiry
self-study
This study has theoretical, methodological and practical significance. The
theoretical framework presents in developmental stages, a reconstruction of learning
organisations. The original framework from Arbuckle (2000), illustrates how we
184
might theoretically frame the notion of schools working as learning organisations.
This original framework has undergone two reconstructions to present a theorised
model of schools restructuring as learning organisations. Secondly, the
methodological significance acknowledges a legitimate and rigorous form of
practitioner research revealing self-study methodology at a level that is more than
mere self- indulgence. This is understood through this study’s emphasis on theorising
through layers. The section concludes by acknowledging the practical theorising that
this study argues as being captured in creating a culture of dynamic inquiry.
My interests in leading and managing curriculum reforms, and the associated
challenges to my leadership and for the learning leadership of my fellow teachers,
have been the key drivers for this study. This narrative self-study has also been
driven by an interest in moving conversations between practitioners from those that
focus on merely the content and assessment of subjects, to deep reflective
conversations that allow us to speak to one another, and focus on learning across
disciplines. The two narratives of this self-study represent two significant chapters in
my professional life and hold approximately four years of professional snapshots.
The initial analysis and then deeper analysis of six specific snapshots, allowed me to
examine my practice of partnering, conversing, arranging and developing shared
vision. These practices are recognised in the literature, and now in this research as
being powerful reculturing mechanisms.
This study reveals the importance of creating a culture of dynamic inquiry for
deep learning. In order for this to occur, it seems that the proposed parallel learning
relationships, (along with the proposed associated concepts parallel learning
partnerships, and parallel learning leadership), are critically important. The findings
of this study therefore suggest that parallel learning relationships require
enabling/capacity building leadership.
The following section presents the significant contributions associated with:
a. The conceptual framework based on the original Arbuckle (2000)
model and its developments, for their theoretical contributions.
b. The layering within and beyond the narratives that ensured the rigour
of the analysis process, for methodological contributions.
185
c. The emergence of a dynamic flowchart that illustrates a Culture of
Dynamic Inquiry, for practical contributions.
11.04.01 Theoretical contributions: The evolution of a concluding model
The proposed reconstructions to Arbuckle’s (2000) model, presented earlier
in Chapter 3.06, considered specific emphasis be given to conversations for learning
and shared approaches to pedagogy and parallel learning relationships for
successful partnerships and leadership. These elements were therefore added to the
original model. The conclusions of this study support the proposed reconstructions
but found a need for an additional layer of emphasis. The refinements to the
proposed reconstructions therefore require emphasising:
• The importance of being innovative in our organisational design so as to find
time and spaces for collaborations when considering Organisational
Arrangements.
• Enabling/capacity building leadership to assist the parallel learning
relationships.
• Culture of Dynamic Inquiry as the process that best describes Arbuckle’s
Deep Learning Cycle.
To illustrate the developments made to Arbuckle’s (2000) model throughout this
study the following is presented:
1. The original Arbuckle (2000) model – Figure 11.1.
2. Reconstruction No. 1 - The proposed reconstructions to Arbuckle’s
model with additional notes of explanation – Figure 11.2. This was
developed after consideration of the literature in this field.
3. Reconstruction No. 2 - The refinements to the proposed model with
additional notes of explanation – Figure 11.3. This was developed
after considering the findings that emerged from the analysis of the
significant snapshots and the responses from the key participants.
The Concluding Model (Figure 11.4) is therefore a final reconstruction. It reflects
the initial proposed changes as well as the modifications made after deeper analysis
of the snapshots and written responses of key participants.
186
Brief notes of explanation and footnotes also support the following diagrams.
The diagrams with their supporting text, serve to illustrate the development of the
concluding model. It is the concluding model that I present as being a significant
theoretical contribution.
Figure 11.1 The Original Arbuckle Model – The Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture12
12 From: Arbuckle, M. (2000). “Triangle of Design, Circle of Culture ”. In Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton and Kleiner , Schools That Learn , London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, p.327.
187
Figure 11.2 Reconstruction Number One13
13 The proposed reconstructions to Arbuckle’s original diagram are identified with bright pink boxes.
Organisational arrangements
-Innovative design of time
and space for teacher learning
Conversations
for learning and shared approaches to
pedagogy
Parallel learning
relationships -parallel learning
partnerships -parallel learning
leadership
Awareness and values
Skills and capabilities
Attitudes and beliefs
DEEP
LEARNING CYCLE
Shared beliefs, mission and vision
Domain of
Enduring Change (social domain; culture;
professional community)
Domain
of Action (organisational
architecture; technical domain)
This emphasis was a proposed addition to
Arbuckle’s original model and added a special
emphasis of conversation to her concept of Methods and
Tools
This emphasis on parallels was a
proposed new addition to Arbuckle’s original
188
Figure 11.3 Reconstruction Number Two - The refinements to the proposed
reconstructed model14
14 The concluding refinements to the reconstructed model are presented in variegated deep shades of the dark pink and sit with the first reconstructions in pink. The tan and mauve coloured boxes identify the original elements of Arbuckle’s (2000) work that have not been altered.
Organisational arrangements
-Innovative design of time
and space for teacher learning
Conversations
for learning and shared approaches to
pedagogy
Enabling/capacity
building leadership of
learning alliances
Awareness and values
Skills and capabilities
Attitudes and beliefs
DEEP
LEARNING CYCLE
Shared beliefs, mission and vision
Domain of
Enduring Change (social domain; culture;
professional community)
Domain
of Action (organisational
architecture; technical domain)
Supported by: Parallel learning relationships
-parallel learning partnerships
CULTURE OF DYNAMIC
INQUIRY
Organisational arrangements have had ‘innovative design for creating space and time for teacher learning’
added.
‘Culture of Dynamic Inquiry’ has been
added to describe the deep learning process.
The additional emphasis on the ‘Enabling/capacity building leadership of learning alliances’ had been added to
the proposed ‘Parallel learning
relationships’.
189
Figure 11.4 The Concluding Model
11.04.02 Methodological contribution: Theorising through layers
The outcomes presented through the six snapshots, which have been drawn
from two narratives, confirm the transformative nature of this action-inquiry self-
study. Readers have been reminded of the messiness of practitioner research that
comes with tracking this transformation. The layering of the narratives to assist the
analysis process reflects a process of making sense of this messiness and
consequently a true sense of this established form of practical theorising in the
teaching profession (McNiff, 2000). These characteristics should be seen not as
limitations but rather as authentic strengths and therefore make a significant
contribution to the outcomes of this research.
The theorising model reflected in this study recognises generative
transformational theorising (McNiff, 2000), the process of inventing and reinventing
Organisational arrangements -Innovative design of time and space for teacher learning
Conversations
for learning and shared approaches
to pedagogy
Enabling/capacity
building leadership of
learning alliances
Awarenessand values
Skills and capabilities
Attitudes and beliefs
DEEP
LEARNING CYCLE
Shared beliefs, mission and
vision
Domain of
Enduring Change (social domain; culture;
professional community)
Domain of Action
(organisational architecture;
technical domain)
Supported by: Parallel learning relationships
-parallel learning partnerships -parallel learning leadership
CULTURE OF DYNAMIC
INQUIRY
190
(Ross et al, 1992) and critical incident analysis (Tripp, 1993). The multi- layering of
texts and chapters, together with the data scanning and mapping techniques, and the
use of confirmatory techniques, took data analysis through the three layers of data
reduction, data display and conclusion drawing (Huberman and Miles, 1994). This
ensured the required rigour and validity for this study. These dynamic processes have
been described in the study as processes that mirror my artistic production processes.
They have been referred to as deconstruction and reconstruction processes and can
be seen to permeate the theorising within this study. This theorising has involved the
constant examination of assumptions and effectiveness, and has been supported by
numerous visual thinking devices like visual metaphor, concept mapping and
matrices.
These methods together capture my methodology. While some
elements may be similar to the methods of others, this study presents its unique
collection of theorising mechanisms. These methodological characteristics are this
study’s authentic strengths and therefore make a significant contribution to the
outcomes of this research.
