learning_to_learn_a_foundation_for_school_engagement

Learning To Learn: A foundation for School Engagement Dr Chris Goldspink International Graduate school of Management, University of South Australia chris.goldspink@bigpond.com Personal address, PO Box 591, Tanunda, South Australia Learning To Learn: A foundation for School Engagement Abstract An analysis is presented of an approach to school reform undertaken at selected sites within the State education system in South Australia The reform was first introduced in 1999 and involved some seventy-seven schools and pre-schools It was initiated to respond to concerns that prior change attempts had led only to incremental improvement rather than the desired transformational change Following its success, it has been extended and widened to provide a foundation for curriculum co-development within the State Data was collected from teachers, school leaders and key policy officers using interviews and case studies This was used to identify peoples experience of the reform, the effectiveness of strategies pursued and the outcomes achieved at the site level This paper discusses the emergent model of change resulting from the project The findings are compared with the more general findings on school based reform drawn from the literature Parallels and divergence with past experience in related Western educational systems are discussed Lessons on successful school level change drawn from the findings are identified Key Words: School reform, learning to learn, educational reform, school improvement, constructivism Wordcount: 11,700 Introduction There has been broad agreement among educational policy advocates in many Western countries that the role of education and the way in which it is delivered needs to change (Bingler 1998; OECD 1999; Delors 2000) This claim is driven in part by observation of changing economic, social and geo-political settings (OECD 1999; Sterling 2001) and in part by concern regarding the efficacy of past approaches (Louis and Miles 1990; Newmann 1996; Caldwell 1998) In response, many countries have introduced a succession of change programs Despite such initiatives, commentators note that schooling looks and works in very similar ways today as it has in the past (Louis and Miles 1990; Spillane 1999) and the broad conclusion is that school reform is difficult (Louis and Miles 1990; Sarason 1990; Fullan and Hargreaves 1991; Fullan 1994; McDonald 1996) Examples of successful change are therefore important This paper discusses findings from research into a reform undertaken over a three year period commencing in 1999 (and now ongoing) in the state school sector in South Australia The focus of this reform was initially school level (since expanded) and was concerned with improving learning outcomes for students by deepening teachers’ understanding of learning theory and their capacity and willingness to apply it in their classrooms Context and Background to the reform In 2001 the State of South Australia had a population of approximately 1.5 Million (source: ABS) As at 23 February 2001, there were 611 schools and 413 pre-schools in the State (Employment 2001) Metropolitan schools numbered 317 while 294 were in the country There were 12,772 teachers practicing (full or part time) in this year Female teachers comprised 66% of the teaching force and the average age of teachers was 45 years There has been widespread concern at a decline in teacher morale and public respect for the profession (Commonwealth 2000) Australian Governments1 have responded in a variety of ways to these issues, with many initiating reforms and often at the same time demanding higher standards, particularly around ‘basics’ such as literacy and numeracy (Johnson and Reid 1999) Learning to Learn The reform studied through this research was known as the Learning to Learn Project It was initially funded for three years with the first round ending in June 2001 This first round involved seventy seven schools and pre-schools (hereafter referred to as sites) This is just under thirteen per cent of all State schools Over the course of the three years of the first round some 4615 (36%) of State sector teachers were involved in some way with activity/programs associated with the Project The project specifically targeted early and middle year schooling and did not include senior secondary years The reform grew out of dissatisfaction with past central curriculum development initiatives found here, as elsewhere (Louis and Miles 1990; Spillane 1999), as generating ‘patchy’ take up by teachers In the local context the way in which curriculum development had previously been undertaken did not assist with “The generation of new thinking and understandings about the learning process - knowledge generation [and] The translation of this knowledge and learning outwards to the system as a whole.” (Foster 2000: 5) Learning to Learn, therefore, had a focus on whole school reform The stated aim was to support the development of a leading edge futures oriented curriculum directed at holistic development of the child and improved meta-cognitive skills This is significant as the literature suggests that what works to improve conventional ‘academic’ attainment is different from that which supports more flexible learning ability in many life roles The following key precepts were identified as having informed the design of the project (Inferred from Foster 2001) • Meta learning skills are increasingly important to society and business as a basis for knowledge; • Education is increasingly expected to be future orientated; • There is a need for a catalyst or leader to trigger partnership to bring this change in orientation about; • Complex problems need complex solutions and these can come from those who are confronting them at a local level; • Vocation matters and constitutes a motivational resource in the context of education; • Learning comes through trust and acceptance of risk; • Reflection on deeply held worldviews and a questioning of identity not just administrative change is needed for sustainable benefit; In Australia Education is primarily a State Government responsibility, but the Federal Government maintains some policy role and provides some funding • • • Transformation was needed not incremental improvement; Change and uncertainty are ubiquitous and form the backdrop for transformation; Sustainable change will only come through responsibility taken at a local level not through imposition This project drew on and promoted ‘constructivism’ as a theory base appropriate to rethinking learning processes and towards achieving improved meta-learning This guiding theoretical position was seen to be relevant to all levels of the education system as constructivist assumptions also informed the redevelopment of the curriculum framework In this context constructivism should be interpreted as implying recognition of a pluralism of needs and a degree of epistemological relativism (see (Le Cornu, Peters et al 2003) and (Le Cornu, Peters et al 2003) for a more complete discussion of the application of constructivism within this program) Systems concepts were also drawn on although the appeal to this theory is vague – signalling a concern with relationships, processes and connections as well as parts, mechanics and outputs Overall, the evidence suggests that a somewhat pluralistic theoretical position was deliberately adopted to loosen up thinking and to keep those involved open to alternative viewpoints There was active avoidance of adopting ‘one right way’ The change was not seen as a ‘one off’ intervention but rather a stimulus to establish “Innovation, change and uncertainty rather than equilibrium from the natural state” (Foster 2000:4) This represents a shift away from what Middleton & Hill (1996) refer to as ‘industrial approaches’ to education and towards a system of co-discovery and codevelopment between the policy centre and sites and between teachers and students A number of specific strategies were adopted as a part of the reform program Administrative Mechanisms and accountability strategies The following specific strategies were adopted Selection process: schools were selected against criteria designed to judge readiness These included an assessment of commitment, ideas for focus of curriculum inquiry and cultural readiness for change Funding: This was provided to allow for teacher release for professional development, participation in meetings and cross school forums, payment for professional development organised at school level and for minor equipment/material needs Accountability: Service Agreements specified a minimum set of conditions and established the respective commitments and obligations of the parties In addition there was a requirement for schools to participate in Annual Review Meetings, Practicums and the 2002 EXPO This provided for accountability in a manner congruent with the values informing the reform The emphasis was on evaluating what was important and valued rather than what was easily measured This was an attempt to focus goals onto longer term learning and system wide outcomes rather