Case studies on good policy practices in the field of school leadership by EPNoSL

Lifelong learning: policies and programme

European Policy Network On School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Grant Agreement EAC-2010-1388 Specific Agreement number: EAC-2013-0536

DELIVERABLE 3.3 School Leadership Policy Practices for Equity and Learning EPNoSL Case Studies Version 1.0:

Date: 28-2-2015

With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Union

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Work Package:

No. 3, Knowledge Exchange and Stakeholders Networking

Author of the synthesis:

Nóra Révai

Authors of the case studies:

Michael Schratz, Silvia Krenn, Helmuth Aigner, Marc Leunis, Lejf Moos, Wolfgang Meyer, Maria Gelastopoulou, Vassilis Kourmpetis, Anna Spanaki, Andreas Kollias, Guntra Kaufmane, Aija Tuna, Danguole Salavejiene, Salvina Muscat, John P. Portelli, Tomasz Kasprzak, Ana Paula Silva, Carmo Climaco, Vlasta Poličnik, Borut Campelj, Jonas Höög, Huub Friederichs, Tom Hamilton

Status, Version No.

Submission date:

28 February 2015

Start Date of the Agreement:

12 January 2014

Duration of the Specific Agreement

18 Months

Dissemination Level:

Public

Project coordinator:

Kathy Kikis-Papadakis, FORTH/IACM katerina@iacm.forth.gr

Financing:

With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Union

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Page 2 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Abstract This report has been developed in the framework of the European Policy Network of School Leadership (EPNoSL) project’s third work package (WP3) and presents 14 case studies. Each case study reports on a ‘good policy practice’ proven to be effective, innovative or promising in terms of fostering equity and enhancing student learning. The report first introduces methodological considerations applied when identifying ‘good policy practice’, then presents the template used to report good practices. Finally, a synthesis is given of the policy areas covered by the case studies and the challenges that the identified practices responded to, and overarching priorities emerging from the case studies are outlined.

Page 3 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Table of Content Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 3 The EPNoSL understanding on good policy practices – methodological considerations ........................ 6 Case study template ................................................................................................................................ 8 Synthesis of the case studies ................................................................................................................. 10 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Case study from Austria – Teacher Leadership at the New Middle School (NMS) – System-wide reform for enhancing equity and learning in Austria’s lower secondary schools ................................. 17 Case study from Belgium (Flanders) – The Flemish communities of schools ....................................... 30 Case study from Denmark – From Teacher to Leader........................................................................... 35 Case study from Germany – The Berlin conferences on school leadership – a joint venture .............. 38 Case study from Greece – The establishment of the "Committees for Educational Diagnostic Assessment and Support" (CEDAS) ....................................................................................................... 42 Case study from Latvia – Initiative “CHANGE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SCHOOLS” (Developing Schools in the Multifunctional Community Centers) ............................................................................................. 47 Case study from Lithuania – NordPlus Horizontal programme project “Development of School Management in the Baltic Region“ (2008-2010)................................................................................... 55 Case study from Malta – All Together Now 2014-2024: Reflective Practice, Inclusive Leadership, and Student Engagement ............................................................................................................................. 62 Case study from Poland – Leadership and management in education – design and implementation of a new model of headteacher’s training ................................................................................................ 66 Case study from Portugal – The use of self-evaluation in schools’ improvement ................................ 70 Case study from Slovenia – E-competent headmaster (development and implementation) .............. 75 Case study from Sweden – The National Principal Training Program in Sweden ................................ 80 Case study from the Netherlands – The approach to Early School Leaving: Policy in the Netherlands and provisional figures of the 2012-2013 performance agreements ................................................... 86 Case study from UK-Scotland – Leadership Capacity and Equity Building through the Review and Revision of the Scottish Teacher Education Standards ......................................................................... 93

Page 4 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The European Policy Network on School Leadership (EPNoSL) set the objective of developing case studies in the framework of Work Package 3 to identify and disseminate good practices in the field of school leadership policy in Europe. This is in line with EPNoSLâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aim to enable policy makers and other stakeholders in the field of school leadership at local, regional, national and cross-national levels to share knowledge, experiences and lessons learned about school leadership. EPNoSL case studies are not based on new empirical research but are reports on existing good policy practices in the field of school leadership. The goal is to showcase some school leadership policies that have proven their effectiveness and efficiency or are promising practices in terms of enhancing equity and learning. The specific themes fall in the domain of the five EPNoSL focal themes: autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, policy response and educating school leaders. To facilitate the identification of good policy practices and to ensure comparable and coherent reporting, a definition of good practice was agreed upon, guidelines for reporting were set and a reporting template developed.

Page 5 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

The EPNoSL understanding on good policy practices – methodological considerations Definition of good practice in the context of EPNoSL case studies A good practice, as compared to other practices, stands out in some way for its capacity to enhance school leadership. Its value may lie in one or more of the following aspects: 

the process followed – e.g. its participative nature, efficiency, fairness, etc.,



in the school leadership change the good practice helps to bring about – e.g. better school leadership processes (improved efficiency, fairness, etc. in the practice of school leadership),



leadership development – e.g. improved knowledge, understanding and capabilities,



the outcomes of school leadership – e.g. improvements in learning, equity, etc.

The term “good practice” does not necessarily imply perfection, excellence or exceptional quality and results. In the context of EPNoSL, a good practice could be defined as an activity (strategy, programme or project) resulting, either directly or indirectly, in enhancing the capacity of school leaders to address effectively challenges of equity and learning in schools, without using inordinate resources to achieve the desired results, and which can be used to develop and implement solutions adapted to similar needs in other regional, national or local contexts. The term “practice” does not refer simply to behaviours and activities. Practice involves the development and application of knowledge, understanding and values, as well as social characteristics (such as shared norms, social divisions and the quality of relationships), peoples’ identities and emotions, and their spiritual, aesthetic and ethical sensibilities. In other words, practice is not reducible to a set of procedures or processes: it derives its character equally from the human and social factors that underlie the practice. Guiding principles for the selection of good practices The overarching principles for selecting case studies derive from the definition. Case studies should illustrate a practice that stands out in terms of •

developing/implementing school leadership policy (e.g. the policy process followed, noteworthy because of characteristics such as its participative nature, efficiency, fairness, etc.)

and/or •

enhancing school leadership by helping to bring about one or more of the following o

better school leadership processes (e.g. improved efficiency, fairness, etc. in the practice of school leadership),

leadership development (e.g. improved knowledge, understanding and capabilities),

improved outcomes of school leadership (e.g. improvements in learning, equity, etc.).

Case studies are derived from a particular national context. However, they should also demonstrate elements that can be shown to have relevance to different nations and cultures in Europe. Page 6 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Results of efficiency or effectiveness can be partial and may be related to only one or more components of the practice being considered. Indeed, documenting what does not work and why it does not work is an integral part of “good practice” so that the same types of mistakes can be avoided in other policy programmes and projects. The relation of the case studies to other EPNoSL products The case studies, although developed independently of other EPNoSL products are in some cases strongly connected to and considered in relation to them. In particular the policy toolsets developed in WP2 are reflected upon by stakeholder groups and are enriched by the case studies developed in WP3. In the framework of the Virtual Platform of EPNoSL (EPNoSL VIP), a series of webinars have been organised focusing on the relationship of a case study and a policy toolset. Each webinar presented a case study together with a policy toolset either •

developed in the same educational context (same country / region) or

•

related thematically to the case study (same overarching theme such as accountability, educating school leaders etc.).

These online knowledge sharing platforms give the opportunity for various stakeholders to reflect on the reported good practices also in light of a more general policy area.

Page 7 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study template Summary of a good practice in SL policy development and/or implementation Title of good practice A short sentence describing the good practice

Context of application Provide contextual information regarding the good practice. e.g. Regional/National context where the good practice is evidenced Other context-specific information (historic, social, cultural or economic issues that frame good practice).

SL policy area(s) related to good practice Give a description of the policy area(s) to which the good practice is related (e.g. autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, professional standards on SL, SL evaluation, research on SL, SL capacity building, etc.) and possible interrelationships/connectedness with other education policy areas or wider areas such as welfare policies, employment policies, etc.

Main goals of the practice Describe the main goals of the good practice. Some such goals could be to promote the capacity of school leadership in addressing issues of equity in schools, to leave more room to school leaders to define priorities and target recourses for the purpose of tackling issues of equity and learning in their schools, to empower members of the school community to undertake leadership roles, to enhance school leadersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; engagement with new learning, etc.

Key initiators/implementers of good practice Offer some essential information about the key people/group(s)/organisation(s), network(s) or other agents involved in the initiation and implementation of the good practice. A good practice may come from a variety of sources such as government agencies, schools, municipalities, groups of school leaders, communities, associations, individual school leaders etc.

Current/prospective beneficiaries Give a short description of the main and direct and indirect target groups that benefit from the improvements introduced by the good practice in the context of its implementation.

Contact information/on-line information Specify contact persons and/or published materials (e.g. WWW links) which can offer further inside information about the good practice.

Description of the implementation of the good practice Please, give an extended summary of the implementation of the good practice, including a short historic account of its emergence and evolution, strengths and weaknesses and lessons learned - maximum 500 words.