11.04.03 Practical contributions: The ‘Culture of Dynamic Inquiry’
flowchart
The findings of this study also support the proposed emphasis on
‘Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy’ and extends
further to emphasise that when these are in place with the other key elements of the
refined reconstructed framework we have a reculturing that reflects a Culture of
Dynamic Inquiry. As a result the associated flowchart presented earlier in Chapter
9.06 has also been refined and re-presented as an important illustration of the model
in action. The refinements to the flowchart now mirror the modifications made to the
proposed Arbuckle (2000) model. This is presented in Figure 11.5.
These refinements emphasise the key place for Enabling/capacity Building
Leadership by placing it up-front. This flowchart emphasises how important and
dynamic conversations about learning can be when learning alliances are supported
and formed. The flowchart represents a significant practical framework behind the
dynamics of reculturing. As a result, it is re-presented in these concluding sections
for its significant practical contribution to the reculturing practice.
191
Figure 11.5 The refined model for a ‘ Culture of Dynamic Inquiry’
The reconstructions applied to Arbuckle (2000) model, the theorising
mechanisms behind my methodological frameworks, and the development of a
flowchart to illustrate the dynamic process of inquiry has emerged from the final
synthesis of data. These refinements therefore extend, and perhaps animate,
Arbuckle’s (2000) work by emphasising:
• the place for shared beliefs, mission and vision,
• how creative, risk-taking leadership may appear in the process, and
• how the dynamic inquiring learning organisation in action may involve deep
learning.
This section will now move beyond the final propositions and make several
recommendations for further research based on the limitations and propositions of
this study.
Enabling/capacity building school leaders reculturing their schools as learning organisations model and support collaborative practices
Collaborative practices are based on parallel relationships
Alliances can be seen in parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships
Parallel relationships respect learning from these alliances
Parallel partnerships encourage conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy
Conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy encourage reflective practices
Inquiry can reconstruct/transform assumptions connected to practice
Reflective practices challenge/refine collective beliefs, mission and vision, and are inquiring
Reconstructed assumptions can assist creative thinking
Creativity supports/understands the value of risk-taking and spontaneity
Which in turn sparks change and the next cycle of inquiry to continue.
The additional emphasis on ‘Enabling/capacity building
leadership as an important starting point has been added to the original.
192
11.05 Recommendations for further research
As a proponent of self-study then, I respect that while the outcome of this
work should be of interest to other practitioners who are leading schools in times of
reform, the study did not set our initially to make generalisations that could be
simplistically transferred to other contexts. What has emerged, however, are two
refined frameworks.
The first framework illustrates the key elements for developing the culture of
dynamic inquiry and the deep learning we see necessary for learning organisations.
The second framework illustrates the inquiry process in action using the elements for
critical support. School leaders, in reflecting on their organisation and their practices,
might consider this reflection and the reconstructions of Arbuckle’s (2000) work to
search for the barriers to school capacity building for enduring change.
Several realisations emerged for me in this self-study that are worthy of
sharing with a wider professional audience. McNiff’s (2000) criteria for judging (or
validating) this transformation, and the associated rigour and credibility of self-study
research, are useful to revisit (first discussed in Chapter 4, Section 4.06) when
discussing these realisations. These criterion are reflected upon here in this
concluding section of the research.
One major realisation was that the validity of this work is judged from the
evidence of transformation (McNiff, 2000), as presented earlier in Chapter 4. On
this, McNiff (2000) states:
Narratives that show the situatedness of the individual and how they worked
to improve their understanding …emphasise the individual accountability of
practitioners and the collective responsibility of nurturing learning from
experience and in this way contribute to a new view of professionalism…the
lessons learnt from the telling and sharing of stories travel far beyond the
workplace and have significant implications for social renewal. (p. 171)
The multi- layering of analysis, spanning Chapters 5 through to 10, reveals
specific layers of theorising. The earlier layers of narrative, coupled with their first
193
reflections, illustrate one level of knowing- in-action and reflection on knowing- in-
action, and this has been critical for transforming my practice. An example of this
explicit evidence of learning and how this learning constitutes a theory of personal
social improvement can be seen in the reflective text of the Narrative Number Two:
I now find myself being able to make a connection with this my preferred
style of teaching that emphasised the opportunity for the invisible and the
unpredictable, with my support and management, and now with my
leadership of these learning leaders. This business of working toward the
unknown could be difficult for some teachers, just as it may have been for
some of my students over the years. (Refer to Confidence with Collaboratives,
Section 7.03.)
In addition to the reflective text that was woven into the narratives, there
were also purposeful connections to both the literature and specific evidence through
out the numerous layers. In the earlier stages, these involved connecting the
narratives with specific artifacts including formal correspondence and journal
extracts. (Refer to Appendices B & C for lists of artifacts.) As the layers are aligned
to critical incidents, analysis became less descriptive and more complex in
explanations.
The critical incidents, sieved through the lens of others, were called readers’
filters and added to the process of validation, through written responses, forming an
additional layer of member-checking. The responses were able to confirm and
contest the data and the first propositions. The close-up snapshots of my leadership
prompted my reflections of these critical incidents and further, the reflections of each
key participant. These responses were then analysed and used to shape my rejoinder,
response and conclusions (Chapter 11).
The deeper stages of analysis reflect McNiff’s (2000) focus on evolving
theory, and the importance of revisiting and rethinking my work. What emerged
from the readers’ filters was also strong evidence of what McNiff (2000) refers to as
potential for influence. According to McNiff (2000), this quality for ensuring validity
and rigour can have wider influence and even social renewal. Within the responses
from one participant, Jane, we see evidence of her renewal and development, when
194
she compares leadership that is restrictive rather than transformative. On this matter,
Jane states “most school structures can often forget to support teacher learning”. She
compares these models to her work under my leadership saying: “The monthly Assist.
Heads meetings are such a vital part of our development …as learning leaders
(Response 4: Jane – Appendix E)”. Similarly, another participant wrote:
Teacher learning requires much greater attention. Similar to the evolution
away from ‘authority-military’ style teachers to ‘democratic facilitator’
teaching, the learning leaders must move away form the concept of ‘top-
down’ and move towards ‘supportive and collaborative leadership’…wherein
the practitioner and leader can facilitate and be an integral part of the
sharing process. (Response 5: Terry –Appendix E)
The evidence of impact on others and their thinking was apparent also in the
numerous written statements provided by the focus group responding to my first
propositions after they were presented at a Singapore conference in 2005. The
following example comes from a female Principal from Singapore:
I have been encouraging my teachers to take personal responsibility in what
they do …I hope to implement the concept of parallel leadership. Your
concept of parallel relationships is a powerful reminder that we mush move
beyond the leaders to embracing and including the entire team. Partnership
is [the] key to school improvement. (Response D: Danielle – Appendix E)
The study, through its multiple- layered analysis, resides firmly within
McNiff’s (2000) perspective about self-studies. The use of stories of one’s
experience as evidence are more likely to have a direct influence on a practitioner’s
day-to-day practices than stories about others, by others. The transformative
experience of coming to know more about myself, my leadership and how I learn as
a practitioner has given me huge personal reward.
Based on my findings, I identify a number of recommendations for research:
1. School administrators and teachers take a similar research journey.
195
This could be possible as individuals or in collaboratives. In many ways this would be like the Pockets of Practice snapshot, where slices of practice were
2. School administrators and teachers take a similar research journey.
This could be possible as individuals or in collaboratives. In many ways this
would be like the Pockets of Practice snapshot, where slices of practice were
investigated and co-written by student teachers and their mentors. As one of
the key teacher participants from this snapshot stated:
The work done in concert with staff and undergraduates came easily
and was enjoyable because of the shared goal and common belief
that each person had an important contribution to make. In contrast it
is difficult to [sic] and infrequent for such collegial unions to occur
among our own staff, perhaps because there is not often an
opportunity to present to a public audience. All involved (internal and
external to the school) recognised the power of the sharing of our
approaches and the great conversations that all could participate in.
By mentoring, the supervising teachers either revisited or drilled
deeper into a pedagogical practice. With their student teacher they
learnt, rethought and reflected similar to the finding of an old
treasured book on the shelf, dusting it off and conversing about its
importance with someone else who had an interest in the story. The
mentor was invigorated and reminded of the value of this story (or
practice). The student teachers also experienced the journey with the
‘mentor’ seeing him/her as another teacher (a peer) who can stumble,
trip, be excited and anxious as part of the normal pathway we beat
around and in the classroom. (Respondent Terry – Narrative Number
Two)
3. Leaders to work collaboratively with other leaders in neighbouring schools to share and co-research their practice and publish their stories and findings for others to read and consider.