than shorter term tangibles Role of the Project Manager: Contrary to many attempts to reform schools, the role of the project manager was not conceived as one of policy direction, or project management and planning Rather it was to maintain the ‘cognitive and relational congruence’ of the Project There was an acute recognition of how entrenched the culture of dependence and control was between the policy directorate and schools and how difficult it would be for both officers in the centre and leaders and teachers to break habits of a lifetime Letting go of the ‘command and control’ model of administration meant rethinking the role of the support team Foster et al note, ‘The potential for old perceptions and relationships to drive the Project was strong’ Maintenance of a congruent approach was a challenge It involved diverse tactics, from things like the ‘identity and badging’ of the project, selection of articles for distribution, and identifying the ‘big ideas’ to be privileged through the Core Learning Program The approach was strategic, involving minimal intervention unless a clear need to help free up thinking was identified It should be noted that this required a rare level of integrity and commitment on the part of the individuals involved so individual talent and capability cannot be dismissed – it was a critical element Learning Strategies Core Learning Program: South Australia has an experienced teaching force and many skilled practitioners who have developed particular ways of working over their years as teachers Many have relatively little university education and, while they have participated in professional development throughout their career, the type, range and nature of this was highly varied The aim was to ensure all principals, Project leaders and staff, were exposed to leading edge research regarding learning and complementary pedagogies and methodology The core learning program was significantly influenced by systems theory as well as constructivist learning theory (see below) Assisting sites to become future orientated meant challenging old world paradigms and the assumptions upon which they were based Project Colleagues: are professionals with a range of backgrounds including specialists in learning and cognition, community education, learning to learn and educational administration and research The capacity to draw on and encourage teachers to engage with a diverse range of leading experts was seen as necessary to loosen the boundaries around established thinking and practice Practicums: Three-day intensive professional development programs were hosted by Project sites that provided teachers and leaders with opportunities to share and learn from one another about their particular approach to reform Practicums were a mandated part of the program and were intended to provide a basis for self-evaluation by schools among peers as well as an accountability point for the wider system Leader Learning Circles: To support learning among leaders themselves about what worked and how to better support and encourage change, leaders were invited to share experience regularly This approach also provided a forum for leaders to interact regularly with Teacher Educators from the University – part of the project colleague team The University staff benefited by gaining exposure to key school management and educational leadership issues The Project Manager benefited from the rich source of insight into the progress of change at site level and an early indication of what issues were helping or hindering leaders’ and teachers’ capacity to make change at the local level Expo: a three day event was held at the end of the first three year project cycle It was intended to: Celebrate the learning of Project sites over the last three years Provide a reflection point for evaluation of the 1999 -2001 phase of the Project Share the work of the Project across the wider Department for Education, Training and Employment The design and program was informed by ‘three big ideas’ These were: • Reigniting the passion – reconnecting teachers as learners to transform engagement • Valuing emergence – recognising that the journey of learning can lead us to new places in our thinking • Seeking congruence – working towards congruence of values, principles and practices in whole school design Research Methodology The aim of the research upon which this paper draws was to investigate the impact of the Learning to Learn Project and to theorise about that impact The outcomes pursued by this reform were subject to a wide range of influences Some of were are readily apparent while others were indirect and difficult to identify Qualitative data, collected using interviews, case studies and personal narratives, therefore played a key role in providing a depth of understanding and a level of detail not obtainable from quantitative data As the aim of the research was to inform policy and program design, it was essential that the findings be owned by and meaningful to those who would need to act upon them the use of qualitative data and an inductive approach assisted with this also At the same time there was a need for some researcher ‘distance’ to reassure (particularly external) stakeholders This was achieved by use of a researcher not previously involved with the project and by researcher triangulation for key stages of data analysis The qualitative data was supplemented with analysis of existing documentation and records Findings - The Emergent Model of change The following account describes the emergent model distilled from the evidence The results are compared with key findings from relevant literature The model, developed through induction, revealed four rather distinct phases Each has a common theme – that of learning Learning processes and methodologies informed each phase but what was being learned showed some notable transitions as the change process unfolded The phases included: The establishment of commitment – critical relationships needed renegotiating and teachers and school leaders needed to see some initial signs of real benefit before bringing commitment Collaboration and engagement – became possible once commitment was gained In most sites, provided there was strong local leadership, this then deepened and widened to involve whole school communities Consolidation and expansion – of networks occurred as sites engaged in wider networks of change – both with the centre and with other sites The system was then poised – with potential for significant further development but facing challenges in maintaining a critical mass Each of these phases will now be examined in more detail Phase One – The establishment of commitment The keys to establishment Evidence collected suggests that Learning to Learn became established in sites as a result of a convergence of five critical factors These included: the provision of adequate funding; attracting ‘committed’ schools or schools with a core leadership commitment; appealing to teachers intrinsic motivation with a focus on improved learning outcomes for students and concepts of lifelong learning; pursuing change with high levels of flexibility and devolved responsibility while maintaining a high level of congruence to core values informing the change; timely and flexible exposure of teachers to diverse new ideas on learning by leading experts and permission to pursue points and issues which were personally significant The relationship between key factors is represented in figure one below Funding Funding was commonly identified as critical but not sufficient for the success of the project Funding provided a means for schools to access critical input including, for rural schools, overcoming barriers to access such as geographical distance It more generally provided the means for supporting and covering the absence of teachers as they participated in the program, releasing them from the day to day demands, to engage more deeply and fully in rethinking their and others’ practice The need for time to research, learn, reflect, plan and experiment may seem self-evident but as Adelman et al (1997) found, is all too seldom provided In this sense the effect of funding was practical, reflecting a realistic appreciation of the minimum conditions needed to ensure teachers could participate effectively Equally important to the practical importance of funding was the symbolic importance The provision of financial support sent a signal about the Department’s seriousness and was widely interpreted as recognition of and valuing of teachers by ‘the system’ This was particularly significant in an environment where declining funding and perceived ‘buck-passing’ between State and Federal authorities has been identified as having contributed to declining morale among teachers (Commonwealth 2000) A c c e ss a n d in v o lv e m e n t p o s s ib le P ro je c t F u n d in g So m e Te a c h e rs re th in k th e ir a p p ro a c h n e w id e a s C o re L e a rn in g In n o v a t iv e te a c h e rs e x p e rim e n t in c la s s Te a c h e rs a n d le a d e rs e x c ite d D e p a rtm e n t s e e n a s s e rio u s S ite s Tru s