Quality characteristics of the good practice Type of good practice Specify under which of the following types the good practice example falls into:

Page 8 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) i. Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence: A strategy, policy program or project that has the highest degree of proven effectiveness supported by objective and comprehensive research and evaluation. ii. Field-tested good policy practice: A strategy, policy program or project that has been shown to work effectively and produce successful outcomes and is supported to some degree by subjective and objective data sources. iii. Promising policy practice: A strategy, policy program or project that has worked within one or a cluster of schools and shows promise during its early stages for becoming a good practice with long term sustainable impact. A promising practice must have some objective basis for claiming effectiveness and must have the potential for replication among other organizations. iv. Other: Please specify.

Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended Under the following subheadings elaborate on the reasons why you recommend the specific practice.

Effectiveness How effective is the proposed practice in tackling the problem/issue at hand? Is there evidence of some kind (such as research data, test results, enrolment and participation rates or â&#x20AC;&#x153;softâ&#x20AC;? evidence such as opinions of people involved and beneficiaries) in favour of the effectiveness of the practice?

Efficiency Does the practice produce results within a reasonable level of demands for resources (human resources, financial resources, etc.)?

Relevance What is the relevance of the proposed practice to the needs and circumstances of the beneficiaries also taking into account their socio-economic and cultural background in the context of the wider regional/national/local or other community?

Sustainability Is the proposed practice sustainable over a long period given the current level of resources, and motivation? What factors are critical for its sustainability in the long-term?

Synergies Describe synergies with other stakeholders which were initiated and maintained in the context of the proposed practice. For example, collaboration between schools and school leaders, researchers, policy makers, administrators, associations, teachers, students, parents, etc.

Transferability What are the potentials of the proposed practice to be transferred to other school/educational contexts? What are possible limitations to the transferability of the proposed practice?

Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications In what ways the practice documented here is related to the wider educational realities at regional/national/local level? Is this practice representing a response to problems and needs that are of nationwide or region-wide relevance? What are the suggested mutually reinforcing and interrelated changes, reforms or other policy initiatives that need to be introduced in order for the practice to diffuse at regional/national/local level and become more effective? (Max. 300 words)

Page 9 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Synthesis of the case studies Altogether 14 case studies have been developed, reporting on national good policy practices from Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, the Netherlands and UK – Scotland. In the following we will give a short overview of the types of good practices, the areas covered, and aspects of relevance and sustainability. We will equally highlight some emerging conclusions that seem to be of wider relevance. Policy areas Each good practice covered several policy areas. Beyond the EPNoSL main areas (autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, policy response and educating school leaders) two wider areas were addressed by the reported practices, namely, professional standards and inclusion (see Figure 1 for the statistical details). Nearly all case studies were related to educating school leaders in some way: some presented good practices about school leaders’ formal qualification programmes organised by universities (or jointly with other institutions) (Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Poland), whereas others reported on professional development opportunities for school leaders with specific purposes (Malta, Slovenia, Germany). Distributed leadership was addressed in 10 case studies, again with varying focuses and to varying degrees. Several good practices focused on building teachers’ capacity as leaders, so that they can become leaders of learning (e.g. Denmark, Malta, Poland, Slovenia), some put a special emphasis on teacher leadership, where teachers had particular roles in leading (e.g. Austria), yet others adopted a more holistic view of distributed leadership involving diverse stakeholders in the a process (e.g. the Netherlands). Autonomy is an area that relates to most case studies, and that appeared especially strongly in four of them (Austria, Belgium, Latvia, Portugal). Autonomy as space for implementing certain policy measures or programmes, realising project goals in a way that best suits the local context and needs was seen as one of the key factors to the success of these practices. In fact, the authors of the Austrian case study use the vivid expression “bringing the programme to life” instead of the word implementation so as not to evoke “following any prescribed measure/model”, but emphasise the importance of the local context and the necessity for the schools to shape the programme in a way that it best fits their culture and best satisfies their needs. Inclusion is also an area addressed in different ways by four case studies. In the German example inclusive education is the issue in focus of the conference (reported as a good practice) and is mentioned in relation to the UNESCO Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Greek good practice describes an initiative that attempts to answer the educational needs of students with disabilities and special education needs. In the Portuguese and the Scottish case it is the process of implementation or development which is characterised by the use of open and inclusive practices. Raising professional standards are mentioned as the result of effective capacity building in three cases (Poland, Slovenia and the Netherlands), while the Scottish case study addresses the review and revision of teacher standards.

Page 10 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Figure 1 - Policy areas addressed by the case studies

We need to emphasise that these policy areas overlap in many cases and the reports were not necessarily consistent in mentioning all areas that relate to the practice described. For example policy response as a theme often relates to autonomy insofar as what is described as school (or local) autonomy can in fact be seen as a local response to a certain policy goal/measure. For this reason we should not draw far-reaching conclusions from the fact that accountability and policy response constituted the explicit focus of only few practices. It is however possible that the imbalance of the areas is caused by the imbalance of the stakeholder groups submitting good practices. Had more policy-makers been involved in reporting on practices, would there have been more examples for addressing accountability or policy response effectively? In this case, other types of institutions and stakeholder groups can be directly addressed in the future to report on such practices. Challenges and responses in relation to equity and learning Equity is a contested concept in educational literature, which is widely debated together with related terms such as social justice, equality, equal opportunities (Lumby, 2013b). The conceptualisation of equity also depends on the political agenda. For example, education viewed in the prism of marketisation, performativity and managerialism give the floor to interpretations restricted to equality of opportunity and/or equity of results (Ward et al, 2013 In …). These interpretations sometimes resulted in counterproductive effects, e.g. evidence suggested that principals in Canada resisted attempts to recognise diversity as they interpreted the notion of equality of opportunity as treating all students the same. (Goddard and Hart, 2007 in: Ward et al, 2013 In …; Lumby, 2013a) Lumby (2013a: p1) defines equity in the widest possible way by saying “equity [] is to ensure that all learners throughout Europe acquire the knowledge, skills and attitudes that will enable them to live a life they value and that offers value to society, without encountering structural barriers or discrimination to the detriment of their progress”. We must acknowledge however, that the socially and politically context-dependent nature of interpreting equity may also be a consequence of the different challenges countries must address at different levels. While some countries have to face deficits in terms of access to education, others

Page 11 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) struggle to combat segregation, yet others endeavour to make all the different voices heard in various decision-making processes. The case studies reporting on good policy practices also mirror these differences. For example the Latvian case responded to a particular challenge resulting from a cut in government spending on education. Here many rural schools were under threat of being closed which in the Latvian context would have potentially meant violating rights to access to education and participation. In Austria the school system was characterised by very early tracking, which impeded the social integration of young people of e.g. migrant families or with SEN. Changing this system took part in the context of a comprehensive educational reform, which demanded the rethinking of school leadership, in particular leadership roles. In the Netherlands serious efforts are made to reduce early school leaving, and emphasis has been put on prevention by introducing early warning systems. Although each good practice addresses country-specific challenges in terms of equity and responds to those challenges in ways that are based on the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s needs and are adapted to the context, the main goals identified in the case studies suggest two themes, which seem to have cross-national applicability. 1. School leader capacity building and professional development for equity and learning As already seen in the frequency of chosen policy areas, the capacity building of school leaders seem to be considered as a crucial element of addressing equity challenges. Whether it is a formal and comprehensive qualification or short term professional development with a specific focus, one of the key features of these programmes is combining theory with practice. Indeed, when it comes to working on such a complex issue as equity it is of crucial importance to challenge leaders to reflect critically on these issues and on their role (Lumby, 2013a; Mac Ruairc, 2013). As far as the nature of theory is concerned, good practice cases report a strong emphasis on educational leadership versus a purely managerialist approach to leadership development. Cases brought from Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Malta or Poland all reflect the above principles. 2. Joining the forces â&#x20AC;&#x201C; co-operation and networking of internal and external partners The collaboration of different partners, within the school, in the local community, between different stakeholders, different types of institutions, or between countries has proved to be highly effective in working towards equity. The EPNoSL case studies demonstrate several levels and types of cooperation at various levels: in Greece special committees have been established representing multiple expert groups to support the inclusion of students with disabilities and special education needs; in Latvia schools work together with the local communities and municipalities to become educational, culture and social support centres; in Portugal involving all actors within the school to reflect on school, teacher and student performance was an effective way of self-evaluation; in the Netherlands different institutions are involved in functioning a comprehensive early warning system to reduce early school leaving; in Scotland the revision of teaching standards were carried out as a result of a wide consultation process; in Flanders (Belgium) schools form school communities to share resources and work for a system-wide improvement of student achievement; whereas the Baltic countries established a collaborative network in the field of school management to unite different stakeholdersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; knowledge, skills, experience for higher learning quality.

