Search results

The purpose of this article is to outline how far the empirical evidence supports the centrality of leadership in the process of improving underperforming schools.

This article draws on evidence from a contemporary, selected, review of the literature.

The findings show that leadership is the critical factor in the improvement of underperforming schools. Seven new themes, derived from the selected evidence, are presented that illuminate how leaders secure improvement in the most challenging of school contexts.

This review is not a systematic review of the evidence and does not claim to be. It provides a commentary based on selected contemporary evidence and therefore is not comprehensive account of all the relevant evidence pertaining to leading the improvement of underperforming schools. The evidence is derived from sources written in English; therefore, it is fully acknowledged that other sources, in other languages might exist but are not included or reflected.

The practical implications are clearly laid out in the form of seven key themes about leading the improvement of underperforming schools that are of direct practical use.

With so many schools in high poverty areas finding themselves in difficulty, this contemporary review provides new insights about the leadership approaches and practices that continue to make a considerable difference to underperforming schools.

School improvement planning has been a central part of school improvement initiatives for decades. Evidence suggests, however, that traditional planning processes are regularly superficial. In the USA, some principals have begun developing short-cycle planning designed to encourage school leadership teams and staff to develop, monitor and adjust plans throughout the academic year.

In this study of eight schools in one urban district, the authors analyzed multiple rounds of short-cycle improvement plans and principal interview data to assess the progress schools made implementing plans over the course of a semester, the ways in which plans were monitored and adjusted and the extent to which principals embraced short-cycle planning.

The authors found that many tasks from first semester plans were completed, which informed the development of plans for the second semester. Observational data were primarily used to monitor plan completion, although principals engaged in monitoring but relied on their leadership team to do so. Principals reported regular engagement with plans throughout semester, but plans were seldom adjusted within a semester.

The findings suggest that short-cycle planning is potentially a viable alternative to traditional annual planning as principals communicated being more engaged and adaptive. Still, the evidence also indicated that old habits might be hard to break as school leaders did not monitor and adjust plans frequently enough to guide improvement efforts in relative “real time.”

This paper will discuss one university’s efforts to initiate a process to better support PK-12 continuous school improvement goals for all 13 schools in their PDS network as a way to broaden the university’s mission and respond more formally to the individual school communities with which they partner.

The paper is conceptual in that it presents an innovative idea to stimulate discussion, generate new ideas and advance thinking about cross-institutional collaboration between universities and professional development schools.

The paper provides insights and ideas for bringing about change and growth in a seasoned PDS partnership network by connecting PK-12 continuous school improvement efforts to PDS partnership work.

This paper fulfills an identified need to study how seasoned partnerships can participate in simultaneous renewal by offering ideas that school–university partnership leaders can build upon as they make efforts to participate in the process of growth and change.

Follett's relational process theory illuminates key aspects of interdependence among organizations in the field of education that are essential to fostering capacities for interorganizational resilience. The article argues for the necessity of developing mutualism in systems of education as essential preparation for times of instability and crisis, as demonstrated through recent experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic.

This article provides an introduction to the relational process theory of Mary Parker Follett, a foundational theorist of organizing and administration. This theoretical review uses worked examples drawn from a collaborative, continuous improvement partnership focused on educational leadership preparation and development.

The author identifies four aspects of Follett's theory that connect most directly to collaborative, continuous improvement partnerships. These include mutualism as circular response, coactive power, embrace of difference through constructive conflict and integrating experience through learning. The article discusses how these offer an integrated framework of foundational concepts for nurturing and sustaining educational systems capable of adaptive change in the face of complex challenges.

Follett's relational process theory offers a perspective on partnering as a dynamic and evolving constellation of interactions and activity. The implications of Follett's core ideas for education resonate beyond improvement partnerships and offer guidance at all levels of educational systems seeking to orient towards an evolutionary logic.

Schools struggle with sustaining their educational innovations (Cohen and Mehta, 2017; Askell-Williams and Koh, 2020) and may benefit from concrete and practical guidance (Askell-Williams and Koh, 2020). A dialogue between staff within schools can be a way to promote self-evaluation regarding the innovation. Therefore, a self-evaluation tool for educators was developed: The Sustainability Meter (TSM). The purpose of the tool is to gain insight into the different perspectives and experiences of stakeholders within the school organization regarding the innovation, as a basis for improvement-directed actions to promote sustainable educational innovation.

In this small-scale study, the authors explored conceptual and instrumental use of the Sustainability Meter in two phases, and also examined user satisfaction. In phase 1, the tool was used under the guidance of the researcher (first author), who supported the chairs in taking steps before the group dialogue took place, and who then guided the dialogue itself as a moderator. In phase 2, work with TSM was organized independently by the schools themselves, supported by the manual. Data were collected in the form of observations of the dialogue, group interviews and documents generated by the participants.

In terms of conceptual use, in general, participants gained better understanding of each other's perspectives and backgrounds with regard to the (sustainability of the) innovation. The dialogue also led to insights into challenges for growth toward sustainable innovation. For instrumental use, the results of the analysis were incorporated in a plan of action in the majority of the participants' schools. In terms of user satisfaction, participants in all groups perceived TSM as an enjoyable support for high-quality dialogue. This research provides some indications that the tool might lead to sustainable educational innovations.

Next to developing an action plan based on the results of the school, the tool also appeared to help breaking up the process in smaller, clearer and more feasible improvement-directed actions. The results of this study further show that the authors could distinguish between three types of instrumental use. The improvement-directed actions in this research often were a combination of this three types: initial solutions, short-term and longer-term measures. This research provides some indications that the tool might lead to sustainable educational innovations.