t c e n t re P a s s iv e t e a c h e rs w a t c h S ite s te s t c e n tre Te a c h e r v a lu e s re s o n a te w / - L L C o n g ru e n t m e s s a g e s f ro m P ro je c t M a n a g e r L e a d e rs e n c o u g e a n d s u p p o rt Te a c h e rs m o tiv a te d t o d o m o re f o r k id s Figure – Phase one – the establishment of commitment However important funding was, and several school leaders stated that in the early days they had little expectation or confidence in the perceived rhetoric of the program and were motivated to apply due mainly to the funding, it was not in the end regarded as sufficient In retrospect school leaders reflected that had they been given the resource but no further guidance they would not have been able to put it to such effective use The likely result without the overall program would have been incremental improvement rather than regenerative and transformational change The overall framework of Learning to Learn then was a necessary adjunct to the provision of funds The caution about ‘when the funding goes away so will the program’ sounded by Louis and Miles (1990) has yet to be tested but will need to be considered as the project moves forward An important test for its sustainability will be whether schools will use their own resource flexibility – particularly that made possible by recent devolution of responsibility – to maintain progress when and if the initial funding dries up This may depend to a large degree on the extent to which stakeholders are convinced of its benefits Attracting progressive schools The importance of and criteria for selecting schools for entry into the project was controversial The literature suggests that the readiness of schools and attention to preconditions for change is important for successful reform Evans (2001: 120), for example, identifies the following characteristics as relevant to assessing a schools readiness: • Occupational framework: the structure of the profession and its influences on the school, the nature of the work, norms, social status and outlook of practitioners • Politics: The trust, consensus, and autonomy the school enjoys and its ability to maintain informed supportive constituencies • History: The schools previous experience with innovation • Stress: The level of demand on the school vis-à-vis its organisational strengths • Finances: The school’s wherewithal to underwrite reform • Culture: The supportiveness of the school’s underlying ethos and shared assumptions The Learning to Learn Project Manager sought schools with a pre-disposition for change and some of the pre-conditions (such as leadership support, learning culture) that would increase the likelihood of success There were no criteria imposed about the scope, type and nature of change project to be undertaken, as there was a desire to ensure diversity and to work with the intrinsic motivation within the school There were concerns about how pre-disposition capabilities may meaningfully be assessed While criteria were applied, the Project Management remains unconvinced that this made much of a difference to the outcomes Some schools that were judged highly against the criteria failed to deliver as expected while others that were initially considered questionable made considerable contributions There seemed to be much wider agreement that while whole school commitment was not necessary in the early stages, the strong commitment of leaders was Many of the participating schools had a history of involvement in developmental programs and many regarded themselves as ‘innovators’ – albeit in diverse directions, not all of which were consistent with the values and philosophy of Learning to Learn Within these schools there was a pool of leaders who were prepared to work to involve their staff and in some cases communities and have them commit to involvement with the Project There was also evidence of a level of collegiality and enthusiasm although it is difficult to judge how strong this was in the beginning or whether it was a result of the Project itself Nevertheless, the overall impression was that with the exception of the first of Evans criteria, the remainder where more or less satisfied Appealing to teachers’ intrinsic motivation A great number of past attempts to improve education have failed due to the failure to effectively engage teachers and produce changes within the classroom (Spillane 1999; Evans 2001) There is very strong evidence that there is a culture amongst teachers which values education as a ‘public good’ Based on extensive research in a number of Western countries (Australia included), Dinham and Scott note that satisfaction in teachers was due to factors: …intrinsic to the role of teaching Student achievement, helping students to modify their attitudes and behaviour, positive relationships with students and others, self-growth, mastery of professional skill, and feeling part of a collegial, supportive environment are powerful satisfiers … (2000: 8) Evidence to the Senate inquiry into Australian education (Commonwealth 2000) affirmed the view that teachers feel most powerful and relevant and identify most strongly with their classroom role and ability to deliver effective learning The underlying value of ‘concern for student learning’ seems widely present and has had a significant effect on success of past attempts at reform Research demonstrates that teachers respond badly where they feel that program or change priorities detract from or are in conflict with this overall objective of teaching Louis and Miles conclude therefore: … starting an innovation program with an effort that centres on curriculum and instruction is the most effective strategy for getting teachers interested and involved … Even where organizational variables, such as morale or climate, need to be worked on, these should usually come after teachers have been excited about an innovation that reaches into the pedagogic core (1990:201) The experience of Learning to Learn reinforces this conclusion The project met little resistance even from the more cynical teachers and inspired and excited those who were more committed Critics may well ask, however – if teachers are so concerned with the quality of learning and outcomes for students and communities – why is there such long standing and widespread concern at deficiencies in our schools? What is striking, and in need of some explanation, is that teaching practice has remained much the same despite substantial environmental change and demands and in the face of community criticism and evidence that current practices are not the best that can be achieved It has to be concluded that some intrinsic motivation to better for students, in and of itself, is not sufficient to generate innovation and continual improvement in teaching practice Rather it appears to act as an abstract value, important as a foundation to teacher’s sense of who they are and of their self-worth and perhaps informing their immediate practice This motivation fails, therefore, to provide a basis for more system wide improvement Tyack and Cuban’s work provides some insights into why this may be the case They argue that attempts to change schools run across deeply held views as to how a school should look and operate Unlike many professions, teaching is one that everyone has some knowledge of – even if only from having been on the receiving end Citizens, politicians and administrators as well as teachers all have a view of what education ‘is’ and how it ‘should’ work The primary reference for what a school ‘is’ and ‘should be’ is based on stakeholders’ personal experience This can act as a significant conservative force to the extent that these stakeholders find it difficult to imagine alternatives to those that they have experienced Change will tend to focus on ‘tinkering’ with what is known and taken for granted as necessary, rather than any deeper questioning In addition, under pressure, there will be a tendency for teachers to retreat to what they know rather than to innovate and try radical new approaches Reform attempts that fail to address and challenge these intrinsic sources of conservatism are unlikely to make much headway Learning to Learn, in embracing a core focus on learning and outcomes for students was perceived by teachers as congruent with their values and commitments and as helpful to them in their classroom It drew on and reinforced their core values rather than threatening them In large part this was attributable to the ‘non-deficit’ view that was promoted and that the strategies engaged and empowered teachers to improve through their own endeavour In this it sent messages that those teachers were valued and trusted, offsetting the negative messages emanating from the general environment The significance of these negative perceptions and unrealistic community expectations has been well documented as a significant factor affecting teacher motivation (Dinham & Scott 2000) and current morale problems within Australia (Commonwealth 2000) What is significant from the Learning to Learn experience is that the effect of these demotivators (none have diminished