Page 12 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Initiators, implementers and beneficiaries In a bit less than half of the policy practices were initiated by the government through the Ministry dealing with education or a government agency. Higher education institutions and professional bodies took the initiative of the practice in 20-30% of the cases. Although to a lesser extent, but NGOs (e.g. Soros Foundation in Latvia), school boards, schools or school leaders themselves and companies also played a role in initiating the good practices. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Figure 2: The initiators of the good practices

Typically many different stakeholders were involved in the implementation process including schools, universities, local communities, NGOs, parents, etc. Even when the official implementer was a particular institution or a particular type of institution (e.g. higher education institution), a crucial part of the implementation was carried out jointly in co-operation with a wide variety of institutions and groups. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

5 2

7 4

Figure 3: The implementers of the good practices

Page 13 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Direct beneficiaries of the reported practices were mostly school leaders and teachers, in some cases other professional support staff, or a wider group of educational stakeholders including e.g. ministry employees. In all cases the indirect target group were students, cases differed in whether a particular group of students was identified (e.g. Greece: students with disabilities or SEN) or the practice targeted (indirectly) a general improvement of student learning (in most other cases). Sustainability, transferability and relationships with wider educational issues In terms of sustainability the following factors have been recurring in the reports and can thus be identified as key:   

motivation of the key actors and a ‘critical mass’ involved in and committed to sustaining the practice, support from a higher level – depending on the context it be at the school (leadership), local (authorities), national (government, ministry) or EU (strategic priority) level, human and financial resources – a wider partnership involved in the processes can attract diverse sources for funding.

Although many of the presented good practices respond to specific needs and challenges of the given country, a lot of ideas and methods seem to be easily adaptable. Some of the case studies stress that there is no “one size fits all” solution, and draw the attention to the importance of carefully considering the context and particular needs when the practice is adapted. Examples on adaptations include testing the reported good policy practice in other countries (the Netherlands). The ensemble of case studies cover a wide range of educational issues that are related to the good practices they reported on. Thus, 

bringing innovation from the macro to the micro level and reaching student learning (Austria),  foster innovative learning environments (Austria),  shared leadership (Austria),  moving towards a more inclusive education (Germany),  increasing employability (Latvia),  facilitating civic engagement (Latvia),  school leaders’ professionalisation (Lithuania, Malta, Sweden, Denmark, Scotland)  increasing the level of qualification (the Netherlands),  reducing early school leaving (the Netherlands) are wider issues that relate to the EPNoSL good policy practices.

Page 14 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Conclusion An overview of the case studies clearly show the context-dependent nature of policy practices, indeed school leadership policy must be embedded in the educational policy of the country, must answer local (national) needs and challenges. Nevertheless, some themes can be identified which seem to be relevant at a more cross-national level, and thus could be considered as the basis for European considerations. 1. Supporting leadership at all levels of a school Much leadership research evidence shows that taking leadership for the heroic action of one (or a few) person(s) at the top of the hierarchy does not lead to enhanced student learning. A distributed leadership approach recognises that many – including teachers, students, support staff, parents – contribute to leadership in diverse ways. (Woods and Roberts, 2013) The question is rather how these contributions can be valorised in the quest of furthering equity and enhancing learning. It seems that effective practices consciously work on empowering different actors and involving them in leadership. Here are some ways demonstrated by the case studies in which policies can facilitate distributed leadership for equity (DLE):  

 2.

attributing special roles to teachers in leading learning (e.g. Lerndesigners in Austria) supporting leadership competence development at all levels o leadership competencies in all teacher standards (Scotland), o leadership education and training or development opportunities for teachers (Austria, Denmark, Slovenia) sharing leadership according to expertise at a local (regional) level (Belgium-Flanders, Greece) Comprehensive professional development for effective school leadership

As Lumby (2013a) underlines it is crucial to create a safe space for leaders to reflect on equity in teaching and leading practices in order to deeply engage in critical reflections and avoid superficial treatment of the issue. Effectively combining theory and practice in school leaders’ professional development is one condition to create that space and opportunity, and was demonstrated by the case studies of Denmark, Sweden, Malta and Poland. Another way to foster the creation of such opportunities is offering professional development for leaders, teachers and other support staff that are specifically targeted at working for equity. These can take the form of organised courses (formal learning opportunities) or intensive co-operation and networking between stakeholders. All good practices described set a specific aim for these professional development opportunities which corresponded to the context and local needs (e.g. ICT competence development in Malta, lerndesigners in Austria, etc.) 3. Enhanced networking and co-operation As already pointed out in the section on challenges and responses, joining the forces is an effective way of responding to complex challenges. Co-operation and new types of partnerships between schools/teachers and other stakeholders such as parents/families, local governments, local NGOs, businesses etc. proved to be beneficial for schools, teachers and students. The power of multidisciplinary and cross-sectorial collaborations lies in the combined capacity and competencies of the people involved in a development process. Co-operation, collaboration and networking Page 15 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) however, have to be facilitated and co-ordinated in order to achieve the intended objectives. Various ways have been described in the case studies to do this such as allocating financial resources to organise networking (e.g. Belgium-Flanders, Latvia, Lithuania), building capacity to work with partners (e.g. Latvia), establishing steering groups that consist of a disparate set of voices (Scotland), etc. Another key condition for successful co-operation and networking is sufficient autonomy for the schools and school leaders, or within a school for teachers, students, etc. to respond to local needs, decide on appropriate foci and actions, to use resources in service of successful implementation. References Lumby, Jacky (2013a) How can we understand educational leadership for equity and learning?, Keynote presentation, Vilnius Nov. 2013. http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/epnoslvilnius-pla-day-2-jacky-lumby-article.pdf Lumby, Jacky (2013b) Leading for Equality in a Changing Europe, EPNoSL Keynote paper and webinar presentation In: Critical Factors in the discourse on School Leadership from the perspective of equity and learning (2013) http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/deliverable/critical-factors-discourseschool-leadership-perspective-equity-and-learning Mac Ruairc, Gerry (2013) Including Inclusion - Exploring inclusive education for school leadership, EPNoSL Keynote paper http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/exploring-inclusiveeducation-for-school-leadership-2013_5.pdf Ward, Sophie; Bagley, Carl; Woods, Philip; Lumby, Jacky; Hamilton, Tom; Roberts, Amanda (2013) Scoping paper on school leadership and equity, EPNoSL paper In: Critical Factors in the discourse on School Leadership from the perspective of equity and learning (2013) http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/deliverable/critical-factors-discourse-school-leadershipperspective-equity-and-learning

Page 16 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Austria – Teacher Leadership at the New Middle School (NMS) – System-wide reform for enhancing equity and learning in Austria’s lower secondary schools Michael Schratz; Silvia Krenn; Helmuth Aigner 1. Context The new role of “Lerndesigner” positions teacher leaders in each school with specific expertise in areas of curriculum and the development of teaching and learning related to the reform goals of equity and excellence. In 2008 a New Middle School (NMS) was piloted by the Ministry of Education (BMUKK) and by 2012 the NMS was mandated by the Austrian Parliament. A main reason for introducing the NMS was to improve equity by responding to growing diverse student learning needs and to reduce early streaming after primary school. Based on the understanding that effective school reform occurs on the school level, as part of the reform process several new teacher leadership roles have emerged. Of these teacher leaders, Lerndesigners are the most visible. They are teacher leaders with specific expertise in areas of curriculum and instructional development (“Lerndesign”) related to the reform goals of equity and excellence and attend a two-year qualification program with academic credits. 2. SL policy areas The legislation regarding the NMS had wide-reaching impact on school policy, from minor changes in laws regarding student use of public transport to influence on the potential reform of assessment policy. The NMS legislation changed the definition of teaching activities (particularly regarding instructional design, criteria-based assessment and differentiation) and also instituted new components such as the student-parent-teacher meetings. Distributed leadership is one of the main policy areas addressed with the introduction of a new middle leadership role. School autonomy is relatively restricted in Austria (Schratz & Westfall-Greiter 2010). While efforts to increase autonomy are currently underway, the room for school-specific measures is still relatively limited. The question of autonomy is an important element of this practice: the different federal systems of the country took advantage of the offered space in different ways, and schools also have space to bring to life the programme in a way that corresponds to the local needs and culture. Because continuing professional development is funded by the federal government, a part of this budget which is under the control of Pädagogische Hochschulen is designated for teacher development focused on the NMS. Planning is done on the province level in cooperation with local school authorities and tends to have a technical view of teaching; as a result the impact of these resources on capacity building of the teaching staff varies significantly. The government also provides resources for school-specific professional development needs. Whether schools actually use these resources depends on the degree to which they are guided in their development process on the local level. 3. Main goals of the practice The nation-wide introduction of the New Middle School (NMS), with the aim of fundamentally reorienting the instructional and organizational system of teaching and learning for 10 to 14-yearPage 17 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) olds aims at avoiding the early tracking of children at the age of 9-10 years and at enhancing equity and learning outcomes for all. Shifting the decision on the future educational careers of youth to the end of lower secondary level should make for better integration of children and young people with both migration background and special education needs. With regards to the new teacher leader roles that emerged, the aim is that they, and in particular the Lerndesigners, act as change agents together with school leaders for innovative learning environments and improving equity in the lower secondary education. 4. Key initiators, implementers and beneficiaries – stakeholder groups, types of institutions Initiator: 

Austrian Federal Ministry of Education and Women's Affairs: 2008 New Middle School (NMS) was piloted and by 2012 the NMS was mandated by the Austrian Parliament.