The purpose of this paper was to develop a quantitative classroom observation method that is able to analyse the school day to identify Time-on-Task losses comprehensively and systematically, at a level of detail that can be used by teachers and principals to stimulate and focus practical improvement efforts.

The novel Time-on-Task Analysis (TOTA) model was developed by triangulating the conceptual framework of the Overall Equipment Effectiveness metric with the semantics and structure of the target domain. Once developed, the model was tested structurally against a time-series classroom observation data set, after which the resulting TOTA was presented to a sample of 52 education stakeholders, who then gave their perspectives of the analysis in a structured survey.

The ontological model was found to be accurate, complete and without conceptual incongruencies, and its output novel and useful by the sample of education stakeholders. Of the participants, 90.3% found the analysis to provide a new perspective, 94.2% reported that the analysis triggered improvement ideas and 80.8% thought that their school(s) could benefit from a TOTA study.

The TOTA model introduces a time-loss-focused perspective to the field of quantitative classroom observation studies, which is dominated by more sociologic- and pedagogic-focused topics. Its grounding in Overall Equipment Effectiveness also gives it a more detailed and systematic approach than the few Time-on-Task studies done to date, resulting in a model made for the “Gemba”: the school classroom.

Existing research suggests that organizational learning, jointly implemented by principals and teachers may reduce agency risks and improve school management effectiveness. However, research investigating how this process occurs is lacking. The relationship between school leaders promoting the involvement of teachers in school-wide processes focused on instructional improvement and the coherence characterizing a school's instructional program remains unclear.

The authors identified shared instructional leadership and instructional coherence, as two key variables describing the process of organizational learning and the outcome of agency risk reduction. The authors employed hierarchical linear modeling to test the hypothesis that shared leaderships positively predicts differences among schools in instructional coherence.

Based on a sample of 113 public high schools selected from a U.S. Midwestern state, the results confirm the hypothesis.

This study uses the existing theoretical and empirical findings to interpret the potential relationship between shared leadership and instructional coherence, and validates it through empirical data analysis. The findings expand the understanding of the shared leadership theory. Although the design of this study is strictly based on theoretical and empirical findings, and part of the purpose of the research is to find the reasons why shared leadership seems to be insignificant in some countries and regions, readers should still note that the sample source is American schools. The findings of this study are worth examining with different samples in future studies.

Since the direct relationship between shared leadership and student standardized test scores has been difficult to measure, and in some countries even negative, there is debate about the need for shared leadership. The difficulty of measurement is caused by the diversity of leadership subjects and the complexity of leadership tasks. This study finds out the direct object of shared leadership and the process of exerting its effects, which will expand the understanding of the positive meaning of shared leadership. This will help different countries and regions better identify and play the role of shared leadership.

Based on the combination of organizational learning theory, agency theory and shared leadership theory, the study modeled the process of collaborative organizational learning among principals and teachers. The study employed instructional coherence as a form of structured organizational learning that is a prerequisite for improvement in common measures of student learning such as standardized test scores. Do so provide practical guidance for educators seeking improvement through organizational learning.

The purpose of this article is to expand knowledge on Swedish principals' professional development (PD) from the perspectives of superintendents. In particular, the article analyzes how superintendents understand and organize PD for principals.

Empirical data are derived from a strategic sample of ten (n = 10) superintendents. Transcribed interviews were analyzed in two steps. The first step was carried out inductively to identify prominent aspects of PD for principals. In the second step, the detected themes and categories were analyzed more deductively through the theoretical lens of learning in organizations.

The analysis revealed that the purpose of PD for principals and the principal leadership that must be nurtured from the perspective of superintendents spans a scale, from knowing what is already required to critically examining and exploring the unknown. In addition, the understanding of learning stretches from an individual enterprise to a collective activity. However, noteworthy differences between the superintendents were detected and organized into three ideal types.

Despite a profound research design and a careful selection of superintendents, the sample sets some limits because of the plurality within the decentralized Swedish school system.

The results can support strategies from superintendents, principals and educational authorities to build infrastructures that foster PD at different levels of school systems.

This article offers a novel perspective by analyzing principals' PD from the perspectives of superintendents.

This paper proposes a new conception of school systems arising out of the collision of three forces: (1) a longstanding press to rationalize the technical work of schools in the service of educational excellence; (2) a growing democratic press to equitably engage community members in the process of defining educational excellence; which together are (3) heightening legacy uncertainties that pervade educational organizations. It then draws on paradox theory to explore how leaders might navigate the growing uncertainties that are central to the work of organizing for excellence and equity.

Integrating scholarship related to organizational institutionalism, paradox theory, learning sciences, social justice leadership and educational system building, this paper examines the changing organization of schools, the growing uncertainty facing educators and the implications for leaders and preparation programs.

This paper introduces two perspectives on how to navigate the growing uncertainty facing educators and educational leaders: one that centers on mitigating uncertainty, the other that prioritizes leveraging uncertainty. Both perspectives have affordances and limitations when considering the twin goals of educational excellence and equitable involvement in decision-making, and leaders should thus view uncertainty as a paradox—an interdependent, persistent, contradiction—that can never be fully resolved, but can be managed. A paradox perspective makes visible the complex work of effectively moving between mitigating and leveraging uncertainty, especially in a field where the latter garners more support and legitimacy.

This paper synthesizes recent educational and organizational scholarship to develop a new conception of educational organizations and a corresponding approach to educational leadership capable of navigating the growing complexity and uncertainty that pervades school systems.