or gone away, indeed if anything they increased over the period covered by this research) can be overcome by attending to the values to which teachers are committed – re-connecting them to a sense of vocation The strategies of Learning to Learn provided teachers with a means to turn the abstract value at the core of 10 In d iv id u a ls deepen c o m m it m e n t In n o v a tiv e te a c h e rs e x p e rim e n t in c la s s S tu d e n ts a n d p a re n ts re s p o n d p o s it iv e ly L e a d e rs e n c o u g e a n d s u p p o rt P a s s iv e te a c h e rs w a t c h G ro u p s a t te n d C o re L e a rn in g In t e re s t g ro w s in s c h o o l Te a c h e rs f e e l a ffi rm e d L e a d e rs e n c o u g e b ro a d e r in v o lv e m e n t C om m on la n g u a g e d e v e lo p s B ro a d e r c o lla b o tio n C o n f u s io n a b o u t c o lle c tiv e d ire c t io n Figure two – collaboration and engagement – the basis for performance Opportunities to Learn in Groups The reform initially attracted most strongly those teachers who had values consistent with the student centred nature of the change Learning to Learn supported these teachers and gave them a voice in their schools encouraging them to make local change Initially this may have gone no further than their classrooms but commonly led to positive feedback from students and in some cases parents also Effective leaders encouraged these local efforts, providing feedback that was important for building commitment and increasing the spread of engagement, particularly from teachers with a ‘wait and see’ approach Spillane (1999) has observed that for change to be effective teachers need to be able to learn the practical knowledge necessary for teaching in the ways implied by the reform Local conversations that were grounded in the reform ideas and in teachers’ efforts to work with them in practical ways in their classrooms were necessary These developed where teachers were simultaneously involved in practising the reform ideas and learning about how to deal with the problems that arose from putting into practice the new pedagogy This ‘action learning’ was an explicit aspect of the design of the Learning to Learn Project and its effectiveness was evident through the research data The messages and understanding of the implications of the philosophy of Learning to Learn were variously interpreted teacher by teacher and school by school This encouraged a pluralistic approach to implementation of change As tools and approaches picked up through the Core Learning opportunities and, increasingly as the program developed, from colleagues, encouraged more teachers to experiment in their classrooms, the pool of ideas grew As the program progressed it became increasingly clear that an individualist approach was not fostering a deeper learning culture Staff who attended core learning reported difficulties doing justice in presenting the material back to colleagues In addition, the intrinsic motivation of learning from ‘international experts’ was lost through this process of re-transmission McDonald notes that there is a tendency for site driven change to overemphasise individualistic approaches: 14 … reform initiatives launched on the inside of schools, by principles or small groups of teachers with or without consultants, typically put too much trust in add-on programs and one shot professional development (1996: 354) This limitation was recognised early in many schools and increasingly group centred approaches were adopted Leaders sought opportunities to send small groups to development relevant to their areas of interest and/or to bring key colleagues to the school to involve more or all staff Leaders often regarded this as a critical step Importantly the possibility of all teachers in the site learning a new way of thinking and talking about learning helped establish a ‘common language’ about learning This enhanced teachers’ ability to articulate their ideas and to question more deeply Provided involvement was broadly based, this reduced the likelihood of ‘in-group’ and ‘out-group’ formation within the school Where insufficient efforts were made to maintain an inclusive approach to the work being undertaken, such division did become apparent The wider use of group professional development, in particular the use of ‘internal’ experts to share new ideas and lessons from experimenting with new approaches enabled the better led schools to engage a wider network of teachers in the process The flexibility of the developmental options available was important – providing multiple possible entry points for teachers with differing experience, approaches and interests Affirmation builds commitment The more innovative teachers were by now reporting a good response to change by their students and in some cases by parents This encouraged leaders and other staff by providing further affirmation for those teachers who had taken the risk of trying something new With many teachers having lengthy service and significant experience, and in a context of declining morale, the sense of capacity to ‘make a difference’ that arose through this process cannot be underestimated As Evans notes, “ There is much research to confirm the importance of a sense of efficacy - the sense of making a meaningful difference, of true accomplishment-in teachers’ motivation and performance” (2001: 95) Many teachers reported a feeling of excitement as they realised that their experiments yielded benefits for students This is no mean feat for a group who could easily claim to ‘have seen it all before’ The establishment of a non-threatening environment and one in which the teachers felt that their experience was valued was important to this For many schools deepened teacher and leader commitment to the Project and its possibilities came with the first Practicum The need to prepare to share beyond the immediate site and the learning that resulted was reported to be a major factor leading to a deeper commitment to change The Practicums provided staff time to reflect on what they had collectively achieved and to gain affirmation from a wider collegiate network for what they had done The exchanges between schools also began to link teachers and leaders to others with like mind, expanding networks beyond school boundaries This capacity to share beyond the school, with others of like mind or work on related issues has also been observed as important for improvement in practice (Hargreaves 1993) 15 Deepening collegiality The literature reflects a broadly consistent view that collegiality is necessary for effective school change Teaching has been identified as a potentially isolating and individual occupation (Huberman 1993; Evans 2001) Fullan and Hargreaves (1991) note that this provides a powerful check on change Spillane (1999) observed that by engaging in new praxis in a collaborative environment teachers learned from one another about what worked and this helped consolidate and diffuse the changes However, collegiality cannot be mandated (Huberman 1993) Indeed, Evans observes (2001) that if demands for greater engagement require too much time, teachers may retreat to formulaic approaches to teaching A collegiate culture which is locally grown and supported by resources, structure and opportunities and which provides time for active teacher reflection and sharing is a precondition for improvement There are many factors that work against its establishment in schools – pressures of work, stress, cynicism, and lack of confidence among them Leaders need to address these issues and find ways to involve, stimulate and excite individuals Through the research, it was evident that leaders, as a part of their Learning to Learn initiatives, identified a wide range of methods for doing this Evans (2001) points out that many teachers prefer to work with children and are neither comfortable nor particularly well skilled at dealing with situations involving adults, particularly where conflict is likely This was clearly apparent in the evidence from the interviews with many teachers and leaders commenting on the fear they felt in having to present to colleagues and the difficulties initially experienced in dealing with difference in meetings with school colleagues The evidence suggests that participating in events like the Practicums would have been avoided by many had they not been required Nevertheless, confronting situations like this were widely regarded as critical incidents, raising staff confidence in themselves and highlighting what had been collectively achieved For McDonald, where reform is effective: “…direct instruction in isolated, departmentalized classrooms yields to a community of learners and teachers sharing common standards, striving for connections, staying open intellectually, cultivating and respecting diverse viewpoints” (1996: 354) The research clearly found that such a shift had occurred in Learning to Learn schools McDonald concludes “…such reform is nearly impossible, contrary to all hype.” (1996: 355) The extent of collegiality established through the Learning to Learn Project is, therefore, a considerable achievement