Implementers: 



  

National Development Support (NMS EB = Neue Mittelschule Entwicklungsbegleitung) based at National Center for Learning Schools, University of Innsbruck & Pädagogische Hochschule Niederösterreich (academic lead) All Pedagogical Universities in Austria (1-2 in each Province) (professionalization of Learndesigners, Support for school based development processes, regional steering and development groups) School Heads and Learndesigners of 1.072 NMS with 7.461 classes1 School inspectorate on provincial level NMS Regional Coordinators, Steering groups on regional level

5. Current and prospective beneficiaries School faculty: teachers, school leaders, parents, students 6. Contact information Contact persons Center for Learning Schools – NMS Entwicklungsbegleitung: 

Tanja Westfall-Greiter, M.A., Dept. of Teacher Education and School Research at the School of Education, University of Innsbruck, [tanja.westfall-greiter@zls-nmseb.at]



Christoph Hofbauer, M.A., Pädagogische Hochschule Niederösterreich, Baden, [christoph.hofbauer@zls-nmseb.at]



Prof. Dr. Michael Schratz, Dept. of Teacher Education and School Research, Dean of School of Education, University of Innsbruck [michael.schratz@uibk.ac.at]

Websites: 1

https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/bw/nms/mr.html

Page 18 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) BMBF (Federal Ministry for Education and Women)  

https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/bw/nms/index.html; http://www.neuemittelschule.at/

NMS Network: http://www.nmsvernetzung.at/ NMS Parents’ Platform: www.nmseltern.at Virtual Campus: www.virtuelle-ph.at/ Center for Learning Research at the University of Innsbruck: www.lernforschung.at 7. Description of the good practice The paradigm shift the NMS reform means for the Austrian education system creates awareness of the hyper-complexity, which Scharmer (2007) sees as critical for systems development and therefore calls for working with the three complexities (dynamic, social, emerging) as central forces. In order to avoid the classical model of a top-down implementation, the ministry asked the schools to decide themselves if they wanted to become an NMS (meaning an 'innovative school'), which needed a two third acceptance by the school community (including parents). Although many schools became interested in participating in this nation-wide reform agenda, the federal parts of the system had to be convinced, since they are vital parts of the decision-making process if schools want to become NMSs in a federal system. At the beginning the educational authorities of the regions and the local authorities had been skeptical and opposed the opportunity of innovation in the historically conflicting structure between central decision-making and decentralized accountability. Historically, this conflict has often prevented school reform in Austria due to the dominating policy culture (Pelinka, 1996). As a result of educational reform efforts throughout the school system, several new teacher leadership roles have emerged since 2008 which have had an impact on the social architecture of the schools. Of these teacher leaders, Lerndesigners are the most visible, in part due to their two-year qualification program comprising national networking events and symposia, but also due to their name. “Lerndesign” was a new word that received some media attention early on and has become part of NMS everyday vocabulary on all system levels. In a distributed leadership position, each Lerndesigner creates his or her own role in the context of his or her school through processes of roletaking and role-making in a sandwich position between principal and other teachers. Ideally Lerndesigners act as change agents in a shared leadership dynamic with school principals and other teacher leaders (subject coordinators, school development teams, etc.). The rationale for working with, qualifying and networking change agents was clear and focused: effective school reform occurs on the school level and teacher leaders require networking and communities of practice in the context of school reform (Schley, Schratz, Hofbauer, & Westfall-Greiter, 2009). The different federal systems of the country took advantage the offered space in different ways. Four (out of nine) provinces started, others took a wait-and-see stance until the second and third generations. Individual regions labeled the NMS along the names of the provinces (e.g. VMS for the Vorarlberg Middle School or SMS for the Styrian Middle School) to make the regional differences visible and to foster identity of their own within a centralized school reform. In this way transparency, interaction, cooperation and competition became vivid forces in the process. Thus the Page 19 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) framework of the NMS is communicated centrally, but the dialogues of the actors in the regions are the driving force to give the new school a face or an identity. This only works, however, if students in the classroom are also engaged in the dialogue. This approach follows the logic of structural analogy, which exhibits a fractal pattern. A framework consisting of objectives and competences is given for each level of the system (national, regional, school, classroom) which has to be designed dialogically by the relevant actors. Whereas conventional reform delivery is characterized by an implementation mode of a given reform package, here the 'culture space' has to be filled by the respective actors (stakeholders), which can only happen dialogically as a process of co-construction and co-evolution. This process follows the different levels suggested by Scharmer in Fig. 1. "Moving from Field 1 to Field 2 requires opening up to the data of the exterior world and suspending ingrained and habitual (and often dysfunctional) patterns of action and thought (open mind). Moving from Field 2 to Field 3 entails taking a deep dive into relevant contexts and redirecting one's attention such that perception begins to 'happen from the field' (open heart). Moving from Field 3 to Field 4 requires letting go of old identities and intentions and letting come new identities and intentions that are more directly connected with one's deepest sources of individual and collective action and energy (open will)." (Scharmer, 2007, 241-242)

Figure 1: Layers of the social field (Scharmer, 2007, 241)

The stage of motivation which can be reached is an indicator of the professionalism of all partners in the system - students, teachers, heads, administrators etc. - through languaging. To support the reform process, a support network was installed in 2008, compromising experts from research and practice and different higher teacher education areas and school research: Prof. Dr. Michael Schratz, University of Innsbruck, School of Education, Prof. Dr. Wilfried Schley, University of Z체rich and IOS Hamburg Tanja Westfall-Greiter, MA, University of Innsbruck, School of Education Christoph Hofbauer, M.A., P채dagogische Hochschule Baden. Page 20 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The NMS reform process is also building on the expertise from graduates from another system wide education system transformation process, the Leadership Academy2 allowing for a social architecture to bridge leadership and learning. In the development process, which was facilitated by the Centre of Learning Schools based at the School of Education at the University of Innsbruck and the PĂ¤dagogische Hochschule NiederĂśsterreich to ensure that both also the different levels of Teacher Education Institutions are responsible and collaborate, seven principles were guiding the learning and development process: Dissolving the structure of tracking in lower secondary education requires a fundamental reorientation of the instructional and organizational system of teaching and learning for 10 to 14year-olds in heterogeneous groups, which most actors in the educational arena were not prepared for. Class work with variously gifted pupils from a wide ability range combined with the need to focus on imparting key competences, such as self-reliance, responsibility, creativity, flexibility as well as communication, conflict management and team skills, calls for a new learning culture. Inventing the NMS asked for a shift of the system to a higher order (Fig. 2).

schooling

learning

a fundamental change in understanding the teachers' role

streaming

personalized learning

a structural shift in dealing with diversity

assessment

feedback

different ways of focusing on student achievement

followership

agency

new assumptions about motivation

'My classroom and I'

'Our school and we'

understanding the school as a social system

concept implementation

systems development

a switch in orchestrating the change process

vertical command and control

lateral integration

a new perspective of the sources for innovation

Figure 2: Shifting the system on a higher level 2

The Leadership Academy (LEA) is a system wide reform project which started in 2004 as an initiative to enhance Leadership for Learning in the Austrian school system by the Ministry of Education and led by Michael Schratz and Wilfried Schley. It targets leaders in the system (school principals, school inspectorate, leaders from teacher education and key stakeholders in the federal and provincial Ministries of Education. It is working across hierarchies and school forms as a large group approach across annual Generations of up to 300 participants in one Generation. Since 2004 more than 2500 participants have become certified members of LEA. For more information see http://www.leadershipacademy.at/index.en.php

Page 21 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Such a paradigm shift creates awareness of the hyper-complexity, was dealt with systematically by working on the following principles. 

Principle 1: New goals require new roles.



Principle 2: Heterogeneity requires shared leadership.



Principle 3: Create professional learning communities.



Principle 4: Foster transparency and open dialogue.



Principle 5: Keep the end in mind.



Principle 6: Difference makes a difference.



Principle 7: Innovation is a strategic activity.

Principle 1: New goals require new roles. Every school taking part in the NMS innovation process had to select a teacher to become a 'learning designer' (Fig. 3).

Figure 3: Multiple roles of the 'learning designer'

Since this role did not exist before, we could symbolize and practice the new task of shifting the perspective from teaching to learning. As a colleague s/he is a teacher like all the others working in the system. In the 'designer' role s/he takes on an extra role helping the school head to arrive at a new learning culture, which centers around the individual child with his or her individual potential. In doing so, s/he works on the system and in a steering function by becoming a member of the school development team. Principle 2: Heterogeneity requires shared leadership. Working with non-homogeneous groups calls for shared leadership of school heads and learning designers. The process of clarifying the roles and understanding within the different professional areas is a crucial first step in shifting the self-awareness and responsibility so that all students attending Neue Mittelschule pilot schools will be supported and challenged in every possible way, to help them develop their gifts and talents. Principle 3: Create professional learning communities.

Page 22 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Bringing the different levels of decentralization together on eye level and establishing heterogeneous regional and local groups in professional learning communities have proven a powerful means of capacity building (Wenger, 1998; Wenger, McDermott & Snyder, 2002; Stoll & Seashore Louis, 2007). Principle 4: Foster transparency and open dialogue. A nationwide platform was created for fostering transparency by making different practices visible and encouraging open dialogue on different ways for dealing with crucial issues of NMS practice. There were debates and later on dialogues on tracking, assessing, learning, teamwork, collaboration between different types of schools - in cooperation with the national project management in the ministry. An EduMoodle platform offers an additional virtual space for communication. Principle 5: Keep the end in mind. Conceptualized understanding of competence-oriented learning and performance-based assessment requires a “backward design” approach to curriculum development (Wiggins & McTighe 2005). This process for designing curriculum begins with the end in mind and designs toward that end, a process which helps determine the necessary (enabling) knowledge and skill, and the teaching needed to equip students to perform. Principle 6: Difference makes a difference. Establishing heterogeneous groups in teaching and learning requires a critical dialogue on individualization and personalized learning. It is important for the school to become aware that it constructs differences “that make differences”. It is of vital importance to become aware of their influences on the social construction of reality. Principle 7: Innovation is a strategic activity. System innovation builds on people and processes on the one hand and bottom-up movements such as professional and systems development at the regional level as well as commitment at the school level (Fig. 4).

