scholarly journals Obligatory coaching in the context of the model project “Talent Schools”: a means for educational equity and improvement of achievement outcomes?

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Dean ◽  
Laura Beckmann ◽  
Kathrin Racherbäumer ◽  
Nina Bremm
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
School Administrators ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Disadvantaged Communities ◽  
External Consultants ◽  
Achievement Outcomes ◽  
Model Project

PurposeIn the present study, we assessed how school improvement consultants, as part of a six-year model project conducted in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, were perceived by school leaders and how they defined their role(s), tasks and working methods as external consultants at the beginning of the project.Design/methodology/approachOur analyses are based on a mixed-methods approach, involving a standardized online survey of school leaders and 18 guideline-based interviews with school improvement consultants, which were conducted at the beginning of the model project. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and typifying structuring of the interview material.FindingsOur results based on the quantitative survey data showed that the school administrators generally rated the collaboration with the external consultants as not very positive. Furthermore, our qualitative findings showed that the school improvement consultants in the model project faced resistance to their coaching efforts, which may be attributed to the obligatory nature of their work on the project. In general, the consulting process appeared to be little differentiated according to the school principals' perceptions of the school needs, with the consultants mainly proceeding as they also do in other coaching processes.Originality/valueThis study contributes to our understanding of coaching in improvement activities among schools serving disadvantaged communities by offering insights into the role(s) and working methods of external school improvement consultants.

scholarly journals Play and play occupation: a survey of paediatric occupational therapy practice in Ireland

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Moore ◽  
Helen Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Therapy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Occupational Therapists ◽  
Assessment Practices ◽  
Skills Acquisition ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Childhood Play ◽  
Primary Focus

Purpose Play occupation has been identified as an essential part of children’s lives, and it subsequently features in paediatric occupational therapy. However, few studies address the current place of play and play occupation in occupational therapy practice. This study aims to address this gap in knowledge by exploring paediatric occupational therapists’ perspectives on the place of play and play occupation in occupational therapy practice in Ireland. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to gather data about the current use of play in the occupational therapy for children under 12 years. Convenience sampling and snowball recruitment techniques were used to recruit paediatric occupational therapists. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. Findings In total, 65 therapists responded to the survey (estimated response rate, 32%). Results are organised into four sections: demographics and practice context, play assessment practices, use of play in practice and perceived barriers to play-centred practice. Respondents reported that they valued play as a childhood occupation. However, the survey findings identified that the primary focus was on play as a means to an end. Lack of education on play (research, theory and interventions) and pressures in the workplace have been identified as barriers to play-centred practice. Research limitations/implications Findings indicate that there is a mismatch between therapists valuing play as an occupation and how play is used in occupational therapy practice. Unless clarifications are made about play occupation as being different to skills acquisition in childhood, play occupation will continue to get overlooked as an authentic concern of occupation-centred practice. Thus, play as occupation deserves further attention from educators, researchers and practitioners as a means of strengthening occupation-centred practice, in particular play-centred practice in the paediatric context. Originality/value Play has been described as an important occupation in childhood, and consequently, it features in paediatric occupational therapy. However, little is known about the current place of play in occupational therapy practice. This study addresses this gap by considering the current place of play in occupational therapy practice in Ireland.

The Last-Planner-System’s impact on project culture

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Jürgen Lühr ◽  
Marian Bosch-Rekveldt ◽  
Mladen Radujković
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Data Gathering ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Last Planner System ◽  
Project Culture ◽  
Last Planner

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the Last-Planner-System’s impact on project cultures in terms of partnering. Design/methodology/approach A case study was performed using multiple data gathering approaches. The project cultures of three projects not applying the Last-Planner-System were compared with three projects that apply the Last-Planner-System. In total, 30 participants were involved in the study. Semi-structured interviews were held and analysed by applying qualitative content analysis. Also, the “organizational culture assessment instrument”, which belongs to the “competing values framework”, was used by means of an online survey. Findings The Last-Planner-System leads to increased levels of mutual understanding and control about the tasks and issues of the other parties. This detailed overview leads towards a more distinguished evaluation of the trustworthiness of individuals. This does not necessarily lead to a partnering project culture. Originality/value The contribution to research is that higher levels of transparency and mutual understanding do not necessarily lead to a high level of trust. Rather, transparency could be seen as a controlling mechanism that leads to better-founded estimations about the trustworthiness of others in the project.