There is no doubt that site leadership played an important role Leaders Role With the expansion to site level engagement, there was commonly a period of confusion where a focus and shared commitment emerged For some this arose quickly, for others it took longer For some leaders this was a challenging time as they felt pressure to provide direction but felt that more learning would take place if teachers found their own pathways forward Noting the work of Lee & Smith, (1994), Foster states “It is clear that the extent to which school leaders are prepared to devolve power to others and provide the support for others to assume leadership roles is critical in transforming school culture from "bureaucratic organisation" to "communal organisation” (Foster: 2) It was not formal authority that mattered in the context of Learning to Learn but relationship management Indeed the most successful leaders recognised that formal 16 authority was a potential barrier and that a genuine need to renegotiate power and to strive to establish a genuinely collegiate basis for decision making was a key to success at school level Just as the central Project Managers had to learn to let go and to be coherent in their messages of genuine empowerment, so too did site leaders This need is well reflected in the literature, Newmann for example notes “In the more successful schools, individuals in leadership positions defined themselves at the centre of the school’s staff rather than at the top” (1996: 194) This did not suggest, Newmann argues, that leaders move to the background Effective leaders maintained a strong presence but focus on facilitative roles rather than directive ones Newmann’s results show clearly that schools which found ways to genuinely move to a shared power situation were most successful at improving their teaching performance This is confirmed by studies by Marks and Louis (1999) and Fullan & Hargreaves (1991) Newmann did identify several instances of where highly centralised power was effective but this was only found in a context of high levels of agreement about values and objectives for student learning By and large participative styles and teacher empowerment were important for success provided, as Marks and Louis state, teachers focused their empowerment on teaching and learning (1999) With Learning to Learn it is apparent that the practice of devolved responsibility and power to local teachers was important as a mechanism for engaging a deeper commitment While this led to short term confusion, in some cases it built a local collegiality and a local emphasis on ‘learning our way forward’ which facilitated the development of a learning culture Role of the Centre – learning our way forward – together Learning to Learn was not a top down change but one that was facilitated and enabled by central initiative It was driven at a local level as individuals connected and deepened their commitment due to a strong values base connection with the purpose of the reform This ‘growing from within’ approach is highly consistent with views of ‘what works’ in school change (Louis and Miles 1990; Sarason 1990; Evans 2001) Louis and Miles (1990) note that the common approach to reform is for the centre to work towards or to insist on support by site leaders to send a consistent message They summarise this imperative as “Make sure that those involved in planning all agree with one another and the central office perspective” but observe that it can fail due to the creation of an ‘ingroup’ of believers and an ‘out-group’ of resisters The Project Managers of Learning to Learn did not require such a common voice They did send a consistent message and that was that the initiative genuinely rested with sites and that sites were free to work with the flexibility provided in a way that addressed their local needs and issues Sites where, however, expected to contribute to drawing lessons from their local experiments which would have more general applicability The aim was for sites and centre to learn their way forward together Neither claimed privileged access to knowledge or experience It is most common for central initiatives to operate through sets of prescriptive changes to structure and process – an assumption that the centre ‘knows best’ Taylorism and the machine metaphor (Morgan 1986) commonly prevail in school improvement initiatives This casts the centre as engineer It reveals a reluctance to learn from experience and contemporary theories for such approaches typically fail Conversely, Newmann (1996), and Fullan (1994) argue that devolution of formal responsibility and control to local 17 management has not generated much change in teaching practice either Neither centralized bureaucratic concepts of institutions, nor formalistic decentralised models of change, it seems, stimulate creative and responsive institutional behaviour Neither compels creative engagement between school leaders and teachers, nor between communities and schools or policy centre and sites Yet it is creative engagement which is essential for both improved practice and curriculum renewal The combined bottom up and top down approach advocated by Fullan (1994) is evident in Learning to Learn It does not however take the form of two hierarchies grafted – a system orchestrated by formal procedures and reciprocal agreements – but of a more complex and informal form of organisation which is essentially self-organising through a commitment to core values and to relationships and learning This form of organisation is consistent with that Weick (1976) has referred to as a loosely coupled system In-group formation Social identity theorists note that the tendency towards group differentiation is endemic to all social systems As groups expand various schisms form to confirm a sense of belonging or identity (Ellemers, Spears et al 1999) While this may increase the local performance of groups it can lead to competition between groups and this has the potential to diminish system wide performance However, it has been identified that groups over a certain size threshold cannot function effectively as a coherent unit The formation of distinct sub-groups, or ‘patches’, is therefore necessary In addition the view that this lack of coherence (homogeneity) is necessarily dysfunctional has been challenged (Kauffman and Macready 1995) The evidence from Learning to Learn suggests that there has been some in/out group formation within schools as a result of the changes undertaken Effective leaders have worked to reduce this by expanding involvement of teachers as widely as possible and avoiding stigmatising those who choose not to participate The more effective leaders respected teachers’ choice and sought ways to turn it to advantage, recognising it as a source of diversity and a check and balance on the enthusiasm of others – another source of learning There is evidence also of the development of in/out group perceptions between Learning to Learn schools and other schools This is in large part accelerating as the success of the Project is realised and non-Learning to Learn schools feel as though they are missing out on resources and benefits There is a certain level of ‘in-group’ behaviour, almost competitiveness, evident at school level with a local self-respect developing around the particular approach taken and the local outcomes achieved It is also an issue between policy areas with those that support Learning to Learn and those who identify it as a threat regarding each other as ‘other’ This can be expected to increase due to the necessarily slow rollout of the project and will need active management The philosophy of ‘moving towards the threat’ and of seeking to engage and include it as a component in a learning network rather than isolating or attacking would be consistent with the past approach and consistent with expanding the influence of the ideas and practices informing Learning to Learn 18 Summary For sites which had developed confidence in the integrity of the program and had good local leadership, early examples of success led to a deepening and more site wide engagement in change This was facilitated by: • The opportunity for teachers to increasingly learn in groups and collaborate in change at site level • Reinforcement and affirmation from one another, from leaders and sometimes from parents as to the impact of the changes they were effecting The role of site leaders was an essential part of this change process as was the congruence of the position of the Project Management – maintaining an emphasis on reciprocal benefit and of joint engagement in learning their ways forward Leaders had an important role also in working to reduce the tendency towards ‘us and them’ thinking among parties involved and not-involved in the program Provided that this was done, it proved possible for sites to move to a consolidation phase where change and achievements became well established and led to an expansion of networks, more closely involving teachers in professional collaboration intra and extra school and in some cases involving wider community Phase Three – Consolidation and Expansion