Figure 4: The NMS innovation strategy (Riemann, Ulrich, Schley) The fundamental understanding of the approach is not building on (external) experts implementing an innovation program but the activation of the energy in the field. The role of facilitation is to clarify Page 23 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) roles (e.g. Lerndesigners and procedures in the interplay between national, regional and school levels. The new role of “Lerndesigner” positions teacher leaders in each school with specific expertise in areas of curriculum and the development of teaching and learning related to the reform goals of equity and excellence. Such an intervention is shown in the time line of the NMS development facilitation during the current school year (Fig. 5).

Figure 5: Intervention strategies of the NMS development facilitation The different symbols in Fig. 5 show the intervention strategies used by the NMS development facilitation: Meetings of Initiative Rounds on the ministerial level help reflecting the relationship between policy and practice in the innovation process. Learning Ateliers bring together the learning designers on the national, regional and local levels. Networking Conferences with the school heads and regional coordinators are part of the professional strategy towards empowering the whole system and leading on to a higher level of motivation and commitment. Lerndesigners are teacher leaders with specific expertise in areas of curriculum and instructional development (“Lerndesign”) related to the reform goals of equity and excellence. Ideally Lerndesigners act as change agents in a shared leadership dynamic with school principals and other teacher leaders (subject coordinators, school development teams, etc.) with the aim of fostering innovative learning environments and improving equity in the lower secondary education. The NMS-House symbolizes this aim: diversity is the foundation of the school, instruction is oriented to competence development, instructional development based on backward design principles, differentiation as a strategic response to student needs and corresponding assessment are the pillars of the Figure 6: The House of NMS approach and being mindful of learning and pedagogical stewardship is the frame to reach and sustain excellence in student achievements.

A key success factor is the effectiveness of Lerndesigners. They attend a two-year national qualification program, which enables them to gain theoretical and practical insights in the six areas of the NMS-House, to develop with one another the knowledge and skills necessary for them to be

Page 24 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) effective in their own schools as teachers and teacher leaders, and to network with other Lerndesigners. The qualification program focuses on equity and excellence in curriculum and instructional development and evolved during the pilot phase in response to pilot schools’ needs. The effectiveness of Lerndesigners as change agents in a teacher leadership role depends to a significant degree on the culture and leadership in their schools. Each Lerndesigner creates his or her own role in the context of his or her school through processes of role-taking and role-making. To structure and strengthen shared leadership, school principals are invited with their Lerndesigners to one national Lernatelier per year. Inviting these “dynamic development duos”, as they come to be called, to work together in a learning atelier has been recognized as key for the Lerndesigners to become effective teacher leaders at the sites. Beyond face-to-face events, the NMS development is supported by an online platform, comprising some 200 eduMoodle courses. In addition, the NMS Online Library was implemented in autumn 2012 and serves as a portal for NMS-related resources, including dissemination of the newest resources for curriculum and instruction, a biweekly newsletter for school principals and insights into the NMS experience through personal anecdotes and a series of online events and publications called “NMS Insights”.

8. Type of good practice - Quality characteristics of the good practice Field-tested good policy practice: A strategy, policy program or project that has been shown to work effectively and produce successful outcomes and is supported to some degree by subjective and objective data sources.

Why recommended? 9. Effectiveness Preliminary results show that the NMS have a positive impact on reducing differences in achievement related to gender as well as economic and social background, particularly related to children of foreign-born parents. A large evaluation of NMS has been done by BIFIE-Graz. The evaluation of New Middle School (NMS) was presented to the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education and Women's Affairs in March 2015. The research report has 472 pages and can be downloaded from the website of the Ministry of Education and Women’s Affairs. •

https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/bw/nms/eval_forschungsbericht.pdf?4safj1

An external research group was mandated to check the outcome of introducing the NMS. Based on the study of documents from 2008 they found out the main goals of the reform: • A new culture of teaching and learning • Better learning results of students in subjects and skills • Equity for students with low income, status and education and migration background.

Page 25 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Design of evaluation: 446 NMS classes were evaluated. The evaluation team investigated the first generation, which started 2008 (all 67 schools, 3100 students) and the second generation, which started 2009 (103 schools from all 177NMS, 5700 students). They looked at the students at the beginning, that means in the first class, and at the end of NMS, that means in the fourth year, and compared it with classes of the „Hauptschule“, the former type of lower secondary education at this level. They did not compare with the classes of the academic secondary school ( Gymnasium), because they could not find pairs of schools with a similar distribution of social background of their students. The following evidences were used for evaluating the results and the processes: •

Standard testing results in Mathematics, English, Literacy of German language

• Results from a study about school climate and classroom atmosphere (sample: 90 classes from 30 NMS, 89 classes from 30 „Hauptschulen“ and 60 classes from 20 Gymnasium.) •

Data of Austrian education documentation: streams of students after finishing NMS

• Formative evaluation: treatment-investigation: How was the concept of NMS transformed into praxis? Data from different NMS evaluations about specific themes; data from three peer-review projects; qualitative analysis from case studies about two NMS. Results of evaluation The evaluation measured the impact of the pedagogical concept. NMS worked well in the initial run and there are positive developments in different ways at those schools. In general especially school climate and learning culture improved. More students (plus 5%) continued their school career after NMS in an academic upper secondary school (AHS or BHS). However the results differ between schools, since the engagement for transformation decides about the outcome. There were „traditional classes“ as well as „model classes“ with better results of students. The problem of early decision-making about school careers is still existing. The social background – low education and income, migration, spoken language of every day life - still effects -equity. Reference Eder, F., Altrichter, H., Hofmann, F. & Weber, C. (Hrsg.) (2015). Evaluation der Neuen Mittelschule (NMS). Befunde aus den Anfangskohorten. Forschungsbericht. Salzburg und Linz, 2015. (https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/bw/nms/eval_forschungsbericht.pdf?4safj1; 06.03.2015) While a profile for the role of the Lerndesigner is distributed to school principals, the actual nomination for the role is not formalized, in large part due to the fact that the function is not yet fully securely anchored in the system. As a result, teachers come to this teacher leader role more or less informed, more or less personally motivated and more or less with the mandate of the whole school.

Province

Schools

classes

Burgenland

345

Page 26 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Carinthia

532

Lower Austria

255

1.438

Upper Austria

204

1.327

Salzburg

357

Styria

164

1.123

Tyrol

107

807

Vorarlberg

560

Vienna

122

972

Austria in total

1.072

7.461

Table 1: The NMS Generations by Bundesland projected into the school year 2014/15 3 10. Efficiency With the NMS mandate of April 2012, the reform pilot came to an end and a new phase of reform implementation began with the 2012/13 school year. The National Center for Learning Schools4 (“CLS”) was established by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Arts for the purpose of guiding system development during the implementation. Two central objectives of the CLS include sustaining and fostering school networks and communities of practice as well as continuing to develop and support Lerndesigners as change agents through qualification programs, symposia and networking. The broad guiding question for CLS is, “How can we sustain and spread innovation in the implementation phase?” As the timeline below shows, four generations of pilot schools began under piloting conditions. The NMS implementation began in 2012/13, in the middle of Generation 4’s program. The transition from pilot to implementation seems to have been relatively easy for this generation, whereas Generations 1 – 3 struggled to adapt the new imposed changes more or less willingly. Generation 5 began with the implementation, which means there was clarity and stability for their development from the beginning.

https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/bw/nms/mr.html

http://www.nmsvernetzung.at/mod/page/view.php?id=2003

Page 27 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

11. Sustainability Innovation must be so widely adopted that it is able to sustain itself and become part of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;way we do things around hereâ&#x20AC;?. Rogersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; analysis of the speed and spread of adoption is still relevant today. He was interested in the point at which an innovation reaches critical mass within the rate of adoption and categorized adopters on a classic S-curve as follows: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards (1962, p. 150). In the context of NMS implementation this critical mass is achieved on paper through the implementation schedule, but real adoption of the reform and the six development areas of the NMS-House as self-sustaining productive innovation drivers across the system is expected to follow the S-curve:

Figure 1: S-Curve of innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards (cf. Rogers, 1962)

The speed of spread of innovation in the NMS is dependent to a large degree on alignment and compliance with policy and directives on all system levels. 12. Transferability

Page 28 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The speed of spread of innovation in the NMS is dependent to a large degree on alignment and compliance with policy and directives on all system levels. 13. Relations with wider issues The reform approach is a good way of bringing innovation into a system from macro to micro level, and reaching student learning. The Lerndesigners were and are important change agents for school reform working in shared leadership with the school principals with the aim to foster innovative learning environments and increase equity in the lower secondary education.