I have already made a suggestion along these lines to our Association of
Independent Schools (AISQ) more recently, when I attended a large seminar
of independent schools searching for a collective response to some key
196
reform directives. These directives are driven by current State and Federal
educational reforms and reflect the current debates on essential curriculum,
standards, assessment and reporting frameworks.
After two days of presentations and reflections from numerous speakers and
participants at the conference, what seemed obvious to me as a
participant/observer was the difficulty of gathering a collection of what is
current practice, and secondly, the obvious reluctance that we all had for
sharing practice across the independent school sector. The intention of this
conferencing process was admirable, but even though the agenda’s aims were
to gather a collective response to assist our State’s direction/response to
serious Federal education reform agendas, the collective response was
difficult to gather
If the AISQ (Association of Independent Schools – Queensland) wants to
inform the State response with current practice and thinking, and if current
practices and beliefs are tricky to pin down, then the idea of a collective-
collaborative action-inquiry might be worthy of further consideration. The
idea has been passed on to the group and has been well received.
Conversations are occurring now to consider the implications of my proposal.
4. Administrators/learning leaders develop and support teacher- research by offering opportunity to share formally their practitioner research.
This research has emphasised the importance of organisational arrangements
and the enabling/capacity-building leadership that can assist teachers in
coming together to share/reflect on practice. Schools are also places where
teacher-researchers (and outside research partners) can be encouraged to
share their research practices as well. My school executive recently asked me
and other practitioners to present at a whole staff development day. Other
presenters spoke about their various curriculum initiatives and I was invited
to share my research.
For this particular presentation I purposefully chose to speak on the theme of
Teacher Learning. I began by briefly stating why and how I came to be a
197
practitioner researcher and what I was investigating. I followed with my key
propositions, but the most critical message that I wanted to convey was that
as teachers we can learn and develop as professionals by telling our stories,
by being critically reflective, encouraging and believing in a culture of
dynamic inquiry.
11.06 In closing: A reminder of the importance of passion, energy, commitment
and mission for student learning
Schools can work as learning organisations to develop teacher learning
partnerships by attending to parallel learning relationships, conversations for
learning, shared vision and mission, and organisational relations by establishing
connections and understanding the independencies of our lives for effective learning.
This may seem simple, but as reported above it comes with significant
passion, energy and commitments. The leadership inherent in schools working as
learning organisations requires us to make time for enabling leadership. Above all
else it means making time for collaboration. As stated in the previous chapter, it will
therefore require:
• leaders to be more self-less and less task-oriented so that the new directions
can be explored, that the unforeseen spontaneous ideas can be adopted
• meetings to become learning spaces where all will value being involved in
listening, responding, reflecting and analysing one another’s stories, not just
their own, and
• the school as a result would have its individuals supported and not struggling
in isolation; led not told, and consequently growing professionally as a
community of practitioners who share common beliefs and understandings
and mission for their students’ learning.
198
199
Appendix A–The Teachers as Leaders Framework (Crowther, 2003)
200
Appendix B: List of artifacts from Narrative No. 1
Summary of artifacts and written responses (archived/ included) from
Narrative Number One
Narrative section
Narrative reference
Artifacts/Written responses used for member-checks and references
Allocated
identification code [‘A’ denotes –
Artifact] [‘WR’ denotes -
Written response]
Confidence in
collaboratives
Narrative No.1
(6.03)
• An artifact -
formal
correspondence
from the early
school based
collaborative
A - 6.03
(Artifact archived –
formal
correspondence)
An experiment
that focused on
undergraduate
learning
Narrative No.1
(6.05)
• Written
response from
key
undergraduate
WR –6.05
(Copy included
below as significant
snapshot written
response No. 1-
Refer to Section 5.2
– this Appendix B,
p.198)
A trial of
accelerating
pathways for
senior students
Narrative No.1
(6.06)
• Artifacts –
formal
correspondence
related to the
appointments of
students and the
proposal
A - 6.06
(Artifacts archived
– formal
correspondence)
201
The virtual
workplace
project
Narrative No. 1
(6.07)
• Artifacts-
formal
correspondence
related to this
project
• Written
response from
one of the key
teachers
A – 6.07
(Artifacts – formal
correspondence
archived)
&
WR –6.07
(Copy included
below as significant
snapshot written
response No 2 –
Refer to Appendix
F)
The school-
based learning
proposal for
teachers and
undergraduates
Narrative No.1
(6.10)
• An artifact-
formal
corresponden-
ce from the
proposals
A - 6.10
(Artifacts – formal
correspondence
archived)
The design
educators’
post-graduate
studies project
Narrative No.1
(6.11)
• Written
response from a
key personnel
from the project
WR –6.11
(Copy included
below as significant
snapshot written
response No. 3 –
Refer to Appendix
F)
202
Appendix C: List of artifacts from Narrative No. 2
Narrative
section
Narrative
reference
Artifacts/Member-
used for member
checks
references
Allocated
identification code
Building new
credibility and
trust in a tough
culture
Narrative No.2
(7.01)
• Artifacts related
to the early
Faculty
meetings and
some of the
meetings with
the Head of
School
confirming the
new directions
(Documents form
various Curriculum
meetings)
A - 7.01
(Artifacts – curriculum meeting documents archived)
A sharpened
focus on
curriculum
leadership
while finding
opportunities
for teacher
learning though
new
organisational
structures &
communities of
practice
Narrative No. 2
(7.03)
• Artifacts related
to this project
& teachers
sharing practice
–Assistant
(Head of
Faculty meeting
documents)
• Written
response from
key participant
A - 7.03
(Artifacts - Head of Faculty meeting
documents archived) &
WR –7.03
(Copy included below
as significant
snapshot written
response No. 4 –Refer
to Appendix F)
203
A specific
focus on
teacher
learning –
making it more
than rhetoric
Narrative No.2
(7.04)
• Artifacts of
additional
school wide
opportunities
offered to
undergraduates
& from the
undergraduates and
teachers pocket of
practice program
• Written
response from
one supervising
teachers
A – 7.04
(Artifacts archived)
WR – 7.04
(Copy included below
as significant
snapshot written
response No. 5 –
Refer to Appendix F)
Reculturing
through
restructure & a
renewed
teacher
appraisal
system
Narrative No.2
(7.05)
• Artifacts of the
Appraisal
document and
trial
• Written
response from
one of the
appraised
teachers
A - 7.05
(Artifact – Appraisal correspondence
archived)
&
WR – 7.05
(Copy included below
as significant
snapshot written
response No. 6- Refer
to Appendix F.)
204
Appendix D: Summary of written responses from the Six Significant
Snapshot participants
Narrative
section
Narrative
reference
Snapshot
close-up
respondent
number
Written
response
archival code
(transcripts
included below)
Assigned
pseudonym
An experiment
that focused on
undergraduate-
learning
Narrative
No.1
(6.05)
1
WR –6.05
Alison
The virtual
workplace project
Narrative
No. 1
(6.07)
2
WR – 6.07
Cathy
The design
educator’s post-
graduate studies
project
Narrative
No.1
(6.11)
3
WR –6.11
Len
A sharpened focus
on curriculum
leadership while
finding
opportunities for
teacher- learning
through new
organisational
structures &
communities of
practice
Narrative
No. 2
(7.03)
4
WR- 7.03
Jane
205
A specific focus
on teacher learning
– making it more
than rhetoric
Narrative
No.2
(7.04)
5
WR – 7.04
Terry
Reculturing
through restructure
& a renewed
teacher
appraisal system
Narrative
No.2
(7.05)
6
WR –7.05
George
206
Appendix E: Transcripts of written responses from participants at
Singapore conference presentation (volunteer audience responses)
Respondent A: Alan (Archival Code WR – 1)
Male school principal from a Singaporean Government school response to paper/presentation
Understand and agree to the essence of setting up the platform for a community of practice, continuous professional development – the team approval
Implementation issues: • Time – Can we assume that the people still spend time outside the
curriculum time to ‘talk’ to exchange ideas? • What is the guiding principle on those who don’t wish to be a part of
this process of renewal and community of practice?