of networks Once the site moved past the initial confusion and found direction, leaders worked to focus efforts and to deepen involvement This was extended in some cases to widen involvement, increasingly bringing in parents and community This development was however patchy Figure three illustrates the key factors and their relationships during this phase P c t ic u m s / E x p o a ffi rm a c h ie v e m e n t L e a d e rs le t go power C o lla b o tiv e P ro c e s s e s u s e d to fi n d d ire c tio n C o n f u s io n a b o u t c o lle c tiv e d ire c tio n C o a lit io n to e xte n d c h a n g e d e v e lo p s W o rd o f v a lu e s p re a d s O u t- g ro u p f o rm s P ro je c ts id e n tifi e d a n d p u rs e d C o lla b o tiv e c u ltu re d e v e lo p s N e tw o rk s e x p a n d L e a d e rs s t te g ie s to b ro a d e n in v o lv e m e n t G re a te r in v o lv e m e n t o f c o m m u n it y Figure three – consolidation and expansion of networks 19 Community The evidence suggests that local community environmental factors, while shaping the particular approach or focus, were seldom a factor in enhancing or inhibiting the success of the reform Moreover, changing expectations of parents and students helped reinforce and stabilise the change At the same time inter school collegiality and growing interschool networks were an important ingredient in facilitating the spread and development of experimentation at a classroom level Community attitudes have been identified as potentially important inhibitors of change Tyack and Cuban (2000: 42) have observed, for example, that many in the community hold multiple and sometimes contradictory views about what they want from schools Pursuing these may lead to contradictory directions and/or cycles of change As school decision making is increasingly devolved, such conflict will be felt at a local level There was, however, no evidence of this having been problematic to date There is significant international and local evidence that community expectations continue to place unrealistic expectations on schools (Tyack and Cuban 2000; Sarason 1990) Education is sometimes seen as a primary basis for ameliorating social and individual ills, and schools and teachers are charged with turning out, ‘good social citizens’ The education system has limited reach and cannot meaningfully be seen as the sole solution to declining social cohesion or social equity for example Sarason (1990: 39) expresses concern about the degree to which educators themselves have assumed responsibility for social ills noting that this inevitably leads them to over promise – given their commitment to students – yet inevitably under deliver There is no doubt that the Learning to Learn schools identify strongly with the needs and interests of their students and their community Many of the strategies introduced as a part of the Project were directed at trying to address the concerns and interests of both There was evidence also of a commitment to wider social concerns – social justice and equity included There was a clear aspiration to ‘do what they could’ These did not appear unduly unrealistic, nor did those interviewed give the impression of having become cynical or resentful of community expectations This too is significant as those expectations have been shown to contribute negatively to teacher commitment and morale (Commonwealth 2000; Dinham & Scott 2000) Evidence from both these sources suggests that local community tend to be more sympathetic and supportive of local teachers than the community in general This may explain why, despite the evidence of a community-wide decline of confidence and regard for teachers, schooling and education by wider community, and evidence that this is having an effect on teacher morale, the Learning to Learn schools did not report it as an issue On the contrary, they were more likely to report having enjoyed community support The feeling of achievement and enjoyment of local support may well, therefore, offset the negatives felt by the more general attitude, experienced indirectly, such as through the media Accountability Accountability was clearly a sensitive issue for teachers and schools and was most commonly interpreted as a negative – reflecting distrust of teachers and leaders professionalism In addition many schools reported that the mechanisms of accountability currently in place imposed an administrative burden (‘busy-work’) while contributing 20 little policy intelligence for the system This was confirmed by an examination of a random selection of school Annual Reports These reflected a standard approach (as required by the Department), with a heavy emphasis on reporting against a selection of metrics, including such things as literacy performance benchmarks by year-group, retention rates etc These may be valuable at the level of the State, but in many cases, particularly for small rural schools or junior primary, were meaningless to the point of farce For such schools the statistics were derived from such small numbers that Principals had to explain in notes how their school-wide absentee figure was affected, for example, by the proclivities of a single family The reports presented information on ‘basic skills’ and favoured quantification of politically favoured indicators over quality reporting on strategic outcomes and priorities of the local school Given this, it is no surprise that the Learning to Learn Project managers were very sensitive to the symbolic power of the term ‘accountability’ and the associations and connotations it carried at school level In their case account they report for example: …we were preoccupied with the knowledge that the accountability processes for the Project had the potential to undo all the learning gains which had been made by invoking a 'compliant mindset' 'Teaching to the test', 'just tell us what to do' were products of a particularly strong view in the Department about accountability as proof We needed accountability processes which provided stock-take points for site learning By all accounts they succeeded There was seldom mention of formal reporting requirements during interviews, and the accountability points included in Learning to Learn (Practicums and the Expo) were not perceived as negative Far from being eschewed, they were commonly identified as the most powerful learning points in the Project Accountability was transformed to mean learning and celebration – an astonishing cultural shift managed through the establishment of trust in a context of learning and tolerance of risk Perhaps most importantly the accountability points provided an opportunity for meaningful collaborative and collective critical reflection on performance by those who were responsible, and had accepted responsibility for the achievement of the outcomes The information, fresh insight and new ideas, the lessons learned from success and failure were useful to teacher/practitioners in improving their practice They were not focused on abstract metrics The information gained through the Practicums, Learning Circles and the Expo helped teachers understand what worked and why Personal challenge – renegotiation of power Louis and Miles (1990: 27) argue that central initiation of reform can work but there is a need to a) be aware of local issues and conditions and b) give sufficient power to sites to find ways to make the policy work at their location The work of Marks and Louis (1999) also strongly supports the conclusion that schools in which power is shared are likely to be the strongest performers in terms of learning outcomes They link empowerment directly to organisational learning, stating: …empowerment must focus on instructional vision and professional collaboration if it is to be useful as a school reform strategy The salience of 21 empowerment in the midrange is also consistent with the organizational learning perspective, which argues that until members of the organization move beyond preoccupation with power, and toward issues of shared vision and inquiry, collectively held models, and increased (professional) mastery of work, they will consistently arrive at the wrong solutions to the wrong problems (1999: 5) For this phase, the focus for change was not so much with centre/site as with the relationship between leaders and teachers and the relationship between teachers and students Devolution of power to Principals does not necessarily imply or require a democratic school Indeed the ‘managerialism’ upon which much contemporary school reform is based is grounded, at least in part in neo-Fordist thinking (Badham and Matthews 1989) and has been seen to reinforce dysfunctional approaches at school level (Sterling 2001; Wright 2001) The approach to leadership and power inherent in Learning to Learn is inherently post-Fordist in placing primary emphasis on flexible coalitionforming rather than formal structures of authority and on the management of meaning rather than rules and procedures The changes that began to take place at this level presented a significant challenge for many leaders, but one they seemed to take on willingly Many reported