scholarly journals Promoting collaboration in a competitive context: school improvement networks in Chile

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-226
Author(s):  
Mauricio Pino-Yancovic ◽  
Constanza Gonzalez Parrao ◽  
Luis Ahumada ◽  
Alvaro Gonzalez
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
Secondary School ◽  
School Performance ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
National Study ◽  
Opportunities To Learn ◽  
Improvement Strategy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
School Networks ◽  
System Improvement

Purpose Chile has developed the school improvement networks (SINs) strategy to support the work of school leaders. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the functioning and effect of the SINs strategy as perceived by principals and curriculum coordinators across the country. Design/methodology/approach An adapted version of the Educational Collaborative Network Questionnaire was applied to a sample of 1,723 participants from 1,375 schools distributed in 398 networks. Descriptive, factor and sub-group statistical analyses by school performance categories and by different roles within these schools and networks are presented. Findings Results indicate that school leaders perceive SINs as an opportunity to work effectively in shared projects that can later be implemented in their own schools. Participants indicate that they can share knowledge in their networks and use it to solve problems in their own schools, which is especially relevant for secondary school leaders who work in difficult circumstances. Results suggest that it is important to facilitate greater autonomy for school leaders in their networks, especially regarding decision making about network goals and activities that are more significant to their contexts. Originality/value This is a national study of a recent school improvement strategy, which provides evidence, from the perspective of school leaders, of its strengths and improvement areas. This study shows that despite being in a competitive context, principals and curriculum coordinators value the opportunities to learn from and with others. These results can be of value for other contexts attempting to promote school networks as a means for school and system improvement.

Is there anything special about lesson study in special schools?

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-316
Author(s):  
Sarah Seleznyov ◽  
Amelia Roberts ◽  
Rachel Walker ◽  
Sarah Watson ◽  
Melanie Hogan
Keyword(s):  
Lesson Study ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Special School ◽  
Special Schools ◽  
Mainstream Teachers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

PurposeJapanese lesson study (LS) is a professional development (PD) approach in which teachers collaboratively plan a lesson, observe it being taught and then discuss what they have learned. LS's popularity as an approach to teacher PD in the UK is growing, and it is used in both special and mainstream settings. This study explores whether LS is perceived and operationalized in the same way across special and mainstream settings.Design/methodology/approachThis study arose as a result of collaboration between UCL Institute of Education academics (principle investigators) and three special school leaders using LS in their own schools (practitioner co-investigators), who together formed the research team. The team first explored the literature base for LS in special education. They then investigated special and mainstream schools using LS for teacher PD. Research tools included semi-structured interviews and an online survey. Participants were obtained through opportunistic sampling via the networks of schools available to the researchers.FindingsThere were several key differences between LS in special and mainstream settings. Special teachers felt LS had a more positive impact on subject knowledge than mainstream teachers, and this impact extended to support staff. Special teachers were more likely to carry out multiple research cycles than mainstream colleagues and to quickly build LS into the existing timetable. Mainstream teachers focused on individual pupils in LS to seek learning about pedagogy more generally, whereas general learning about pedagogy was seen as a secondary benefit to special teachers.Research limitations/implicationsOne of the limitations of the research is that participants are more positively inclined toward LS than the general population of their school, since those not interested in LS would be unlikely to take the time to engage with the research. It will be important to conduct more research into the use of LS in mainstream schools, as this study is one of very few exploring LS in this special context.Practical implicationsThe ease with which special schools can align LS to current practice due to greater flexibility of timetables and larger staff teams seems to result in a greater appreciation and “valuing” of the process in mainstream schools, where teachers seemed to feel their senior leadership teams had gone to extra lengths to enable LS to happen. LS seems to offer a framework within which senior leaders can prioritize such learning experiences for teachers, leading to positive benefits for pupils, teachers and the school, and is therefore a process worth considering both for special and mainstream school leaders.Originality/valueThe literature review found a limited number of studies of LS in a special educational needs and disability (SEND) context, all of which took place in the UK and focused on the impact of teacher participation in LS on teacher practice and pupil learning. All three studies show a positive impact and suggest that LS might have wider applications for both special schools and mainstream schools supporting SEND pupils. There has been no exploration of the different ways in which mainstream and special school teachers and pupils might experience or construct LS in their own contexts.