Page 29 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Belgium (Flanders) – The Flemish communities of schools Marc Leunis 1. Context of Application Freedom of education is a constitutional right in Belgium. Every person or legal person may organise education and establish schools to that aim. The government may not prevent the establishment of free schools. Also according the constitution the government has the duty to organise nondenominational education. The school governing board is a key concept for the organisation of Flemish education. The board is responsible for one or more schools and can be compared to a board of directors in a company. School governing boards dispose of a wide autonomy. They choose freely their teaching methods and may found their education on a certain philosophy of life or a teaching method. They may also determine their own curricula and timetables and appoint their own staff. Only for recognition of the school and for its financing by the government some conditions need to be fulfilled. The constitution guarantees the freedom of choice of the parents. Parents and children must have access to a school of their choice within reasonable distance of their residence. There exist three educational networks: 

The GO! education is the official education which is organised by the Flemish Community. The constitution prescribes the duty of neutrality for the GO!. The religious, philosophical or ideological conviction of the parents and pupils must be respected.



The subsidised public education consists of schools run by the municipal authorities and schools run by the provincial authorities. The school boards of both groups are united in two umbrella organisations: the Educational Secretariat of the Association of Flemish Cities and Municipalities and the Provincial Education Flanders.



The subsidised private education is organised by a private person or a private organisation. The school board is often a non-profit organisation. Subsidised free education consists primarily of catholic schools. They are united in the umbrella organisation the Flemish Secretariat of Catholic Education. There are also protestant, Jewish, orthodox and Islamic schools. Next to denominational schools there are a small number of schools which are not linked to a religion. Examples are the alternative schools (on the basis of the ideas of Freinet, Montessori or Steiner) which apply specific teaching methods.

In an educational network school boards may join a representative association of school boards, called an umbrella organization. An umbrella organization represents the school boards towards the government, but also supplies services to the schools by e.g. drafting the curricula and timetables, support professional development of teaching staff, etc. A small number of schools in Flanders are not recognised by the government. These are private schools, which do not receive funding from the government. Education which is organised by the government (the GO! and the municipal and provincial education), is called official education. Recognised education from a private initiative is called free education. Page 30 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The financing scheme of education in Flanders is based on parental choice. The government provides funding for schools based on the number of students enrolled. As funding follows the student, the system favours schools that can attract and retain students. Traditionally, schools compete for students and resources, even when they belong to the same school board or school authority. Schools tend to keep their students as long as possible, even when they should be better off in another school with another curriculum. 2. SL policy areas - Autonomy The community of schools receives resources to allocate support staff and deputy-heads to the schools. The community of schools â&#x20AC;&#x201C; by means of the board of school heads â&#x20AC;&#x201C; decides autonomous on principals and mechanisms to distribute these resources to the schools. They can also decide to use part of the resources to appoint a coordinating director who is in charge of the community of schools. - Distributed leadership The Flemish authorities do not intervene to strengthen systemic leadership at the community level. There are no centrally organised support structures for principals, no monitoring and evaluation of leadership, and no dissemination of best practices. However, we observed that in successful communities of schools systemic leadership evolves locally: school leaders have made use of the community structure to establish mechanisms for peer support, school leaders of successful schools share best practices with more disadvantaged schools, and the coordinating-director of the community takes on a coaching and mentoring function to provide guidance for principals. There are some good practices of communities of schools where shared leadership evolved as each school head of the community specialised in a certain field such as personnel, pedagogy, or infrastructure. The quality of shared leadership at the community level seems to depend on local factors, especially on the involvement of committed individuals at the school, community, or school board levels. - School leadership capacity building The Flemish communities of schools fit well with the OECD school leadership for systemic improvement focus. The definition of school leaders guiding the overall OECD activity suggests that effective school leadership may not reside exclusively in formal positions but instead be distributed across a range of individuals in the school. Principals, managers, academic leaders, department chairs, and teachers can contribute as leaders to the goal of learning-centred schooling. The precise distribution of these leadership contributions can vary and can depend on factors such as governance and management structure, levels of autonomy and accountability, school size and complexity, and levels of student performance. Principals can act as leaders of schools as learning organizations which in addition can benefit and contribute to positive learning environments and communities. 3. Main goals of the practice Communities of schools are collaborative partnerships between schools from the same geographical area. These schools can belong to the same school board or school authority, but even so they can belong to different school boards or school authorities.

Page 31 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Participation in a community of schools is not compulsory. Schools can form these communities voluntarily. If they collaborate as a community of schools they receive (some) extra funding by way of additional staff or other resources. The competences and tasks of communities of schools are defined by decree: communities can be created to allow schools to cooperate about matters such as better pupil guidance, more effective staff selection and evaluation, sharing infrastructure, more efficient use of resources, sharing experience on continuous professional development. 4. Key initiators and implementers - Ministry of education and training, Flanders: sets the guidelines and legislation in a decree. Gives incentives for the communities of schools - Umbrella organisations of school boards: encourage their school boards to participate in communities of schools - School boards/school authorities: encourage their schools to participate in communities of schools 5. Current and prospect beneficiaries - schools: working together in the community leads to a more efficiency on the organisation of the school - school heads: collaboration with other school heads within the community of schools leads to sharing experience and support - teachers: more opportunities for starting teachers on getting a job, more opportunities for professional development - pupils: better school and career guidance 6. Contact information Specify contact persons and/or published materials (e.g. WWW links) which can offer further inside information about the good practice. Marc Leunis (marc.leunis@ond.vlaanderen.be) Research is done by the University of Ghent. The result is at this moment only available in Dutch: Devos G. et al (2010). De evaluatie van scholengemeenschappen in het basis- en secundair onderwijs. OBPWO 07.02 Gent: Universiteit Gent â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/obpwo/projecten/2007/0702/0702.htm More information can be found on the website from the research group ath the University of Ghent: http://www.bellon.ugent.be/english.html 7. Description of the implementation of the practice In 1999 the practice of communities of schools has been introduced in secondary education to go beyond the tradition of school competition and to make schools work together. In 2006 followed the introduction of the communities of schools for primary education. Schools can join a community of schools on a voluntary base. The Flemish government provides incentives (extra resources for participating schools) to promote the communities.

Page 32 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) A community of schools is limited to schools within a certain region that belong either to secondary education or to primary education. A community of schools is formed for a period of six years (6 school years). After that period the community can prolong its cooperation, schools can join another community or decide to leave the community and stay on their own. The number of communities formed over the past 16 years proves that the concept is working. In primary education there are 357 communities of schools with an average of 1.800 pupils (min. 900 – max. 4.500 pupils). On a total of 2.577 schools for primary education, only 45 schools do not participate in a community of schools. In secondary education there are 117 communities of schools with an average of 3.700 pupils (min. 1.000 – max. 10.600 pupils). On a total of 1.067 schools for secondary education, 69 schools school do not participate in a community of schools. At first most schools formed a community of schools because that way they received more resources. The umbrella organisations also recommended the community of schools for that reason. Over the years other benefits of working together emerged. In several regions this has gone as far as the merger of several school boards towards one school board for all the schools in the same community. A lesson learned – and also confirmed by research – is that stimulating cooperation between schools within a certain region takes time and shouldn’t be made compulsory by regulations. 8. Type of good practice Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence:

The system of communities of schools has been evaluated by academic researchers from the universities of Ghent and Antwerp. (Evaluation of communities of schools in primary and secondary education – only published in Dutch) Devos G. et al (2010). De evaluatie van scholengemeenschappen in het basis- en secundair onderwijs. OBPWO 07.02 Gent: Universiteit Gent – Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/obpwo/projecten/2007/0702/0702.htm 9. Effectiveness The system of communities of schools has been evaluated by academic researchers from the universities of Ghent and Antwerp. Devos G. et al (2010). De evaluatie van scholengemeenschappen in het basis- en secundair onderwijs. OBPWO 07.02 Gent: Universiteit Gent – Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/obpwo/projecten/2007/0702/0702.htm The study concludes that being part of a community of schools enhances the level of resistance of the school and contributes in a positive way to the ability of policy making in the school. School leaders confirm that being a member of a community of schools leads to following advantages: - growing exchange of expertise (school heads as well as teaching staff); Page 33 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) - more resources for the school; - extra support from peers. 10.Efficiency Research has proven it to be efficient within our Flemish context. 11.Relevance Most relevant since our new minister has plans to strengthen cooperation between schools. 12.Sustainability The practice proves to be sustainable. Since the introduction of the community of schools in 1999 most of the schools formed or joined a community of schools in their region. The number of schools who didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t join has always been very low and is staying low. 13.Synergies Recently coordinating directors (a school head who is in charge of the community) from the communities of school belonging to GO! education formed networks. They aim to create a common profile for this task, work on professionalization, etc. 14.Transferability As schools allocate resources collectively, school leaders are compelled to get together regularly and consult on the use of these resources. In some cases cooperation stays limited to this very aspect of resource distribution. In many schools, however, the externally imposed cooperation on resource matters has had a spill-over effect: communities of schools provided a structure and platform for knowledge sharing and collective action among school leaders and teachers. Research shows that the interactions of school heads at the level of the community of schools cluster are influenced by both school interests (relating to the school organization) and individual professional interests (relating to the individual school head). Balancing these different school and individual interests shapes their actions and helps to explain how leadership practices at the upperschool level take place. Cultural-ideological interests (particularly safeguarding the identity of the school) appear to be of crucial importance. When these interests are threatened, school heads (and school boards) will almost certainly withdraw from the upper-school organization. 15.Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications Our new government and new minister of education have taken the decision to take the community of schools a step further. They plan to stimulate school boards to merge to larger entities existing of schools for primary as well as secondary education. This will not be compulsory, but will be favoured by incentives.