Response B: Ben (Archival Code WR – 2)
Anonymous participant– response to paper/presentation
Yes I can identify with the horizontal teaming of teachers. In our institution we group teachers/students into consortiums. There is not only more sharing of teaching ideas, information about students, there is also more collaboration in the utilisation of resources/time etc. The vertical teaming (in terms of Assistant Heads) is good as when they meet, that’s where cross team sharing can be done.
Response C: Collette (Archival Code WR – 3)
Female School Principal from Singapore– response to paper/presentation
Wonderful ideas – just want to extend an avenue of partnership. The school I’m heading is Coral Secondary (i.e. Secondary 1 to 5 students of ages 13–17 yr olds). We are currently looking how action research can build the capacity of teachers so that they are informed, reflective practitioners hence expanding their repertoire of knowledge, skills and competency. I am currently exploring the effectiveness of alliances to help build the capacity of teachers as well.
207
Response D: Danielle (Archival Code WR – 4)
Female School Principal from Singapore– response to paper/presentation
I have been encouraging my teachers to take personal responsibility in what they do and for the…teachers to take up instructional leadership roles. I hope to implement the concept of parallel leadership. Your concept of parallel relationships is a powerful reminder that we must move beyond the leaders to embracing and including the entire team. Partnership is [the] key to school improvement.
Response E: Ellen (Archival Code WR – 5)
Female - School Principal from Singapore–Written response to paper/presentation
Like the idea of collaboration between trainee…teacher and mentor teacher. Not done in Singapore where the benefits are one-way.
208
Appendix F: Transcripts of written responses from the ‘Six
Significant Snapshot’ participants
Response 1:Alison (Archival Code WR -6.5)
Female–Snapshot No. 1: Participant from Narrative Number One Written response to Snapshot No.1– Narrative Number One: This mentor relationship gave me confidence to perform in an area I had little experience with. The leadership provided by my mentor steered me to learn and perform to a level I had not reached before. At the same time, I was able to share my knowledge of word processing and desktop publishing that I had gained in my previous roles before becoming a teacher. By being able to help out in this way, my confidence was further boosted as I felt like a valuable part of an expert team – where expertise was drawn from many areas and experiences this proved to be a reciprocal relationship–a learning alliance forged by collaborative practice and parallel relationships.
Response 2: Cathy (Archival Code WR – 6.7)
Female–Snapshot No. 2: Participant from Narrative Number One
Written response to Snapshot No. 2–Narrative Number One: Having read ‘Snapshot 2’ … I think the brief two para comments it offers touch on key points of the experience (from my point of view as only a tangential participant in the learning circle) accurately and insightfully. I most definitely agree with the comment (as a video conferencing participant) that, ‘teachers reflective practices were supported and strengthened by the questions that came from the university undergraduates’.
Written response to the Chapter 9 and First Propositions Summary: I take issue with the emerging propositions because they (or at least their wording presupposes that schools are currently not learning organisations, not enabling teachers to work as learning leaders; assume/presuppose that ‘Admin leaders do not currently support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous and collaborative practices; and presuppose that there are currently not ‘shared beliefs, mission and vision etc…
I think these presuppositions are incorrect as a blanket statement and are probably not even true in the majority of cases. Certainly the statements do not hold true in my experience of a number of school over three decades.
209
Response 3: Len (Archival Code WR – 6.11)
Male–Snapshot No. 3: Participant from Narrative Number One
Written response to Snapshot No. 3 – Narrative Number One: As a participant in the program to connect secondary and tertiary design educators through collaboration in a design focus event, I can confirm the central role of leadership in the success of the venture.
In this case the leader’s brief was to find and pursue opportunities for collaboration and mutual benefit between two institutions. The brokership of the connection was critically important, as the two groups would have been less able to independently identify and develop these connections.
The notion of parallel learning is interesting in the sense that it implies a community of interest between teams of design educators at tertiary and secondary levels, and this proved to be true, to the extent that informal sharing and debate about pedagogy in the context of the event was very open and fruitful.
There was less evidence of parallel interest at an institutional or systemic level. Further meaningful collaboration beyond the focus event was very much dependent on the recognition of a wider and more lasting mutual benefit at the head of the organisations.
In other words there appeared to be a parallelism of interest at a professional level among educators, but there needs to be an overarching identity of interest between institutions to cement these relations. Given that the tertiary institutions generally hold the whip hand in the power relations between the two sectors, it is often ultimately their call as to the continuation of collaborative programs.
Outcomes were mixed in the context of the event cited in the study. In one faculty the collaboration and subsequent joint resource development were pursued much more vigorously, again driven by the leadership/brokership role, and in the case, by the enthusiastic support of the faculty head. Where there was less recognition of mutual benefit at this level, the relationship quickly faded.
Written response to the Chapter 9 and first propositions summary:
I support the idea of building learning organisations through flexible and imaginative leadership. I feel the author in this report certainly exemplifies the energy and passion required to drive such open-ended and system-challenging change. The culture of learning in schools is changing and needs further flexibility to accommodate that rate of change in the world of work. The potential to cultivate networks and partnerships across schools, across different educational sectors, professions and industry, is a key element of new learning cultures.
210
In practical terms I think the culture of very fruitful partnerships across learning institutions is possible and potentially mutually enriching, but has to be strategic and supported by clearly defined goals and interlacing leadership structures.
In my experience, the schools need to operate in clusters or in networks to cement relations between themselves and the tertiary sector.
The tertiary learning community is also more likely to support fairly self-sustaining programs and projects that require short bursts of intensive interest and mentorship rather than long-term commitment. Alternatively they are likely to be sustained where leaders are appointed specifically to cultivate and drive the liaison.
Response 4: Jane (Archival Code WR –7.03)
Female–Snapshot No. 4: Participant from Narrative Number Two
Written responses to Snapshot No.4 – Narrative Number Two, and the Chapter 9 and first propositions summary:
I currently work with many different types of leaders: some are task masters
(they dish out tasks often via e-mail with no personal contact with you to consider or hear your position, etc); some are masters of promotions they meet with you offering you the challenge of a talks and then once completed, claim it as their own. They have fed your human need to be needed/feel worth in the initial stages, but forget you once the task is completed thereby failing to complete the conversation); others (often far too few – because they are generally under attack) work alongside you every step of the way. They recognise your basic desire to be challenged and nurtured, encouraging you to take risks by offering you opportunities, supporting you throughout the journey, sharing with you, listening and standing beside you, seeing it through. (Mind you often one thing leads to another hurtling you (me as Assist HoF) along the next path of teacher-learning and discovery. School structures, such as Faculty meetings, are in place to support collaboration, planning and evaluation. Unfortunately these occasions are often hijacked by organisational matters – often unconducive for teacher learning. I in my persona l situation, one of me across four subjects each with three year levels is tough, especially teaching in only one area. But, this is a challenge I haven’t given up on yet (thanks to the support of my leaders).
The monthly Assist Head of Faculty meetings are such a vital part of our development. …as one layer of learning leaders. By having these meetings, a forum is provided for Assist. Heads of Faculty to: • share subject specific practices, further strengthening our collective
understanding of middle schooling • vent - human relationships are such hard work. It can often become
easy to simply shut down when you think no-one is listening
211
• share our learnings as an Assistant Head of Faculty that may assist others should they ever find themselves in a similar situation
• through sharing we are able to be guided by experts and experienced practitioners in setting realistic goals from our often massive dreams
• to spend time honing skills that will assist us in dealing with our staff • to develop (through give and take) our shared goals for the greater
middle school • safely discuss Faculty specific goals and human relationships. The fortnightly one-on-one meetings allows Gladys and we Assistant Heads to further any points that might have been brought up in the whole group meeting; attend to subject specific organisational matters (eg report comments); share most recent learnings, successes and disappointments. In a nutshell these one-on-one meetings are priceless in that our own progress in curriculum management and leadership as well as human management and leadership can be supported, encouraged and nurtured according to our individual needs (and every learning style!) Our conversations for learning see the cycle completed. I have found encouragement and support taking risks. When taking risks there are times when it is one step forward and two steps back. And sometimes this situation doesn’t even exist because the benefit from taking the risk has been so great. Our team of Gladys, Assistant Head of Faculties and teachers is dynamic. Increasingly more followers are joining in because the environment is such that conversations about learning are valued and respected.
