Download UC Futures - UC Research Repository

Time to reframe leadership
learning for the middle tier of
school leadership
Physical Education New Zealand 2015 Conference Keynote
Associate Professor Susan Lovett, University of Canterbury,
November 2015
Outline for presentation
1. Use an existing leadership program for middle leaders
as a springboard for exploring the learning needs of
MLs
2. Drawing on international research findings about MLs’
professional learning needs
3. Introduce some frameworks for identifying learning
needs (criteria & leadership content knowledge)
4. Possible directions for the design of middle leaders’
professional development programs
Research focus on middle
leadership
• Recent move to recognise importance of middle leaders
as leaders of learning;
• Current crisis in attracting people from middle leadership
into higher leadership roles (Harris, 2007);
• Professional learning for middle leaders tends to assume
upward movement rather than staying in the role
• Being a leader of learner requires a particular skillset to
ensure professional conversations with colleagues are
empowering, respectful and not controlling.
Urgent need to:
• rethink the leadership roles for
middle leaders;
• have professional learning which
improves MLs’ capacity to enhance
their own and teachers’ pedagogical
leadership
Middle Leadership
Program example: QELi
in Australia
• Queensland Educational Leadership
Institute under licence to National
College of Leadership & Children’s
Services in England.
• 12 month program
• 4 day workshops plus online discussion
and reading & thinking on key ‘think’
pieces
• Key feature is the identification &
implementation of a school-based
leadership challenge project
Framework for
evaluation of QELi
program(1)
• Participation rates
• Completion rates
• Impact
– Confidence
– Knowledge & skills
– Explicit school improvement
– Career development
– Positive student outcomes
– Reach of participants, school type &
locations
Framework for
evaluation of QELi
program (2)
• Engagement
The ‘learning’ (extent to which
energised & challenged
The ‘doing’ (task level promotes
discussion & critical thinking)
The ‘approach’ (extent of guiding role
by facilitator)
Satisfaction
Program structure, content, delivery,
& connection to learning outcomes
Framework for
evaluation of QELi
program (3)
• Pre-program survey to all participants
• Facilitator individual interviews & follow
up focus group (pre-program & midpoint)
• Follow-up interviews with sample of
principals around their staff member’s
school-based challenge (about 5 months
after program completion)
• Post-program survey to all participants
(about 5 months after program
completion)
The relationship
between middle leaders
and teachers
• interested in improving personal
understandings of themselves as leaders,
and how to develop and lead teams of
teachers.
• Challenge to get staff buy-in to projects
in which middle leaders were engaged
25% to major extent,
40% to moderate extent
• Having the knowledge and skills to
facilitate collective action by teachers
was the challenge many experienced.
The QELi evaluation has highlighted the
value middle leaders place on fostering and
sharing leadership with teachers.
These findings suggest we need to give
greater attention to understanding the
development preferences of middle
leaders.
Literature on middle
leaders : 6 matters of
prominence
• general malaise that surrounds people
being attracted to leadership roles;
• apparent privilege of principals’
professional learning;
• visible tensions in middle leadership;
• seductive cry that everyone is a leader;
• on-going contest over middle leadership
functions; and
• relevant essentials in middle leaders’
learning.
The general malaise that
surrounds people being
attracted to leadership roles
• International concerns about the inadequacy of
preparation & learning support for educational
leaders (Brundrett & Crawford, 2008);
• Global concerns about recruitment & retention
of school leaders;
• 70% current MLs in the UK were not aspiring to
headships & 43% of incumbent deputies not
attracted to headships (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2009);
• Pool of MLs moving to headships has shrunk in
last 5 years in Hong Kong (Ng & Chan, 2014)
The apparent privilege of
principals’ professional
learning
• Fewer examples of leadership programs for
MLs;
• Those that did exist were more likely to be
‘stepping stones to senior leadership rather
than concentrating on the exercise of middle
leadership’ (Thorpe & Bennett-Powell, 2014);
• Moral imperative to support those in leadership
roles other than the principalship.
