Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore how perceptions of risk influenced teachers’ sensemaking and actions during a professional learning and development (PLD) initiative where teachers were expected to change their practices.

A risk perception lens, focussed on uncertainty, was used to capture the on-going experiences of teachers as they participated in PLD. The PLD, delivered by one organisation, focussed on developing teacher use and understanding of formative assessment practices. Data for this three-school qualitative exploratory case study of teachers’ perceptions of risk primarily utilised qualitative interviews.

Findings identified that teachers perceived risk and experienced feelings of vulnerability as a result of their on-going assessment and evaluation of the uncertainty in the professional learning context. The perceived risk informed teachers’ responses and actions, ultimately impacting on teachers’ learning.

The risk perception process model developed from the findings and conceptual framework provides a tool for educators to navigate and reduce perceived risk and enhance learning in change.

This research advances the conceptualisation of perceived risk in PLD. It challenges the current concept of teachers’ resistance and instead considers the role of their perceptions of risk, broadening the understanding of responses to educational change.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate two recent examples of the New Zealand Ministry of Education's approach to reducing the persistent disparities in achievement between students of different social and ethnic groups. The first example is cluster‐based school improvement, and the second is the development of national standards for literacy and numeracy across the primary sector.

The evaluative framework used was derived from recent international analyses of the characteristics of school systems, which are either high performers or successful reformers on recent international surveys. Policy documents and evaluation reports provided the evidence on which the evaluation of the two New Zealand (NZ) examples is based.

The six criteria associated with high system performance and/or reform success were: system‐wide commitment to educational improvement; ambitious universal standards; developing capacity at the point of delivery; professional forms of accountability; strategic resourcing; and institutionalizing the improvement of practice. The present analysis of the NZ reform examples suggests that while there is a broad commitment to more equitable outcomes, a new resolve to introduce and report against national standards, and a high level of espousal of professional accountability, there are significant contradictions between school self‐management and the work that needs to be done to reduce achievement disparities.

This paper's evaluation of these two examples raises important policy questions about the assumptions that are made in the NZ self‐managing system about teacher and leader capability and about where responsibility for school improvement lies.

New Zealand schools are now managed by parent‐elected trustees whose role is to work in partnership with school staff to formulate and monitor aspects of school policy. A sample of those involved in the partnership (principals, teachers, chairpersons and parents) were asked what role they thought the Board should play in three different types of school policy decision. The results showed that, while there were some differences between primary and secondary respondents, most respondents believed the Board should play a far less influential role in educational than in administrative decisions. Overall, less than 50 per cent of both the professional and lay groups expressed opinions about the Board′s role that were consistent with current government policy on the management of New Zealand schools.

Performance appraisal and teacher evaluation systems in schools have been subject to criticism in many countries because they have not met perceived requirements of educators and/or the state. This study sought the views of New Zealand secondary school principals to whom responsibility for developing appraisal systems has been devolved since 1989. In general, principals developed systems that met their own requirements and were reasonably satisfied with their efforts. Some principals prioritised developmental purposes while others included accountability purposes. These two groups experienced different outcomes. In some cases, staff opposition prevented principals from developing accountable systems. Although the performance appraisal systems developed by principals mostly met their own requirements, most did not all meet the state’s requirements for accountability.

This paper aims to serve as an introduction to and overview of this special issue of the Journal of Educational Administration entitled “Building organisational capacity in school education”. The co‐editors have solicited contributions from authors in Wales, Australia, Canada, the USA, England, Hong Kong and New Zealand.

The paper reviews past and contemporary approaches to the issue of capacity building in education and in particular, sustainable capacity building. As well as reviewing key researchers and writers in this field, including their own work, the authors foreshadow and synthesise the other seven papers that make up this special issue.

The paper contends that building capacity in schools and schooling, while no means easy, can be both understood and accomplished. However, caution needs to be exercised because hard‐fought gains in capacity building and sustainability can be quickly eroded under the influence of poor leadership or extraneous changes.

The paper serves as a framework both for the seven papers that follow and more generally for understanding and conceptualising sustainable school capacity building.

The paper performs the function of framing current debates and pressures around sustainable school capacity‐building in an international theoretical and practical context.

This scoping review utilizes findings from 80 articles to build a research model to study research-practice-policy networks in K-12 education systems. The purpose of this study was to generate a broad understanding of the variation in conceptualizations of research-practice-policy partnerships, rather than dominant conceptualizations.

Arskey and O'Malley's (2005) five stage scoping review process was utilized including: (1) a consultative process with partners to identify research questions, (2) identify relevant studies, (3) study selection based on double-blind peer review, (4) charting the data and (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results in a research model identifying key dimensions and components of research-practice partnerships (RPPs).

Coburn et al. (2013) definition of RPPs arose as an anchoring definition within the emerging field. This article proposes a model for understanding the organization and work of RPPs arising from the review. At the core lies shared goals, coproduction and multistakeholder collaboration organized around three dimensions: (1) Systems and structures: funding, governance, strategic roles, policy environment, system alignment; (2) Collaborative processes: improvement planning and data use, communication, trusting relationships, brokering activities, capacity building; (3) Continuous Learning Cycles: social innovation, implementation, evaluation and adaptation.

By using a common framework, data across RPPs and from different studies can be compared. Research foci might test links between elements such as capacity building and impacts, or test links between systems and structures and how those elements influence collaborative processes and the impact of the RPPs. Research could test the generalizability of the framework across contexts. Through the application and use of the research model, various elements might be refuted, confirmed or refined. More work is needed to use this framework to study RPPs, and to develop accompanying data collection methods and instruments for each dimension and element.

The practical applications of the framework are to be used by RPPs as a learning framework for strategic planning, iterative learning cycles and evaluation. Many of the elements of the framework could be used to check-in with partners on how things are going – such as exploring how communication is working and whether these structures move beyond merely updates and reporting toward joint problem-solving. The framework could also be used prior to setting up an RPP as an organizing approach to making decisions about how that RPP might best operate.

Despite increased attention on multistakeholder networks in education, the conceptual understanding is still limited. This article analyzed theoretical and empirical work to build a systematic model to study RPPs in education. This research model can be used to: identify RPP configurations, analyze the impact of RPPs, and to compare similarities and differences across configurations.

The purpose of this paper is to present a case study of the support provided to all three education sectors in one state of Australia to assist school leaders in the analysis and interpretation of their school's performance on state‐wide and subsequent national assessments of Literacy and Numeracy in Years 3, 5, 7, and 9.

This is a case study, presented from the perspective of the chief investigator over a ten‐year period. The approach is an interpretive one, involving reflection on action and some external qualitative evaluation data.

The case study illustrates the need for those involved in large‐scale assessment aimed at school improvement to adopt a long‐term view, understanding that the use of data to inform and change school practices, pedagogical and administrative and cultural, takes time and a great deal of support.

The paper does not purport to provide empirical evidence, nor does it attempt to provide experimental or quasi‐experimental conditions.

The paper aims to provide policy makes and educational authorities with information to assist in understanding the long‐term nature of using data for school improvement.

The paper presents an account of a decade of involvement with a project designed to assist schools to make use of large‐scale assessment data to inform and stimulate school improvement. The paper is original because of the length of engagement in this project, and its broad scope, involving all schools in one state of Australia.