Search results

This chapter draws on the school improvement research of EducAid, a small NGO with schools in Sierra Leone. We review the challenge of school improvement in the context of a low-income country still emerging from the aftermath of civil war, historically low expenditure on education as a per cent of GDP, low levels of trust between people and the government and lack of a reliable evidence base on which to plan school improvement. As predictable consequences of these challenges, the Ministry of Education recognises weaknesses in teacher recruitment and training, resulting in low student attainments. In a critique of adaptations of Hood's (1998) social cohesion/social regulation matrix we argue that it may not provide a coherent framework for understanding the process of school improvement in a low-income country such as Sierra Leone. Specifically, high social cohesion, when focussed on educational improvement, is likely to be necessary for school improvement, but the concept of social regulation is more complex. Although the structure is hierarchical, both at national and local levels, implying high social regulation, lines of accountability seldom work effectively, resulting in low social regulation. The picture is further complicated by evidence that socioeconomic status may be less influential in predicting students' attainments in low-income countries than in those with high and middle incomes. We argue that a professional learning network for head teachers is a necessary starting point for head teachers to stimulate debate on change strategies within their own schools.

South Africa is a developing country with an education system that remains in crisis, despite three decades of democracy. The vestiges of South Africa's oppressive past continues to plague a system where repeated efforts at top-down transformation and curriculum renewal have failed to create the change required (Roodt, 2018). Extensive country-wide research attests to persistent inequalities linked to poverty, unemployment, and poor educational outcomes, effectively trapping disadvantaged communities in downward spirals (World Bank, 2018). As in most other countries, evidence-informed practice (EIP) has been widely discussed and advocated for in South Africa, with the matric (school leavers') results resurging the conversation annually. Unfortunately, as is the case in many developing countries, it is well documented that the actual implementation of EIP is not as widespread as desired.

This chapter reviews and analyzes the use of EIP in South Africa through an exploration of the various spaces where EIP is reported to occur within the broader education landscape. Examples of teacher and school level EIP innovations, led by a wide variety of actors within the system, are evident – this despite the pervasive lack of resources, support, and effective leadership within the formal education system. Through reflecting on these ‘pockets of hope,’ which were found to exist not only within, but also outside and alongside the system, we hope to gather insights and initiate debate on how the uptake of EIP might be better informed and facilitated within the broader South African public education system.

This chapter reports on how teachers engage with research evidence in New Zealand (NZ). NZ is classified as a mixture of egalitarian and individualist ways, as it has low social regulation but is ‘centre right’ on social cohesion according to Hood’s (1998) matrix. That is to say, as it is self-governing school system, it has low social regulation with fewer hierarchical accountability systems, but there is evidence of both high and low social cohesion in the system. While the system values and promotes research engagement and establishes initiatives that require it, such engagement is not yet as fully embedded as the related policies and initiatives would hope. Many teachers are unlikely to engage with research without sufficient support, conducive conditions and adequate resourcing that support that aspiration. Enablers include: a research-derived and research-promoting model of pedagogy in the national curriculum, and initiatives that promote connections between practitioners and research/researchers. Barriers include: limited system-wide mechanisms to ensure that the policy mechanisms are working as intended, the ‘translation’ of research to practice, and research accessibility. We discuss three lessons from the NZ case: systematic and system-wide efforts to ensure high-quality tools and capability-building initiatives, the potential of research-practice partnerships to build research engagement capability, and how enquiry can support appropriate use of research evidence.

The United Arab Emirates has made great strides in terms of its overall educational system with a variety of educational reforms to meet the nation's strategic vision. In this chapter, we utilize Hood's (1998) social cohesion/social regulation theory and DiMaggio and Powell's (1991) institutional theory to examine the evidence-informed teaching practice in the UAE. It is evident that the UAE educational model sits in the top two quadrants based on this chapter's analysis – a high social cohesion with high social regulation (i.e., “a hierarchist way”) and at times exhibiting fatalism with high social regulation and low social cohesion. Although the findings reveal substantial diversity in terms of enablers and barriers to evidence-informed practices, they provide a space to reflect on the complex cultural and social contexts behind such a diverse set of perspectives and responses.

Historically, the school effectiveness and improvement movement has focussed its attention on “within school” factors associated with effectiveness and improvement and on the individual school as the primary unit of analysis for improvement and scrutiny purposes. More recently, research has focussed on school-to-school collaboration and engagement with a broader range of services and providers has highlighted the need for more adaptive and nuanced forms of collaboration and partnership. The purpose of this paper is to explore this complex landscape from the perspective of educational reform of the middle tier in Scotland.

This paper draws on perspectives associated with socio-cultural theory, its application to public service settings and insights gained from research and evaluation outcomes over a five-year period.

This paper focusses on the establishment of Regional Improvement Collaboratives in Scotland; an example of an attempt to generate system-wide change and a shift from the hierarchical cultures characterised by bureaucratic organisations to more egalitarian cultures characterised by mutualistic, laterally networked organisations. It highlights the importance of structure and cultural change, identity and agency, leadership capacity, outward perspectives, primacy of learning and teaching and variations and complexities in creating a more networked and collaborative education system. It offers cautions concerning potential unintended consequences in the quest to develop a “self-improving” or “learning system”.

This paper highlights the importance of maintaining and building social cohesion between different stakeholders within educational systems in order to support the implementation of educational reform.