Response 5: Terry (Archival Code WR –7.04)
Male – Snapshot No. 5: Participant from Narrative Number Two
Written response to Snapshot No.5 – Narrative Number Two
The work done in concert by staff and undergraduates came easily and was enjoyable because of the shared goal and common belief each person had an important contribution to make. In contrast it is difficult to and infrequent for such collegial unions to occur among our own staff, perhaps because there is not often an opportunity to present to a public audience. All involved (internal and external to the school) recognised the power of the sharing of our approaches and the great conversations that all could participate in.
By mentoring, the supervising teachers either revisited or drilled deeper into a pedagogical practice. With their student teacher they learnt, rethought and reflected. Similar to finding an old treasured book on the shelf, dusting it off and conversing about its importance with someone else who had an interest in the story, the mentor was reinvigorated and reminded of the value of this story (or practice). The student teachers also experienced the journey with the ‘mentor’ seeing him/her as another teacher (a peer) who can stumble, trip, be excited and anxious as part of the normal pathway we beat around and in the classroom.
212
More opportunities need to be found (or made) in our daily/weekly staff interactions so we can share and reflect. Written response to the Chapter 9 and first propositions summary:
(I particularly like the figure in 10 but I don’t refer to it, so I crossed it out) … I would like to comment on ‘Learning leaders’. Teacher learning requires much greater attention. Similar to the evolution away from ‘authority-military’ style teachers to ‘democratic facilitator’ teaching, the learning leaders must move away from the concept of ‘top-down’ and move towards ‘supportive and collaborative’ leadership wherein the recognised and knowledgeable practitioner and leader can facilitate and be an integral part of the sharing process. Rather than merely focusing upon the curriculum tasks and mandating the curriculum processes to be ‘enacted’, the curriculum manager must model the ‘learning alliances’ by establishing and maintaining collaborative relationships. The mentioned renewal of curriculum leadership models cannot ignore the administrative roles but it must prioritise the conversations and reflections as tasks of equal or greater importance to other paper-based or budget-oriented tasks. The new model of curriculum leadership does exist but can easily be victimised or cast aside by the prevalence of the ‘old authoritive’ leaders. The conflict between these styles creates confusion and uncertainty because the expectations are different and the learning leader must be able to move away from the traditional role as the centre of and holder of power. Asking the crowned leaders to share can be unpopular. I say abdicate now!
Response 6: George (Archival Code WR –7.05)
Male–Snapshot No. 6: Participant from Narrative Number Two
Written response to Snapshot No.6– Narrative Number Two
Agree entirely that there is an opportunity for developing learning partnerships if the appraiser and appraisee both understand the benefits of the process and why it is being undertaken.
Whole process requires that staff are looking at their practice, are concerned about the whole school direction and wish to develop learning partnerships.
Staffs who do not currently have a close working relationship with appraisers will potentially feel stress and wonder about the ‘checking up’ or ‘getting dir’ component of the appraisal.
I would doubt that appraisee’s share the notion of agreed benchmarks.
213
Written response to the Chapter 9 and first Propositions Summary:
My first conclusions response:
Agree entirely with your summary. Only means to truly develop a great school is to develop such a learning environment. Too often we are working in isolation and often ‘re- inventing the wheel’.
Resources much better utilised when internal education via sharing is present. Administration must change attitude to developing a shared vision. The handing down of a direction with little ownership by the coalface immediately destroys the potential for such change.
214
Appendix G: Abstract for conference paper
(Submitted to ‘Redesigning pedagogy: research, policy, practice: 30
May – 1June, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)
Building Teacher Learning Alliances to Support Learning Leadership
The imperatives of current curriculum reforms present significant challenges for school leaders charged with leading not only student learning, but teacher learning as well. This paper shares snapshots of stories from a doctoral study, which explores ‘Reculturing a School as a Learning Organisation within a Context of Curriculum Change and Reform’. It discusses the notion of learning alliances to create the culture of dynamic inquiry needed for the associated teacher- learning that comes with renewal and reform. The notion of learning alliances will be illustrated by presenting several examples of how learning leaders are able to support and encourage investigative, reflective practices in schools. The examples chosen for the presentation and this paper will illustrate how collaboratives/alliances can move our conversation from discussions that focus merely on merely the content of our various subjects/disciplines, to deep reflective conversations that allow us to speak to one another across the curriculum with a focus on ‘learning’. Some of the examples that will be shared will include: • leadership/agendas and learning alliances that have been developed when
managing a team of learning leaders/subject leaders • leadership of the undergraduates - supervising teacher learning alliances • school timetabling and organisational structures to support learning
teams/alliances across the curriculum. By reshaping or reconstructing some of our traditional leadership and organisational models, this study argues that we can create a professional culture of dynamic inquiry. The paper respects that learning alliances recognise that an organisation that works together can learn together, and that there is strength and powerful learning for all when working in teams to improve our student learning outcomes.
215
Appendix H - Mapping of data
Table D1. Mapping of Data – page 1 [¡ = Most important learnings to be shared with respect to this quality indicator]
Narrative Section
Reference
Narrative Focus Points
Artifacts/Member-checks References
Shared Beliefs,
Mission & Vision
Organisational
Arrangements
Conver-sations
For Learn-
ing
Parallel Relation-
ships
Reflective Dialogue
Unity of Pur-pose
Collect-ive
Focus
Collab-orative Norms
of Sharing
Openness To
Improve-ment
Deprivat-ization
of Practice
Trust &
Resp-ect
Renew-al of
Comm-unity
Support-ive &
Know-ledgeable Leader-
ship Confidence in Collaboratives
Narrative No.1 (6.03)
- My collaboratives as a teacher - My collaboratives as a member of QSA panel chair & syllabus committee - Confidence that came with these
* An artifact of an early school based collaborative
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/NoBarriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
An Experiment that Focused on Undergraduate Learning
Narrative No.1 (6.05)
- Involved an undergrad and staff working with their strengths and knowledges collaboratively - Allowed a re-think of typical practicum experience - Trial of on-site learning
# Interview with the undergraduate
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡ A Trial of Accelerating Pathways for Senior Students
Narrative No.1
(6.06)
- Example of School & University could benefit as this provided high achieving students to undergrad teaching positions that were at risk and low in numbers (i.e. Maths and Science teaching areas) - Example of how additional university personnel were able to assist with this program with specific focus & budget- therefore a good example of parallel leaders working together
* Artifacts related to the appointments of students and the proposal
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
The Virtual Workplace Project
Narrative No. 1 (6.07)
-University initiative -But collaborative submission to apply for funding to support a partnership to provide a learning circle co-ordinator -I was the major school link who provided contact with teachers & classes to be ‘beamed’ into the uni undergrad program -Teachers were able to speak reflectively about their practice to undergraduates who were able to watch from the outside and ask questions on line -Assumption that teachers had time at the end of the day to be involved-but time was a problem -Again great success came from a number of leaders working on this project
* Artifacts related to this project
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Page 1
216
Narrative Section
Ref.