“I thought I was prepared to do this”: an exploration of the learning and development of leadership coaches

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Shawn Huggins ◽  
Hans W. Klar ◽  
Parker M. Andreoli
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
Learning Community ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Learning And Development ◽  
Developmental Needs ◽  
Qualitative Design ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Coach Learning ◽  
Coaching Skills

PurposeThe purpose of this paper was to determine what experienced school leaders learned through participating in a three-year leadership initiative, called the Leadership Learning Community (LLC), that helped them coach less experienced leaders to lead school improvement efforts.Design/methodology/approachData were collected and analyzed using a qualitative design throughout the three-year initiative.FindingsThe findings indicate the LLC leadership coaches learned to accept and navigate the leaders' developmental and contextual needs, practiced and honed their coaching skills and recognized their own developmental needs.Originality/valueThese findings address the paucity of research on leadership coach learning and development.

There is no “T” in school improvement: the missing team perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 922-929 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pascale Benoliel ◽  
Izhak Berkovich
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
School Leadership ◽  
School Change ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Team Leadership ◽  
Coupling Mechanism ◽  
Effective School ◽  
Central Function ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Effective Teams

Purpose The concept of teams tends to be marginalized in the scholarly discussion of school improvement. The purpose of this paper is to argue that teams play a crucial role in promoting an holistic integration of school operation necessary to support school change. Specifically, the paper outlines the dynamic of effective teams at times of school improvement. Design/methodology/approach The paper presents the concept of teams, elaborates on their central function as a “coupling mechanism,” and describes the reciprocal relations between teams and school change. Findings The paper emphasizes the reciprocal effects of teams and change, suggesting that teams can serve as key change agents in school restructuring processes, specifically when balancing between “coping” and “pushing” forces. Based on the model, effective team leadership and effective school leadership at times of school change are introduced. Practical implications are discussed for school leaders. Originality/value The integration of the concept of teams into the school improvement discourse might assist school leaders to develop processes and procedures that will enable both school teams and schools to react more effectively in times of change and restructuring.

Autonomy and accountability in schools serving disadvantaged communities

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 589-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Dominique Klein
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
Student Assessment ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
School Autonomy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Disadvantaged Communities ◽  
International Student Assessment ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Governance Models ◽  
The Uk

Purpose Increased school autonomy and accountability have been a common denominator of national reforms in otherwise heterogeneous governance systems in Europe and the USA. The paper argues that because schools serving disadvantaged communities (SSDCs) often have lower average performance, they are more often sanctioned or under closer scrutiny, but might also receive more additional resources. The purpose of this paper is to therefore analyze whether SSDCs have more or less autonomy than schools with a more advantageous context in four countries with heterogeneous autonomy and accountability policies. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on the data from the Programme for International Student Assessment 2012 school and student questionnaires from Finland, Germany, the UK, and the USA. The choice of countries is based on different governance models described by Glatter et al. (2003). The data are used to identify SSDCs and analyze the reported autonomy in resource allocation and curriculum and assessment. Using regression analyses, patterns are analyzed for each country individually. They are then juxtaposed and compared. Differences are related back to the governance models of the respective countries. Findings The results indicate an association between the communities the schools are serving and the autonomy either in the allocation of resources, or the curriculum and assessment. SSDCs appeared to have a little more autonomy than schools with a more advantageous context in Finland, Germany, and the UK, but less autonomy in the USA. The comparison suggests that in the USA, autonomy is rather a reward for schools that have the least amount of need, whereas in the other three countries it could be a result of strategies to improve schools in need. The paper discusses possible explanations in the policies and support structures for SSDCs. Originality/value The effects of increased school autonomy and accountability on student achievement have been discussed at length. How different accountability policies affect the autonomy of schools with the highest needs has so far not been studied. The study can be understood as a first step to unravel this association. Following steps should include in-depth investigations of the mechanisms underlying increased or diminished autonomy for SSDCs, and the consequences for school improvement in these schools.