This is the first documentation and reflective analysis for an ambitious reform agenda for the middle tier in Scotland. Its value lies in the lessons and considerations it offers to other systems embarking on reforms that endeavour to build more cohesive and agile education systems, without opening them up to neo-liberal approaches to education.

Since the early 2000s, China has been actively promoting school collaboration to narrow down educational gaps between schools to achieve inclusive and quality education for all. Among the reforms, building education groups has become one of the most widely adopted approaches for school improvement. This chapter aims at visualizing a hybrid model of school collaboration formulated by both hierarchist and egalitarian approaches in the Chengdu City of China. It starts with policy review on the construction of education groups for education improvement in China to interpret how social cohesion and regulation are constructed at policy level to promote school collaboration. Through data collected from education groups in District A of Chengdu, it then provides an analysis of the practice of improving education quality through promoting education groups among public schools in this province. The study reveals top-down policy initiatives, bottom-up school autonomy, and a shared responsibility for constructing quality education for all are key factors which enabled education groups to contribute to school improvement. The research also reveals how a lack of policy coordination and limited shared value and trust within education groups have become barriers to this reform. It concludes by discussing possible solutions for further promoting a sustainable school collaboration based on experiences of some ongoing practices at school level.

The idea of Evidence-Informed Practice (EIP) was introduced in Denmark at a national policy level with the 2013 national school reform. After 10 years of gradual development towards an output-oriented, accountability-based school system, the school reform fully realized the idea of a school system, which was oriented towards learning objectives and based on capacity building and supporting professional capital. One element of professional capital was EIP, and this idea was supported financially both by the parliament and large private foundations (e.g. the Maersk Foundation). However, for different reasons, the national reform created a lot of resistance among teachers and the national teacher union, including a number of pedagogical researchers. Partly, the reform was underfunded, and partly it represented a qualitative change from understanding teaching as craft to observing it as a rational, research-informed professional practice. The result was that EIP was met with scepticism among many teachers. After 6–7 years of EIP development, the current status is that one can identify a small, yet statistical significant positive correlation between teachers' professional, evidence-informed collaboration, and their job satisfaction. However, there have been no significant changes to student achievement, well-being and teaching experiences. Part of the explanation seems to be that EIP has been introduced with a combination of high social regulation and low social cohesion, pointing towards a fatalist system approach. However, this is not an expression of an intentional approach, but rather the result of a lack of teacher acceptance. One important reason for this was that the reform was underfunded. Consequently, it was combined with a labour market conflict followed by an increase of teachers hours without an increase of salary. This resulted in a legitimation crisis, which negatively influenced the teachers' acceptance of the school reform, including the idea of EIP.

In Hong Kong higher education, students' learning outcomes are increasingly treated as evidence to inform course and teaching improvement. Therefore, outcome-based teaching and learning (OBTL) has been encouraged by the University Grants Committee (UGC) since 2007. OBTL has gradually been implemented by Hong Kong higher education institutions (HEIs) to enhance student learning outcomes. Relating OBTL to the social cohesion/regulation matrix, this chapter aims at analyzing how OBTL is being implemented by the HEIs in Hong Kong. Given the high institutional autonomy and academic freedom afforded to individual HEIs, each university has established its own systematic framework for integrating outcome-based approaches into its teaching, learning, and assessment. Unlike other higher education systems in Asia with strong government supervision, the government in Hong Kong acts as an enabler and facilitator, leaving the UGC to invite international experts as an independent audit body to assure the quality of student learning. As a result, this chapter chooses the eight UGC-funded universities to investigate how they engage their faculty members in OBTL, and what the enabling and hindering factors are. Based upon the social cohesion/regulation matrix, the Hong Kong higher education system is featured by the individualist way of promoting OBTL. Nonetheless, while universities are empowered with institutional autonomy to decide upon teaching, and student learning matters, their strong orientation with OBTL means they cannot simply do whatever they like. Adopting a robust quality assurance mechanism in evaluating university performance through University Accountability Agreements, the institutional autonomy that universities enjoy rests heavily upon their performance in teaching and student learning, which is assessed through rigorous international benchmarking via the Quality Assurance Audit conducted by the UGC and research performance through the Research Assessment Exercise. This chapter discusses the unique university governance of Hong Kong through the critical review of OBTL being adopted in teaching and learning in Hong Kong universities.

This chapter aims to explore Polish experiences of school-to-school collaboration (SSC): a mosaic of dynamic interplay between history, culture, politics, economics, and education. Starting with a diagnosis of Poland’s education system as ‘fatalist’ via the lens of the cohesion/regulation matrix, this chapter reveals the complex nature of SSC in this country, which is underpinned by conflicting logics: the decentralized education system, the state’s desire for control over that system’s key mechanisms, and the heavily capitalistic influence of neoliberal pressures. Then, drawing on data from available policy reports and legal acts, as well as the authors’ own research experiences, this chapter offers some insights on promising policy developments and examples of good practices in SSC at national and international levels. Furthermore, this chapter identifies possible barriers that block the full utilization of the potential inherent in collaboration between schools. These include formal/legal barriers (e.g. lack of policies regulating the collaboration between schools, unstable education policy after 1989, and competition between schools) and normative/cultural barriers (e.g. lack of long-standing tradition and experience of cooperation between schools, the bureaucratic school management model, and lack of cooperation skills among the main stakeholders). This chapter concludes with a discussion of some key lessons for policy and practice in tangibly harnessing the potential of SSC as a means of addressing current education challenges in Poland.