Narrative Focus Points
Artifacts/Member-
checks References
Shared Beliefs,
Mission & Vision
Organisatial
Arrangements
Conver- sations
For Learning
Parallel Relatio
n- ships
Reflect-ive
Dialogue
Unity of Purpose
Collect-ive
Focus
Collabor-ative Norms of Sharing
Openness To
Improve-ment
Depriv-atizat-ion
of Practice
Trust & Respect
Renewal of
Comm-unity
Support-ive &
Know-ledgeable Leader-
ship School Based Learning Proposal for Teachers and Undergraduates
Narrative No.1 (6.10)
-This was a proposal was presented in the section - ‘The courage to create substantial programs of partnering through stronger relationships’…the emphasis on relationships reveals lessons learnt from previous experiences - while parts of this proposal were well received the logistics made this proposal difficult to implement without additional leadership support- importance of parallel/shared leadership again
* An artifact from the proposals
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t &
A Number of Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
A Number of Barriers
¡
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t &
A Number of Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
¡
The Design Educator’s Post-Graduate Studies Project
Narrative No.1 (6.11)
-Again like the previous section this is part of the section which focused on partnering through stronger relationships - Evidence of a wider collaborative between a group of teachers in a school& a group of teachers in a university -Example of parallels between teachers and between leaders -Importance of shared leadership for teacher learning -Example of how collaborative submissions can be successful and supportive by funding
# Interview with one of the key personnel from the project
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Building New Credibility & Trust in a Tough Culture
Narrative No.2
(7.01)
-This section acknowledges the beginning of a cultural deconstruction & reconstruction - Emphasis es the importance of overcoming some of the cultural obstacles/resistance to restructuring -Realisation that modelling practice was part of establishing credibility -Discussed how new titles and people alone can’t change the culturally entrenched practices
* Artifacts related to the early Faculty meetings & early some of the Meetings with the Head of School confirming the new directions
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number Of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number Of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t &
A Number of Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
¡
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
A Number of Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
¡
Sign’t & A
Number of
Barriers
Sign’t & A
Number Of
Barriers
¡ Page 2
217
Narrative Section
Reference
Narrative Focus Points
Artifacts/Member-
checks References
Shared Beliefs,
Mission & Vision
Organisatial Arrangements
Convers-ations For Learn-ing
Parallel Relation- ships
Reflective Dialogue
Unity of Purpose
Collective Focus
Collabo-rative Norms of Sharing
Openness To Improve-ment
Deprivatization of Practice
Trust & Respect
Renewal of Comm-unity
Support-ive & Know-ledgeable Leader- ship
A Sharpened Focus on Curriculum Leadership While Finding Opportunities for Teacher Learning Through New Organisational Structures & Communities of Practice
Narrative
No. 2 (7.03)
-This section was connected to the section 9.3 which emphasised the importance of ‘Avoiding an isolated vision yet again…strength in collaborative teams’ and discussed the importance of a collective focus/vision for direction. - Founded a critical mass to share best practice and experiment. This assisted the beginnings of conversations for learning across the school -Concept of horizontal and vertical teaming (Middle School Matrix) was discussed as learning and pastoral teams that assisted in developing the shared direction and focus -The position of an Assistant Head of Faculty to provide specific curriculum focus and strength for new directions -Very much about teachers and leaders working in parallel with shared focus.
*Artifacts related to the ‘Sunny Side Up- Cross Curriculum Project *Artifacts related to teachers sharing practice * Artifacts related to this project
Sign’t &
Few /No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No
Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
A Specific Focus on Teacher Learning –Making it More Than Rhetoric
Narrative No.2 (7.04)
-This section presents the continued interest in developing teacher learning via undergraduate partnerships. For all undergraduates who were working in our school this showed our commitment to broader learning opportunities beyond the classroom experience alone. A small number were involved in a special investigative practice which assisted the undergrad and their supervisor to investigate a very small slice of practice; ‘A Pocket of Practice’ and to reflect and share their learnings with their colleagues and in a section of a chapter of a new book on Middle Schooling - An alliances framework where teacher learning that was aligned to whole school plus personal goals and allowed for developing partners for learning across and beyond the school fence -Also emphasised that as administrators we moved from curriculum management to curriculum leadership- moving from managing from a distance to parallel relationships where leaders are learners as well
*Artifact of Alliances framework * Artifact of additional school wide opportunities offered to undergraduates *Artifact from the undergraduates and teachers pocket of practice program *Artifact from one of the supervising teachers * Artifact of Memo of understanding from a participating university
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡ Page 3
218
Narrative Section
Reference
Narrative Focus Points
Artifacts/Member-
checks References
Shared Beliefs,
Mission & Vision
Organisatial
Arrangements
Covers-ations
For Learn-ing
Parallel Relatio
n- ships
Reflective Dialogue
Unity of Pur-pose
Collect-ive
Focus
Collab-orative Norms
of Sharing
Openness To
Improve-ment
Depriv-atization
of Practice
Trust &
Respect
Renew-al of
Comm-unity
Supportive &
Know-ledgeable
Leadership Reculturing Through Restructure & A Renewed Teacher Appraisal System
Narrative No.2 (7.05)
- The most relevant part of this section related to the possibilities that could come with the teacher appraisal system. This teacher review process has the potential to lead practice by supportive supervision but it will need a shared commitment and understanding by all administrators - Potentially this appraisal system can involve broader teacher reflection that considers student feedback as well as line managers’ and co-workers. …However a huge reculturing for a group who have had no or very little accountability structures
* Artifacts of the Appraisal document and trial
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
Sign’t &
Few/No Barriers
¡ Page 4
219
Appendix I – Criteria for Judging Overall Validity (Anderson & Herr,
1999)
221
Appendix J - Ethical Clearance Procedures – Consent Forms, Information Sheets, Question/response sheets
1. Consent form for the participants of this study submitted to Ethical
Clearance Committee and attached to question sheet
Title of the research project:
Reculturing a school as a learning organisation within a context of curriculum change and reform. A narrative exploration/inquiry of implications for teacher learning in two Queensland Schools
Attached University:
This research is being carried out as a part of a professional doctorate study with Queensland University of Technology (QUT).
Contact information:
Researcher: Gladys Martoo - 34 Kates Street, Morningside 4170. Phone: 33998484 [email protected]
Supervisors: Dr Ian Macpherson and Dr Susan Danby – Faculty of Education. QUT- Kelvin Grove Campus, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, 4059. Phone: 38642111 ____________________________________________________________________ By signing below, you are indicating that you: � Have read and understood the information sheet provided for this research
project � Have had your questions answered to your satisfaction � Understand that if you have any additional questions that you can contact
the researcher undertaking the study � Understand that you can withdraw at any time without comment or
penalty � Understand that you can contact the Research Ethics Officer on 38642340
if you have concerns about the ethical conduct of the project, and � Agree to participate in the project
Name ___________________________________________________
Signature__________________________
Date ____/____/____
222
2. Information sheet for the participants of this study submitted to Ethical
Clearance Committee and attached to question sheet
Title of the research project:
Reculturing a school as a learning organisation within a context of curriculum change and reform. A narrative exploration/inquiry of implications for teacher learning in two Queensland Schools
Attached university:
This research is being carried out as a part of a professional doctorate study with Queensland University of Technology (QUT).
Contact information:
Researcher: Gladys Martoo - 34 Kates Street, Morningside 4170. Phone: 33998484
Supervisors: Dr Ian Macpherson and Dr Susan Danby – Faculty of Education. QUT- Kelvin Grove Campus, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, 4059. Phone: 38642111
Research /project description, objectives, and benefits:
This study looks at the issues of curriculum reform in the context of more general organisational reform. It explores the notion of schools being recultured or reconstructed to work as learning organisations in order to improve the social and academic learning outcomes of their students. As a result this study will explore the relationship between teacher learning, teacher leadership and a professional learning culture.
The study acknowledges my evolving leadership roles over the years, as well as the relevant current literature when forming the following research questions: � What does deconstructing and reconstruc tion a school as a learning
organisation involve? � How does a process of deconstruction and reconstruction of a school as a
learning organisation take place in particular cases? And, � What propositions can be elicited about the implications of deconstructing
a school and reconstructing it as a learning culture characterised by educational learning leadership?
The study is most appropriately defined as practitioner research and the methodology is most aptly described as action- inquiry self-study and presented through layered narratives. By being involved in this study you will have the opportunity to have your story presented within the layers most relevant to you.
223
While the results of this study will be of particular interest to you as a participant and other practitioners who are leading schools in times of reform, the study will not be making generalisations that can be simplistically transferred to other contexts.
Participant identification, time involved, undertaking, confidentiality
and risks:
As the layers of my narratives evolve, a number of key participants have emerged. As a participant, you will have been contacted by phone or in person before now, and given a brief outline of the project.
This information sheet has been prepared to give you more comprehensive information and to invite you to give me your own story after reading the relevant sections of my writings to include in some of the additional layers of my work. These responses will be your personal responses/interpretations/reflections about the issues/journeys I present though my writing.