that they felt quite early on that they needed to let go of more and more control and allow teachers to take greater responsibility for directions and approach to experimenting with change and developing directions of change in areas consistent with their collective motivation This meant challenging their own and teachers’ assumptions about roles and responsibilities As with the Project Managers, it also meant the need to adopt new practices and to maintain congruence with a new set of behaviours This is not easy to initiate and it can be even harder to maintain The collegiate support provided by the leader Learning Circles may have been important here While few leaders mentioned these during interview, earlier research suggests that they: … not only provided opportunities for participants to engage in co-construction of knowledge about leading the change process but they have also provided a structure for school leaders to help manage the emotional dimension of the change process As one school leader said recently, "they have enabled us to manage our anxiety" This is a very important role, given what we know about the role of emotions in learning and change (Foster 2000:16) If renegotiation of power was a challenge for leaders, it was no less so for teachers The Project compelled them also to rethink their traditional role in the classroom Many teachers were now actively working to be more responsive and more flexible in order to accommodate and work with students’ diverse and individual needs This implied a shift to empowering students and the equity issues associated with a more individually responsive approach to learning, while recognising a need to consider the learning impacts of the wider social context of students Networks expand Activities such as the Practicums took teachers into explorations beyond their immediate site The Core Learning Program also allowed teachers to begin to form wider networks of relationships For leaders, strategies such as the Learning Circles broadened their 22 networks with other leaders and also served to connect them to academics within the teaching universities This was experienced as a challenge Many schools reported looking at their own work and feeling inadequate in comparison to others There was common reporting also of a stock take and reflection with schools feeling that as they were doing things differently they must be doing something wrong These feelings gradually dissipated and confidence grew Thus from being essentially isolated practitioners with a lack of self-confidence in dealing with with peers, participating teachers report increased confidence and a delight in working with others, both within and beyond the school The Core Learning Program and Project Colleagues connected teachers in participating schools to a national and international network of leading practitioners and academics This served to raise self-esteem, confidence and willingness to rethink and learn from others It provided a source of inspiration and a connection well beyond the immediate confines of the classroom, school and immediate community As Marks and Louis observe: Learning cannot take place without a knowledge base and access to new ideas Organizational learning requires permeable boundaries through which knowledge can flow both in and out, and community-based knowledge resources that are connected in multiple ways with internal actors (1999:31-32) However, new input without the desire, opportunity and support to try ideas in practice would not have contributed to significant change The importance of action orientated programs which help teachers connect theory to practice has been discussed (Emihivitch and Battaglia 2000) As was intended, Learning to Learn challenged the traditional boundaries that serve to keep school practice as it had been This provided teachers not only with new skills and ideas, but equally importantly with new confidence to try them out and to learn from each other’s attempts It promoted and accelerated diffusion of new ideas and of practitioner insight into ‘what worked’ At the same time it served to professionalise those effected, opening them up to peer review and to a wider base of professional knowledge Consolidation through embedding in structure and Culture Research into school change concludes that one of the most important determinants of a capacity to sustain change is local school culture For Evans for example, “School improvement is embedded in an ethos of empowerment and collegiality” (Evans 2001: 229) For Newman & Wehlage, schools that were successful in making change to improve student achievement were built on an ethos of ‘trust, respect, and sharing of expertise and power’ (1996: 288) For Marks and Louis also A key finding is the significance of the relationship between “empowerment at the middle range” and the capacity for organizational learning The finding suggests two conclusions: first, that schools can’t “take off” in terms of getting teachers fully involved in taking collective responsibility for making the school a good working environment for both themselves and students until they have the capacity for organizational learning that permits them to be professional Second, both the capacity for organizational learning and empowerment are, 23 once the school is provided with autonomy, largely a matter of internal relationships among people, in which school staff provide each other with support, exchange ideas and reach consensus, and treat each other in professional and egalitarian ways These are not aspects of reform that cost a great deal of money: they are reforms of culture and not of external resources, buildings, assessment programs, or student schedules (1999:32) As noted above, many past reforms have emphasised the importance of structural change With Learning to Learn the emphasis was on relational and cultural change Structure and culture are however related and this was confronted by a number of schools as they advanced the change process at whole of school level The evidence suggests that as the development of a shared commitment to change deepened, there arose a need to confront structural impediments Many schools made significant changes to the way in which they organised staff and scheduled programs and delivery in order to become more flexible and to use more effectively the diverse talents of teachers Significantly though, these changes to structure came after cultural acceptance had been gained and were commonly designed and implemented by teachers themselves Summary Contrary to what might be expected, negative reaction from parents and community was not a factor limiting change Indeed, the general experience of sites was that they enjoyed support in the changes they made Rigid and punitive accountability too could have undermined the changes being made Instead the project demonstrated that accountability can be experienced in terms of information for learning and be celebrated rather than resisted For change to become established and to begin to take on a robust form, it proved essential for power to be renegotiated at all levels This included between centre and sites, between Principals and teachers and between teachers and students Under these conditions, the network of those committed to change expanded and consolidated In some schools by the end of the three years this had developed to the point where a number of school leaders commented that it was now not possible to go back even if they wanted to However, change had been established within a limited number of sites within the overall, public school system Furthermore the majority of staff in the centre of the organization, especially those outside of the curriculum area (such as the in HR, Finance, Facilities) had not been influenced or exposed to the change at all For them it was business as usual in the Department This situation began to impose itself on those sites which had been involved Limits began to be felt Phase Four - Diffusion begins and walls bind and limit Throughout the Learning to Learn process, schools have reported some problems with staff turnover New teachers or even new principals raised the challenge of how effectively to induct and include those not familiar with the concepts and who had not participated in the journey This remains a challenge and will continue to be one while 24 only a minority of teachers have experience with the Project This presents a number of challenges N e tw o rk s e x p a n d In t e re s t in c h a n g e b e yo n d s c h o o l g ro w s C o lla b o t iv e c u lt u re d e v e lo p s N e w s t a ff d o n ’t kn o w h o w O u t- g ro u p f o rm s S t a ff tu rn o v e r c h a lle n g e s c u ltu re B a s is f o r c u rric u lu m c o - d e v e lo p m e n t deep ens D iffi c u lt to s u s ta in s c h o o l le v e l change Tra in e e s d o n ’t kn o w h o w R e s e n tm e n t a n d s iz e o f o u tg o u p in c re a s e s Figure four – system poised For the Learning to Learn school it presents a constant diffusion of unfamiliar teachers in and a loss of those who have contributed and come to understand what is needed to make