Making sense of external partnerships

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-71
Author(s):  
Susanne Sahlin
Keyword(s):  
School Improvement ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Software Tool ◽  
Sense Making ◽  
Depth Information ◽  
Institutional Perspective ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
University Partnership

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine principals’ sense-making of a school–university collaboration taking an institutional perspective on organizational change. The study’s context involves three schools in a collaboration focusing on leadership and school improvement with one university. Design/methodology/approach The study draws on findings from a qualitative case study that examined principals’ sense-making of this type of school–university collaboration. Data were collected over three years and consisted of semistructured interviews, meeting notes, field observations, field notes and document analysis. A qualitative content analysis was performed using the Atlas.ti 6.2 software tool. Findings The findings showed that mattering sense-making for the principals in this collaboration is related to the cultivation of collective participation and responsibility, the development of trust and improvement culture among actors, and the sense of moving towards research-based and collaborative learning-oriented practices in their schools. Research limitations/implications This study encountered several limitations that need to be addressed and recognized. First, the small number of cases in this multiple case study, as well as the specific social context, limits the possibilities for the generalization of the findings. Second, the study was not independently selected and the findings and analyses were linked to national and local contexts, which can be seen as a limitation and a strength. Nevertheless, this study provides in-depth information about the principals’ experiences and constructions of meaning as they helped lead a school–university collaboration in their schools. Finally, although the sample was small and not representative, the findings provided useful insights into and examples of how principals understand and interpret a school–university partnership in their schools’ improvement processes. Originality/value The findings provide an elaborated illustration of how intentional efforts to collaborate and develop the schools in a school–university partnership may affect the regulative, normative and cultural–cognitive aspects in schools.

Merit selecting school leaders: Australian principals' perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 1303-1315
Author(s):  
Kevin Steed ◽  
John De Nobile ◽  
Manjula Waniganayake
Keyword(s):  
School Leadership ◽  
Professional Learning ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
School Principals ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
The State ◽  
Head Teachers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
South Wales

PurposeThis research paper explores the perspectives of Australian school principals in the state of New South Wales (NSW) regarding what they believe constitutes “merit” when selecting deputy principals, assistant principals (primary) and head teachers (secondary).Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was utilised to collect qualitative and quantitative data from school principals across the state of NSW to investigate their understanding of, and approach to, the merit selection of their respective school leadership cadres.FindingsStudy findings indicated a statewide variance in the perceptions of principals when identifying merit for the purposes of recruiting school leadership teams. These findings question the widely held view that candidates compete for school leadership positions on a level playing field.Practical implicationsIn practical terms, the findings indicate that NSW school principals would benefit from more intensive professional learning opportunities designed to enhance their ability to objectively identify and assess merit when selecting school leaders.Originality/valueThis study contributes to an enhanced understanding in an area where there is a paucity of research-based evidence focusing upon the perspectives of school principals regarding their understanding of meritocratic theory and its influence on their school leadership selection practice.

Leading school-wide improvement in low-performing schools facing conditions of accountability

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelby Cosner ◽  
Mary F. Jones
Keyword(s):  
School Districts ◽  
School Improvement ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
School Leaders ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Low Performing Schools ◽  
Departments Of Education ◽  
Work First ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
State Departments Of Education

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to advance a framework that identifies three key domains of work and a set of more nuanced considerations and actions within each domain for school leaders seeking to improve school-wide student learning in low-performing schools facing conditions of accountability. Design/methodology/approach – Review of literature. Findings – Drawing from the work of Robinson et al. (2008), the authors identify and discuss a set of nuanced considerations and actions for school leaders seeking to improve school-wide student learning in low-performing schools facing conditions of accountability. These considerations and actions fall into three broad domains of leader work: first, goal setting and planning for goal achievement; second, promoting and participating in teacher learning; and third, planning, coordinating, and evaluating teaching and curriculum. Practical implications – This paper generates implications for school leaders, and school leader developers, school districts, and state departments’ of education. The authors detail two key implications for school districts and/or state departments’ of education as they seek to offer guidance and support to low-performing schools facing conditions of accountability. It also generates a testable framework that can be drawn upon to examine school improvement and the work of school leaders in low-performing schools facing conditions of accountability. Originality/value – The analysis reveals unique challenges and considerations situated within each of the three domains of leader work found by Robinson et al. (2008) to have moderate to strong effects on student outcomes. These issues motivate an assortment of more nuanced leader actions and considerations in each of the three domains of leader work of consequence to student learning. The analysis provides an important accounting of an assortment of nuanced actions and considerations likely to be necessary if leaders are to support the improvement of student learning in these uniquely challenged settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document