You will be able to present in one of two ways: either by written responses to the specific section/s of my stories or by giving me some time (Meeting time/Writing time: approximately 30 minutes) to hear from you in person, in an informal discussion after you have had time to read the section/s and reflect (Reading and reflection time approximately 20 minutes).
If the discussion option is taken, then the discussion will be taped and the tapes will become my property and kept in safe storage. The typed transcripts from the tape recordings will be sent back to you for checking (Approximately 10-20 minutes), and at that time you are welcome to add further comments or make any deletions before you forward to me on or before an agreed date……… for inclusion in the study.
I propose that I can send you your section to read by. …(date) …and that I will be wanting your response or our meeting to take place some time in the following week. I will be in contact again by phone on …..(date) to discuss the possibility of your participation and if necessary confirm your preferred response method, suitable times etc. We can arrange to meet somewhere off campus if this preferred.
It is important for you to note that the risks to you and your career/reputation re extremely low. At all times your privacy and anonymity will be respected. For instance, your school and your identity will never be disclosed, as pseudonyms will be used for the names of all participants within the final document. The final writings will be shared with you for your final approval. (This checking may require an additional 15-30 minutes.) At all times your data will be given and handled in confidence and as stated your anonymity and confidentiality will be safeguarded in any publication of the results of this research through the continued use of pseudonyms.
224
Voluntary participation:
It is important for you to note that your participation is absolutely voluntary and in the event that you begin and then change your mind and wish to withdraw from the project, then you can do so at any time. Any further questions or information:
I will be in contact by phone during this week or next to answer any questions you may have and to confirm your willingness to take part. At this time if you are willing to take part in this work I will be able to make a time to meet and/or a time to send out the relevant section of my work for your reflections. If your need to contact me beforehand, you are most welcome. (Please refer above for details) Concerns/complaints:
If you have any concerns or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project you can contact the QUT Research Ethics Officer on 38642340 or email [email protected] or postal contact: Research Ethics Officer, Office of Research, O Block Podium, QUT, GP Campus, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, 4001.
Thanking you for your time
Gladys Martoo
225
3. Copy of question/response sheet given to snapshot participants
Page 1
Summary of emerging propositions for participants’ responses
___________________________________________________________
Teachers will cope better with the ever- increasing demands of curriculum reforms, when: • Schools work as learning organisations • Schools enable teachers to work as learning leaders • Administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous
and collaborative practices • There are shared beliefs, mission and vision, organisational
arrangements/support, conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy and parallel relationships.
By enabling leadership for learning alliances, a professional culture of dynamic inquiry will evolve with a renewed focus on conversations for learning…. and therefore parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships and the specific emphasis on conversation for learning have a purposeful place in the reconstructed model that presents the essential elements for schools that work as learning organisations.( i.e. my reconstructed model of Arbuckle’s work.) After reading: • The snapshot/stories that I believe may connect to a part of your professional life
(see attached), and • My tentative conclusions (summarised above and presented in attached chapter) I invite you to give me your own story to include in some of the additional layers of my work. These responses will be your personal responses/interpretations/reflections about the issues/journeys
Thank you very much Gladys Martoo – [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2
Code Name/Number______________________
After reading the attached snapshot/story I would add the following
comments/reflections:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________25 lines left for written response After reading the attached chapter section which outlines first propositions, and the summary at the beginning of this sheet, I would add the following comments/reflections: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________19 lines left for written response
226
4. Copy of question/response sheet given to volunteer audience responses
Summary of emerging propositions for volunteer audience Responses ______________________________________________________________ Teachers will cope better with the ever- increasing demands of curriculum reforms, when: • Schools work as learning organisations • Schools enable teachers to work as learning leaders • Administrative leaders support/enable and model risk-taking, spontaneous
and collaborative practices • There are shared beliefs, mission and vision, organisational
arrangements/support, conversations for learning and shared approaches to pedagogy and parallel relationships.
By enabling leadership for learning alliances, a professional culture of dynamic inquiry will evolve with a renewed focus on conversations for learning…, and therefore parallel learning leadership and parallel learning partnerships and the specific emphasis on conversation for learning have a purposeful place in the reconstructed model that presents the essential elements for schools that work as learning organisations. (i.e. my reconstructed model of Arbuckle’s work.) ___________________________________________________________________ After reading/listening to my conclusions (summarised above), what are your thoughts, reflections and connections with what I presented/proposed?
Gladys Martoo – [email protected]
My thoughts/reflections are: ______________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________20 lines left for written response
Name: (optional)____________________
Contact email (optional)______________________________
Professional:___________________________________________
227
___________________________________________________ References
Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K. (1999). The new paradigm wars: Is there room for
rigorous practitioner knowledge in schools and universities? Educational Researcher, 28 (5), 12–21.
Anderson, G. L. (2002). Reflecting on research for doctoral students in education.
Educational Researcher, 31(7), 22– 25. Arbuckle, M. (2000). Triangle of design, circle of culture. In P. Senge, T. Lucas, B.
Smith, J. Dutton, & A. Kleiner (Eds.), Schools that learn: A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. (pp.325–339). London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. N. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon. Boud, D., & Solomon, N. E. (Eds.), (2001). Work-based learning: A new higher
education? Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Bullough, R. V., & S. Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelines for quality in autobiographical
forms of self-study research. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 13–22. Burns, R. (2002). The adult learner at work. Crows Nest: Allan and Unwin. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1994). Personal experience methods. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.413–427). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1995). Teachers' professional knowledge
landscapes. New York: Teachers College Press. Collins, J. (1989). Uncommon cultures: Popular culture and postmodernism. New
York: Routledge. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1999). Shaping a professional identity: Stories
of educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Connor, P. E. & Lake, L. K. (1994). Organizational culture defined. (2nd ed). Westport, Connecticut: Praeger. Crotty, T. (2001). Perceptions of purpose for children's writing. In M. Dadds & S.
Hart, Doing practitioner research differently (pp. 68–80). London: Routledge Falmer.
228
Crowther, F., Kaagan, S., Ferguson, M., & Hann, L. (2002). Developing teacher leaders. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, Inc.
Crowther, F. (Ed.), (2003). Teachers as leaders in a knowledge society. Deaken
West, ACT: Australian College of Educators. Crowther, F. (2003). Teaching, a profession whose time has come. In F. Crowther
(Ed) Teachers as leaders in a knowledge society (pp.1–8). Deaken West, ACT: Australian College of Educators.
Cunningham, S., Ryan, Y., Stedman, L., Tapsall, S., Bagdon, K., Flew, T., and
Coaldrake, P. (2000). The business of borderless education. Canberra: Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs.
Cuttance, P. (Ed.), (2001). School innovation: Pathway to the knowledge society.
Canberra: Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs. Dadds, M., & Hart, S. (2001). Doing practitioner research differently. London:
Routledge Falmer. . Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), (1994). Handbook of qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks: Sage. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), (2000). Handbook of qualitative research
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Dewey, J. (1967). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press. (Original work
published 1916) Dimmock, C. (2000). Designing the learning-centred school: A cross-cultural
perspective. London: Falmer Press. Education Queensland (2000). 2010: A future strategy. Brisbane: The State of
Queensland (Dept of Education). Education Queensland (2001). New Basics: The why, what, how and when of rich
tasks. Brisbane: New Basics Project-The State of Queensland (Dept of Education).
Education Queensland (2003). The middle phase of learning. Brisbane: The State of
Queensland (Dept of Education). Eisner, E. (1973). Do behavioural objectives and accountability have a place in art
education? Art Education, 26 (5). 2-5. Emery, L. (Ed), (2002). Teaching art in a postmodern world. Melbourne: Common
Ground Publishing. Ferguson, L. (2001). Communicative practices in a classroom for children with
severe and profound learning difficulties: a case study of methodologies on
229
reflective practice. In M. Dadds & S. Hart, Doing Practitioner Research Differently (pp.81–98). London: Routledge Falmer.
Flanagan, N., and Finger, J. (2003). The management bible. Brisbane: Plum Press. Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge
management in schools. Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria (IARTV), October, (117).
Garrison, J. (1989). The role of postpositivistic philosophy of science in the renewal
of vocational education research. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 14(3), 39–51.