The visible tensions in
middle leadership
• Leadership density is now accepted as necessary
for a school’s success;
• MLs leaders caught between whole school
agendas & agendas of subject departments &
networks;
• Conflict between hierarchical line management
& professional concern for collegiality (Thorpe &
Bennett-Powell, 2014);
• MLs are often trapped, mendicant to the
compliance & control exercised by the
leadership layers above them, rendering them
unable to respond to their colleagues as they
would wish
The seductive cry that
everyone is a leader
• Call for distributed leadership may be turning
teachers away from leadership work as they can
face roles for which they are unprepared & not
supported (Gurr & Drysdale, 2013);
• “Leader plus”. We need to think of distributed
leadership as behaviour rather than role
definition (Harris, 2004)
• Now harder to see who the leaders are;
• Leaders can be in formal & informal roles
(Fitzgerald, Gunter & Eaton, 2006)
The on-going contest over
middle leadership functions
• Principals & middle leaders have differing views
about the functions required of MLs (Thorpe &
Bennett-Powell, 2014)
• MLs themselves despite confidence in matters
to do with the improvement of teaching &
learning & raising standards, still want more
professional learning in this area.
• A NZ study by Marshall (2012) showed those
hierarchically above MLs held MLs primarily
responsible for staff management ignoring MLs’
role in fostering collegiality
The relevant essentials in
MLs’ learning
• Ng & Chan (2014) suggest:
- interpersonal skills,
- understanding of current curriculum
requirements,
- strategic directions,
• Thorpe & Bennett-Powell (2014) suggest:
- breadth in learning options because likely
to have portfolio outside specialisation,
- managing people & leading teams,
- time management,
- accountability for disparate team,
- dealing with new & failing staff
Anderson & Curtin (2014):
- knowledge & strategies related to
coaching & mentoring
Criteria for determining
quality of leadership PD
programs (Lovett, Flückiger & Dempster,
2014)
1. Philosophically & theoretically attuned
2. Goal-oriented
3. Informed by weight of research evidence
4. Time-rich
5. Practice-centred
6. Purpose-designed
7. Peer-supported
8. Context-sensitive
9. Partnership-powered
10. Effects-oriented
Learning for MLs
moving to principalships
Task: identify questions under each of the
following leadership content knowledge
focal points
Pedagogy
People
Place
System
Self
(Lovett, Dempster & Flückiger 2014 extending earlier work of Clarke
& Wildy, 2011).
Sample questions:
What do I need to learn …
• in order to ensure that I create & lead effective
opportunities for professional development
with my future staff members? (Pedagogy)
• to enable me to create good leadership team
working relationships & helpful and supportive
communities of practice? (People)
• about my local community, its families &
students and the policy environment in which I
will work? (Place)
• to ensure that I have the necessary grasp of
legislation & regulation for which I am
accountable at my school? (System)
• about my personal & professional values & their
implication in ethical leadership decisions? (Self)
Learning for MLs
staying in their position
Questions related to pedagogy:
- Do I understand learning sequences &
progressions in order to help teachers plan
activities?
- Am I able to help teachers design and use smart
tools to evaluate learning?
- Am I aware of banks of teaching strategies from
which teachers may draw, irrespective of the
learning area?
- Am I aware of what the research tells us about
strategies which hold potential for the greatest
learning effects?
Sample questions
related to people
• What opportunities am I providing for my
team members to see themselves as
leaders?
• How are we describing and practising
leadership?
• Can I name leadership contributions from
all of my team members?
Sample questions
related to place
• How will I know that I have understood
the context of leaders and learning in my
school?
• How effective are my learning
conversations in empowering teachers to
ask questions about their own practice?
• Am I seeing other teachers using
disciplined dialogue in discussions with
colleagues?
Sample questions
related to system
• Do I know what and when the system
requires reports?
• What strategies do I employ for
supporting teachers to produce
necessary data?
• To what extent am I collating
achievement data so parents
understand?
Sample questions
related to self
• How well do I and my colleagues
articulate and implement the shared
moral purpose to improve student
learning?
• Are my practices in working with others
based on consistent professional values?
• To what extent do my strategies and
language when mentoring align with best
practice?
Conclusion (1)
• 2/3 MLs in QELi program saw themselves as
leaders of learning rather than as promotional
applicants for principalships;
• Programs which incorporate pedagogical
leadership skills & provide opportunities to
develop these in situ with scaffolded support
are most needed for the greatest number of
MLs
• Programs should provide opportunities for MLs
to improve their capacity to enhance their own
and their teachers’ pedagogical leadership
• Education systems have an obligation to provide
role-relevant professional learning for leaders
who see middle leadership as their career path
Conclusion (2)
• suggest different types of leadership
learning are needed
• further research into middle leadership
program development & implementation
is needed
• Middle leadership should be seen as a
rewarding career choice because its
primary aim is clearly focussed on
fostering talented teacher leadership
teams working collaboratively on an
agenda committed to the moral purpose
of schooling