Page 34 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Denmark – From Teacher to Leader Lejf Moos 1. Context Until a few years ago there was no national, formalized, mandatory school leader education, but a number of shorter courses. From 2009 the Public Management Diploma courses was made mandatory for all newly appointed school leaders, but some school districts (municipalities) still found there was an urgent need to have an education, that was locally focused and focused on school leadership, so they established in collaboration with some university colleges this theorypractice mixed education. 2. SL policy areas: 

Educating school leaders



Distributed leadership

3. Main goals Many educational programs, also on school leadership, find it difficult to have students combine the theories and concepts acquired in their studies, with the practical use in the everyday life of leading a school. Theories may be seen as very abstract and distant for the challenges of school practice. So constructing close links between leadership education and leadership practice use to be a great challenge. 4. Key initiators Municipal school authorities are in charge of basic schooling, primary and lower secondary education. Municipalities are the school districts that are in charge of overarching Human Resource Management in their area, and in charge of recruiting and training school leaders. The regional university colleges deliver much of that education. They are therefore collaborating closely with municipalities and can develop education, fitted to the local needs. The project thus started as local/regional initiatives as a result of negotiations between university college, school leader groups and municipalities. 5. Current and prospective beneficiaries Teachers and school leaders, schools and educational systems concerned with education at the basic level and the development hereof. Also benefitting are university colleges because the collaboration it strengthen their knowledge of actual practices in schools. The project has been running for 15 years in 5-10 municipalities (out of 98) every year. 6. Contact information Lejf Moos, Department of Education, Aarhus University, email: moos@dpu.dk 7. Description of the good practice In this project it thus is the aim to educate school leaders to develop leadership understanding/theories and practice in one and the same process. The education is done in a combination of theoretical studies at a university college and practical leadership exercises in their

Page 35 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) own school with an experienced school leader of the learner own school as mentor. Concepts and models that are introduced in the course are being reflected and made use of in the mentoring process in the school. The project build on theories of situated learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1999), the reflective learner and counselling (Moos, 1994; Schรถn, 1983) A number of school districts/municipalities have collaborated with leader education institutions, university colleges, in planning and carrying through a number of educational processes. Teachers participate in one or more modules of a Leadership Diploma of Education, which is multifaceted. They participate in approximately 30 lessons, spread over 3-4 two-day seminars, of the Diploma of Education and as part of this they carry out investigations, implementations or projects in their own school. This part of the Diploma course focuses on educational leadership: Organising, developing and planning for school; what is an educational institution; leading development and sociological and social-psychological perspectives on collaboration within school. This means that the core purpose of school and education are in focus of all themes: learning and equity. The school leaders of these schools are mentors for the teachers and thus supervise them on the basis of the very detailed and concrete leadership knowledge they, themselves, have of their school. The mentors have no special training for this task, except that they are also participating in the Diploma seminars. In regular meetings with the teachers they discuss and mentor the teacher on the tasks given from the Diploma course on concrete leadership activities in actual school. They thereby bring both this detailed knowledge and leadership perspective to the student teacher in dialogues on the practices of their school and school leadership, and at the same time they brush up their own theoretical knowledge and insights. It is worth mentioning that this education is not part of a formal selection procedure for school leadership. The teachers have not applied for, nor been assigned to, school leadership posts prior to taking part in the program. 8. Type of good practice The project shows good policy practice in bringing together several levels of the education system at municipal level in close collaboration: teachers and leaders in schools, municipal authorities and higher education in university colleges. This is supported by research and feedback/evaluation evidence produced in interviews with stakeholders (Harrit, 2001). 9. Why recommended and relations with wider issues The mixture and combination of theory and practice with the support from a mentor is very useful for both the learner and the mentor and has implications for school development in that school and the school authorities. The project has helped teachers to consider the option of getting into leadership. The first stage of this is, when the school leader encourages a teacher to join this project. Secondly the teacher start to acquire a leadership identity, and third: the school leader can observe if the teacher could develop into a good leader and thus guide him/her to go on or not to go on this path. The role of mentoring carried benefits for school leaders, as they are participating in the negotiations about leadership-membership in school and thus having to sharpen the arguments themselves, both in relation to practice and to theories (Harrit, 2001). Page 36 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The combination makes practice, observations and reflections fuller as they can be put into perspective by theories and therefore contribute to a deep learning for both teacher and school leader. It has generally been stated that the shift in teacher identity into leader identity was a major benefit of the project: teacher learned, in their own work place, to widen their perspective from the class room teaching to the whole school organisation. This education combines theoretical insights with practical knowledge in ways that have proven to show high commitment to learning. This education furthermore facilitates teachers to be more skilled and knowledgeable about school leadership before they take on leadership posts. As the project has been constructed in a mixture of theoretical education at the seminars and the work on practical leadership tasks in schools, it is a model of how to distribute leadership: The teacher participates in (some of the) leadership meetings in school and he/she takes on small leadership tasks and responsibilities, and is accepted by leaders and colleagues, as a learning leader. That means that small portions of leadership is distributed to the teacher, who accepts it as part of this project, and at the same time the manoeuvre produces acceptance and leadership legitimacy from all stakeholders in the organization. A number of these projects are still running, and as the course is now mandatory, sustainability is not so much a matter of funding. There are no barriers for transferring this practice, it requires however the collaboration of municipalities (or local school authorities), school leaders and university colleges. References Harrit, O. (2001). Lærer til leder - intentioner, erfaringer og perspektiver [Teacher to Leader Intentions, Experiences and Perspectives]. Skive: Styregruppen. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate perpheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Moos, L. (1994). Kollegavejledning [Collegial Counselling]. København: DLH. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Page 37 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Germany – The Berlin conferences on school leadership – a joint venture 1. Context of application The cooperation between the Lower Saxony State Institute for Quality Development in Schools (NLQ) and the State Institute for School and Media (LISUM) Berlin-Brandenburg started during the EPNoSL PLA in Berlin in June 2012. The two State Institutes represent three of the sixteen German federal states with almost 14 million inhabitants, about 4650 schools and 500 vocational training schools. Both institutes have departments for school leadership training and provide comprehensive capacity building programmes for all phases of school leadership activities. Being both partners in EPNoSL second and third period it was agreed to cooperate in holding joint conferences/PLAs to provide networking and learning opportunities for school heads, political decision makers and other stakeholders in school education. This ongoing cooperation between two state institutes is unique in the German national context. There are several school leadership conferences each year. The biggest – Deutscher Schulleiterkongress Düsseldorf (http://www.deutscher-schulleiterkongress.de) – with about 2000 participants, is a commercial event, organised by Wolters Kluwer, an educational publisher. This year’s main topics are “new perspectives for teaching and learning, human resources development as a key to school quality, school management and winning partners to build networks”. The foremost target group is school heads. Smaller events are arranged by Universities, regional school heads’ associations and other NGOs. The German Academy for Pedagogical Leadership at the University of Dortmund held its fifth congress last year entitled “tools of the trade for school leaders”. The Berlin Conferences on School Leadership have two unique features: they are a joint venture between two state institutes and – being embedded in EPNoSL – they offer a European perspective on the responsibilities of school leaders and policy makers for equity and learning. Furthermore they aim at building a sustainable network between school leaders, capacity building institutions, educational research and policy makers. The conferences are independent of any commercial interests and only committed to educational values. The form of annual conferences supports the networking aspect and secures sustainability. LISUM and NLQ are also partners in a network of all 16 state institutes for school leadership qualification. To understand the German national context it must be noted that the Federal Ministry of Education in Berlin has no responsibility for school education in Germany. The exclusive jurisdiction lies with the 16 federal states. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The conferences / networking events focus on the following (EPNoSL) policy areas: school autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, policy response and capacity building. One essential issue, and a challenge for all players and stakeholders in school education, is the implementation of the UNESCO Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities leading to an inclusive approach to education for all learners. The 2014 conference underlined the responsibility of school leaders for

Page 38 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) equity and learning. The 2015 event will explore organisational, legal and financial frameworks and existent leeway to encourage school development towards equity and learning. 3. Main goals of the practice The main goal in line with the EPNoSL’s aim to enable policy makers and other stakeholders in the field of school leadership at local, regional, national and cross-national levels to share knowledge, experiences and lessons learned about school leadership. The conferences have been addressing issues of equity and learning outcomes in schools. The 2015 conference in September will explore creative leeway within the political and legal framework to allow school leaders to define priorities and target resources for the purpose of tackling issues of equity and learning in their schools. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice The key initiators and implementers of the Berlin conferences for School Leadership are the two departments for school leadership qualification in the respective state institutes, backed and supported by the ministries of education of the three federal states involved. Key persons involved are Bernd Jankofsky, Dr. Steffi Missal, Dr. Rolf Hanisch, Gerhild Rehberg (LISUM) and Dr. Katrin Basold, Gerhard Brückner, Joachim Voges, Wolfgang Meyer (NLQ). 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Direct target groups are school leaders, associations working in the area of school leadership and education, capacity building organizations and policy makers. 6. Contact information/on-line information Contact persons: brandenburg.de

Bernd

Jankofsky

(LISUM)

–

E-mail:

Bernd.Jankofsky@lisum.berlin-

Dr. Katrin Basold (NLQ) – E-mail: Katrin.basold@nlq.niedersachsen.de Website:

http://wordpress.nibis.de/epnosl/

7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The cooperation between the Lower Saxony State Institute for Quality Development in Schools (NLQ) and the State Institute for School and Media (LISUM) Berlin-Brandenburg started during the EPNoSL PLA in Berlin in June 2012. The two State Institutes represent three of the sixteen German federal states with almost 14 million inhabitants, about 4650 schools and 500 vocational training schools. Both institutes have departments for school leadership training and provide comprehensive capacity building programmes for all phases and levels of school leadership activities. Being both partners in EPNoSL second and third period it was agreed to cooperate in holding joint conferences /PLAs to provide networking and learning opportunities for school heads, political decision makers and other stakeholders in school education. The conferences were prepared in joint meetings between the two institutes. The organizers chose reasonably priced venues (Humboldt University 2013, Technical University 2014, Heinrich Böll Foundation 2015) to keep fees as low as possible. In 2013 about 130 participants joined the conference, in 2014 the number reached 180.