Gee, J., Hull, G. & Lankshear, C. (1996). The new work order: Behind the language
of the new capitalism. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers (2nd ed). New York: Longman Greene, M. (1994). Epistemology and educational research: The influence of recent
approaches to knowledge. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in Education (pp.423–464). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
Grimmett, P., & Dockendorf, M. (1999). Exploring the labyrinth of researching
teaching. In J. Loughran (Ed.), Researching teaching-methodologies and practices for understanding pedagogy. New York: Falmer Press.
Groundwater-Smith, S., Cusworth, R., & Dobbins, R. (1998). Teaching: Challenges
and dilemmas. Sydney: Harcourt Brace. Grundy, S., & Bonser, S. (2000). The new work order and Australian schools. In C.
Day, A. Fernandez, T.E. Hauge & J. Moller (Eds.), The life and work of teachers: International perspectives in changing times (pp.130–145). London: Falmer Press.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers work and
culture in the postmodern age. London: Cassell. Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., Moore, S., & Manning, S. (2001). Learning to change. San
Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society. New York: Teachers
College Press. Huberman, M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In
N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.428–444). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
230
Huberman, M., Thompson, C.L., & Weiland, S. (1997). Perspectives on the teaching career. In B. J. Biddle, T.L. Good, and I.F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 34–69). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor,
methodolatry, and meaning. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.209–219). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Johnston, M. (1997). Contradictions in collaboration: New thinking on
school/university partnerships. New York: Teachers College Press. King, M. B., Youngs, P., & Ladwig, J.G. (2003). Capacity building through
collaborative professional development. In F. Crowther (Ed.), Teachers as leaders in a knowledge society (pp. 44–54). Deaken West, ACT: Australian College of Educators.
Kirsch, G. (1999). Ethical dilemmas in feminist research: The politics of location,
interpretation, and publication. Albany: State University of New York Press. Kruse, S., & Louis, K. (1995). Developing professional community in new and
restructuring urban schools. In K. Louis & S. Kruse (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Laboree, D. F. (2003). The peculiar problems of preparing educational researchers.
Educational Researcher, 32(4), 13–22. Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective
use of educational technology. London: Routledge. Lieberman, A. (2000). Networks as learning communities: Shaping the future of
teacher development. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3): 221–227. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Lingard, B., Ladwig, J., Mills, M., Bahr, M., Chant, D., Warry, M., Ailwood, J.,
Capeness, R., Christie, P., Gore, J., Hayes, D. & Luke, A. (2001). The Queensland school reform longitudinal study: Teachers' summary. Brisbane: Education Queensland.
Lingard, B., Hayes, D., Mills, M., & Christie, P. (2003). Leading learning.
Philadelphia: Open University Press. Long, B. (2000). Understanding my work as a group leader in employment
counselling. In J. McNiff, Action research in organisations. (pp. 173–176), New York: Routledge.
Loughran, J., Ed. (1999). Researching teaching: Methodologies and practices for
understanding Pedogogy. London: Falmer Press.
231
Louis, K.S., Marks, H. M. & Kruse, S. (1996). Teachers’ professional community in
restructuring schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33 (4), 757–98. Martoo, G. V. (1996). Interpretations of assessment policies by heads of art
departments in selected Queensland secondary schools. A qualitative study. Unpublished master’s thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
McNiff, J. (2000). Action research in organisations. New York: Routledge. Macpherson, I., Brooker, R., Aspland, T., & Cuskelly, E. (2004). Constructing a
territory for professional practice research: Some introductory considerations. Action Research, 2(1), 89–106.
Meadmore, D., & E. McWilliam (2001). The corporate curriculum: schools as sites
of new knowledge production. Australian Educational Researcher, 28(1), 31–45. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.).
London: Sage. Mohr, M. (2000). Drafting ethical guidelines for teacher research in schools. In J.
Zeni, (Ed.). Ethical issues in practitioner research. (pp. 83–91). New York: Teachers College Press.
Newman, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison:
Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools. Newman & Associates (Eds), (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring school
for intellectual quality. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, H. (2003) Mode 2 revisited: The new production
of knowledge. Minerva, 41(3), 179–194. O'Sullivan, F. (1997). Learning organisations - Reengineering schools for life long
learning. School Leadership and Management, 17(2), 217–230. Page, J.S. (2003). Towards a critical appraisal of the Queensland new basics project.
Australian Council for Educational Leaders (ACEL)-Queensland, Perspectives on Educational Leadership, 13(6), 1-2.
Pallas, A. M. (2001). Preparing educational doctoral students for epistemological
diversity. Educational Researcher, 30 (5), 6–11. Pitman, J., Herschell, P., Allen, R., Veerman, M., Gray, K., Harris, K., Bell, E.,
Kelly, D., Brennan, P., & Delley, D. (2002). The senior certificate: A new deal. Brisbane: Education Queensland.
232
Potter, J. (2000). Visualisation in research and data analysis. In M. Dadds & S. Hart, Doing Practitioner Research Differently. (pp. 27–46). London: Routledge Falmer.
Proudford, C. (2003). Building professional learning communities for curriculum
change. Curriculum Perspectives, 23 (3), 1–10. Queensland School Curriculum Council (2002). Overall learning outcomes and the
valued attributes of the lifelong learner. Brisbane: Queensland School Curriculum Council (now QSA).
Ross, E.W. (1992). Teacher personal theorizing and reflective practice. In E.W.
Ross, J.W. Cornett, & G. McCutcheon, (Eds.). Teacher personal theorizing – connecting curriculum practice, theory and research. New York: State University of New York Press.
Ross, E.W., Cornett, J.W., & McCutcheon, G. (Eds.). (1992). Teacher personal
theorizing: Connecting curriculum practice, theory and research. New York: State University of New York Press.
Sachs, J. (2003). Learning to be a teacher: Professionalism and activism. In F.
Crowther (Ed.) Teachers as leaders in a knowledge society. (pp.83–94). Deakin West, ACT: Australian College of Educators.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action.
New York: Basic Books. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Washington, DC:
American Educational Research Association. Schön, D. A. (Ed.). (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational
practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Schön, D. A. (1995). Knowing- in-action: the new scholarship requires a new
epistemology. Change. (November– December). Schubert, W. H. (1992). Personal theorizing about teacher personal theorizing. In
E.W. Ross, J.W. Cornett, & G. McCutcheon, (Eds.). Teacher personal theorizing – Connecting curriculum practice, theory and research. New York: State University of New York Press.
Schwandt, T. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In
N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln, Handbook of qualitative research. (pp.118–137). Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning
organization. Sydney: Random House.
233
Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn - A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1996). Leadership for the schoolhouse: How is it different? Why
is it Important? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London:
Sage. Sirotnik, K., & Goodlad, J. I. (1988). School university partnerships: Concepts and
cases. New York: Teachers College Press. Sizer, T. R. (1992). Horace's school. Boston: Mariner Books. Smyth, J. (1999). Researching the cultural politics of teachers' learning. In J.
Loughran, Researching teaching: Methodologies and practices for understanding pedagogy. London: Falmer Press.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research, analysis, types and software tools. New
York: Falmer Press. Tinzmann, M., Jones, B., & Pierce, J., (1992). Changing societal needs: Changing
how we think about curriculum and instruction. In C. Collins & J. N. Mangieri, teaching thinking: An agenda for the twenty-first century. New Jersey: Hillsdale.
Toffler, A. (1990). Powershift: Knowledge, wealth and violence at the edge of the
21st Century. New York, Bantam. Tripp, D (1992). Critical theory and educational research. Issues in Educational
Research, 2(1), 13–33. Tripp, D (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgement,
London: Routledge. Van den Berg, O. (2001). The ethics of accountability in action research. In J. Zeni,
(Ed.). Ethical issues in practitioner research. (pp. 83–91). New York: Teachers College Press.
Veel, L. (2003). Boys' business. EQ Australia, Summer (4), 22–3. Wenger, E., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organisational
frontier. Harvard Business Review, 139–145. Winter, R., Griffiths, M., & Green, K. (2000). The 'Academic' qualities of practice:
what are the criteria for practice-based PhD? Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 25–37.
Zeni, J. (Ed.). (2001). Ethical issues in practitioner research. New York: Teachers
College Press.