effective change For students it means that new norms for classroom conduct and a more empowered set of relationships with teachers may be changed as teachers lacking the skills or desire to work this way come into the school or as the students themselves move to classes or schools which not embrace the philosophies of constructivism For teachers and leaders, having invested much time and commonly a great deal of emotion in achieving change, to move to an ‘unreformed’ environment with its characteristic individualistic approaches, hierarchical management and low morale, can be a serious blow In addition, the evidence suggests that new teachers entering the system in no way help The majority of schools reported that trainee teachers lacked an appreciation of what it meant to teach according to these principles and commonly retreated to a model of teaching consistent with high power distance The momentum of change and its sustainability is threatened by these factors System poised At the stage that the research ceased the system involving Learning to Learn sites and the wider educational system is poised The first round of change had concluded There was some uncertainty amongst past sites as to what type of support they may continue to enjoy into the future Most had received additional funding but not all New sites were more limited in number and there was a growing tension between those who are ‘in’ and those who are ‘out’ This is particularly acute amongst those schools whose application for inclusion in the second round was not accepted There is confusion and an apparent lack of agreement about what the Project is and what the intentions are for its future expansion Is it a localised curriculum renewal process or is it intended as a wider reform effort that may eventually lead to fundamentally new ways of working system wide? 25 These factors present substantial challenges for the continued development of the reform All evidence to date however suggests that they are challenges well worth facing up to Conclusions Learning to Learn is an example of innovative school reform that is refreshingly different from the recent spate of managerial inspired school change It shows that school reform which is driven by an emphasis on learning and attention to relationships and cultural change can succeed It reinforces many of the conclusions of the literature in particular that: • reform should be curriculum/learning focused; • successful change involves teachers directly; • teachers respond well to being treated as professionals; • improved learning outcomes for students is possible with attention to school environment and with the injection of new ideas • renegotiation of power at all levels is essential It also offers significant new insights into factors important to the achievement of successful outcomes from change These are: • Appealing to teachers’ intrinsic motivation is key to both prevent resistance and ameliorate other de-motivating factors present in the general environment • No trust – no change • Pursuing change with high levels of flexibility and a learning and risk tolerant approach to accountability can lead to rigorous approaches to change and a focus on results, contrary to ‘managerialist’ assumptions about a need for tight control • Maintaining a high level of congruence to core values informing the change is vital • Change processes which involve all players genuinely acknowledging that real change is hard and that they not have answers opens up possibilities for collective learning which imposed change shuts down • Change needs time – there are phases of development which cannot be truncated or omitted These are emergent and cannot be engineered The Project has demonstrated some substantial achievements in a relatively short period of time It remains to be seen if these can be maintained into the future There are some significant new challenges to face in expanding the scope and depth of the Project While the lessons drawn from the experience to date are helpful in particular the need to: • consolidate and maintain change at existing sites in the face of changing staff and new staff; • support staff who have been a part of the change as they move to new schools which have not been involved; • find new ways to stimulate and excite those who have engaged with the first round to maintain a momentum for change; • broaden the involvement of community and parents in local change; • link change at site level to higher level organisational learning and ensure it impacts on policy; 26 • • expand the involvement of schools, increasingly having to confront less supportive school cultures and conceive of new strategies for involving more reluctant stakeholders; manage the backlash that will arise as increasing numbers of people at all levels of the system feel their established ways of working are threatened by the inexorable ‘creeping influence’ of Learning to Learn References Adelman, N E., K P Walking Eagle, et al (1997) Racing with the Clock: Making time for teaching and learning in School Reform New York, Teachers College Press Badham, R and J Matthews (1989) "The new production systems debate." Labour and Industry 2(2): 194-246 Bingler, S (1998) Less is more: Learning environments for the next century 2002 Boudourides, M A (1998) Constructivism and Education: A Shoppers Guide International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics, Samos, Greece Caldwell, B J H., Don K (1998) The Future of Schools: Lessons from the reform of Public Education London, Falmer Press Commonwealth, o A (2000) A Class Act Canberra, Senate employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education Committee Davies, B and L Ellison (2000) Self Management: Myth or Reality? A Followup Study APAPDC Online Conference - Local School Management Delors, J (2000) Learning: The Treasure Within, UNESCO Dinham, S and C Scott (2000) Enhancing teacher professionalism: The Need to Engage with the third Domain ACEA Conference, Hobart, Australia Ellemers, N., R Spears, et al (1999) Social Identity Oxford, Blackwell Emihivitch, C and C Battaglia (2000) "Creating culture for Collaborative Inquiry: New Challenges for School Leaders." International Journal Leadership in Education 3(3): 225238 Employment, D o E T a (2001) Statistical Update - Issue Adelaide, epartment of Education Training and Employment Evans, R (2001) The Human Side of School Change New York, Jossey Bass Foster, M (2001) Learning our way forward Adelaide, Department of Education Training and Employment Foster, M., R Le Cornu, et al (2000) Leadership for Learning Australian Association for Reasearch in Education Conference, Sydney Fullan, M G and A Hargreaves (1991) Working together for your school Hawthorn Vic, ACEA Fullan, M J (1994) Coordinating top-down and bottom-up strategies for educational reform 2002 Hargreaves, A (1993) Individualism and Individuality: Reinterpreting the Teacher Culture Teachers' Work J W Little New York, Teachers College Press Huberman, M (1993) The Model of the Independent Artisan in Teachers' Professional Relations Teachers Work J W Little New York, Teacehrs College Press Jackson, M C (2000) Systems Approaches to Management London, Kluwer Academic Johnson, B and A Reid (1999) Contesting the Curriculum Riverwood, Social Science Press Kauffman, S A and W Macready (1995) "Technological Evolution and Adaptive Organizations." Complexity 1(2): 26-43 27 Louis, K S and M B Miles (1990) Improving the Urban High School New York, Teachers College Press Marks, H M and K S Louis (1999) "Teacehr Empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning." Educational Administration Quarterly 35(4): 707-751 McDonald, J P (1996) Below the Surface of School Reform: Vision and its Foes Innovations in Learning: New Environments for Education L Schauble and R CGlaser Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Middleton, M H., Jennifer (1996) Changing Schools, Hawker Brownlow Education Morgan, G (1986) Images of Organisation Ca, Sage Newmann, F M (1996) Authentic Achievement San-francisco, Jossey-Bass Newmann, F M and G G Wehlage (1996) Conclusion: Restructuring for Authentic Student Achievement Authentic Acievement: Restructuring Schools for Intellectual Quality F M Newmann San-Francisco, Jossey Bass OECD (1999) Innovating Schools, Centre for Educational research and innovation OECD Sarason, S B (1990) The predictable Failure of Educational Reform San Francisco, JosseyBass Schwarzer, B (n.d.) Dinosaurs or Placental Mammals? Dilemmas for Teachers as Professionals in the 21st Century, ICP Online 2002 Spillane, J P (1999) "External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment." Curriculum Studies 31(2): 143-175 Sterling, S (2001) Sustainable Education: Re-visioning Learning and Change Foxhole, Green Books Tyack, D and L Cuban (2000) Tinkering Towards Utopia Cambridge M.A., Harvard University Press Weick, K E (1976) "Educational Organizations as loosely coupled systems." Administrative Science Quarterly 21: 1-19 Wright, N (2001) "Leadership, 'bastard leadership' and managerialism." Educational Management and Administration 29(3): 275-290 28