Page 39 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Last year the programme offered three workshops in English as EPNoSL colleagues from FI, IE and UK contributed on the basis of their work in EPNoSL, thus opening up the scope to a real European perspective on issues of school leadership. The 2015 conference will focus on the creative leeway within the political and legal framework to allow school leaders to define priorities and target resources for the purpose of tackling issues of equity and learning in their schools. The structure of the event, 2-3 keynotes, complemented with strands of parallel workshops and sufficient time for discussion and networking, has proved to be accepted by a vast majority of participants. Outcomes and results of the practice can be derived from the very positive feedback of participants (c.f. evaluation). In addition, the conferences give impulses for continuous networking and support a discourse between practitioners, the departments for leadership qualification in the state institutes and policy makers to define and implement standards in leadership education. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice ii. Field-tested good policy practice: A strategy, policy program or project that has been shown to work effectively and produce successful outcomes and is supported to some degree by subjective and objective data sources. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended 9. Effectiveness The evaluation surveys of the conferences show a very high general satisfaction with the event. In 2014 ninety participants (50%) answered the survey. 75 % were perfectly satisfied that expressed their wish to join a follow-up conference, 23% were content and only a few were less content (4,4%) and discontent (2,2%). 93% considered the conference to be a very good or good opportunity to exchange ideas and network. More than 80 % of the respondents confirmed learning and knowledge gains in all plenary sessions and workshops and a high relevance for their work. Another indicator for the effectiveness of the practice is the attendance of stakeholders from ministries and the state school administration (16%) and experts from capacity building institutions (15%) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; both at different levels involved in policy making. 10. Efficiency It can be acknowledged that the practice produces measurable results within a reasonable consumption of human and financial resources. The two state institutes LISUM and NLQ dispose of the necessary skills to organise these events in a cost-effective way. 11. Relevance 93% of the participants considered the conference to be a very good or good opportunity to exchange ideas and extend their personal networks.

Page 40 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The presence of the Minister of Education of Berlin at the conference indicates that the importance of the issues presented and discussed in keynotes and workshops is recognized by policy makers. 12. Sustainability Sustainability depends on the motivation of the key persons involved in the two departments for school leadership qualification, the support from the top of the institutes and the goodwill of the ministries of education. 75% of the participants in 2014 were perfectly satisfied with the event and declared their intention to join a follow-up conference. This very positive feedback encourages NLQ and LISUM to continue the project. The 2015 event is scheduled for September 21-22. For the future the two partners have agreed to invite other federal states to join the organisation. 13. Synergies Synergies arise in two main areas: between the two state institutes and among participants. 14. Transferability In principle there is great potential to transfer the described concept to other educational contexts, countries or regions, however it is a challenge to reach a critical mass of participants/networkers and secure the necessary personnel and organizational resources. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications The Berlin Conferences on School Leadership 2013 and 2014 have attracted participants from most German federal states. The focus on the policy areas school autonomy, accountability, distributed leadership, policy response and capacity building reflects the importance that these areas have both in EPNoSL activities as well as in education policies of the 16 German states. The responsibility of policy makers and school leaders for equity and learning and the need to move on from a segregate to an inclusive education system is seen as a fact by nearly all social groups involved.

Page 41 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Greece – The establishment of the "Committees for Educational Diagnostic Assessment and Support" (CEDAS) Maria Gelastopoulou, Vassilis Kourmpetis, Anna Spanaki and Andreas Kollias

1. Context of application The proposed practice is the establishment, at national level, of the Committees for Educational Diagnostic Assessment and Support by law which came into force in January 2013. This is an innovative institution aiming to support the educational process and assessment of pupils’ needs in mainstream schools which operate integration classes for pupils with special educational needs or disabilities. These Committees are operated by special schools. In particular, each special school through its Committee functions as a support center to a cluster of mainstream schools in the area. The needs that led to the institutionalization of Committees for Educational Diagnostic Evaluation and Support included:   

Pupils’ access to an inclusive, quality and free education assessment of their special needs or disabilities. Removal of barriers and restrictions imposed so far by mainstream schools to pupils with special education needs or disabilities. The provision of effective individualized support to pupils with special educational needs or disabilities in mainstream schools with the aim to maximize their academic and social development potentials, consistent with the goal of full inclusion and in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice This practice encourages the emergence of new forms of school leadership both in mainstream and special schools. This is because it widens school autonomy as pupils’ assessments regarding special education needs or disabilities have now to be taken predominantly by these decentralized Committees with the direct involvement of schools. These local Committees undertake some responsibilities from the more centralized pupils’ assessment bodies (operating at the level of Prefecture in most cases) that so far were the only bodies responsible for the assessment of pupils with special needs or disabilities. Furthermore, this practice promotes distributed forms of school leadership both between and within schools in terms of roles and responsibilities regarding the assessment of pupils with special education needs or disabilities. This practice also introduces new forms of school policy planning and accountability on how different actors at school and local level deal with the needs of pupils with special needs or disabilities. Another positive measure introduced by this practice is the professional development of school leaders and other members of the Committees. Page 42 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

3. Goals of the Good Practice From the perspective of mainstream schools and their teachers, the goal of the Committees is their interdisciplinary empowerment with the provision of complementary special education services and practical support. The overall school policy aim is to ensure that mainstream schools provide inclusive education for all pupils. The objectives are the following:     

To create new forms of distributed leadership in school education specifically targeting to promote inclusive education for all pupils. To enhance the autonomy of schools in dealing more inclusively with the needs of all pupils. To provide differentiated accessible learning materials for all pupils. To ensure interdisciplinary approaches to learning and teaching in mainstream schools that are suitable for pupils with disabilities and special education needs. To promote the professional development of school leaders on issues of inclusiveness.

4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice While the initiator is the Ministry of Education, the proposed practice involves special education teachers, psychologists and social workers. Each Committee consists of:   

The Principal of the Special School in each area, who acts as the Coordinator of the Committee. The special education teacher of each mainstream school in the area which maintains integration classes for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. The psychologist and the social worker of the area’s School Networks for Education and Support.

When necessary extra specialists can become members of these Committees (for example, specialists from the municipal social services). 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries From this practice the main beneficiaries are pupils with special educational needs or disabilities enrolled in mainstream schools, their parents, teachers in integration classes in mainstream schools who get support in their work and in general the mainstream school communities. 6. Summary of Good Practice The recommended practice concerns the newly established Committees for Educational Diagnostic Assessment and Support with the aim to serve the educational needs of pupils with disabilities and special education needs in mainstream schools. The responsibilities of the Committees are to: a) Diagnose the special educational needs the clusters of mainstream schools in an area they are responsible for. b) Develop programs of differentiated instruction for pupils with documented special learning needs, disabilities or behavioral issues in collaboration with their class teacher.

Page 43 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) c) Conduct collaborative interdisciplinary interventions that address the difficulties that special needs students face in mainstream classrooms making use of the resources available at school, at home and in the community. If there is clear evidence of mental health problems, child abuse or parental neglect the Committee cooperates with medical or psychological public services in the area, with social services and the competent judicial authorities. d) Establish forms of early intervention programmes for pre-school children, in collaboration with pediatric services and organize special training programs for parents with pre-school children in cooperation with the competent municipal services. e) Monitor the implementation of the Individual Interdisciplinary Program and Differential Support. f) Coordinate and monitor the actions offering social support to the pupils in need and their family and work with the municipal social services and other relevant bodies. g) Design and implement joint activities for pupils with special education needs or disabilities who attend to Special Education Schools and pupils who attend to mainstream schools.

7. Why is it a Good Practice? The proposed practice is recommended because it: •

is innovative with many prospects for improving the quality of education.

•

is sustainable.

•

contributes to the improvement of mainstream schools.

•

promotes gender-equal learning and teaching process.

•

promotes social justice.

•

promotes interdisciplinary approaches to teaching and learning.

•

narrows the gap between special and mainstream schools.

•

implements new forms of school leadership that ensures: i. Distributed forms of school leadership. ii. School accountability on issues of equity. iii. Autonomy and decentralization in relation to the design and implementation of interventions aiming to support the inclusion of pupils with special needs or disabilities in mainstream schools, early diagnoses of learning or other issues etc. iv. Training of school leaders and all other stakeholders on issues of inclusion.

8. Type of good practice This practice can be characterised as promising policy practice. According to an external evaluation, implemented by the Ministry of Education with the use of evaluators, this practice is characterized as effective, supportive for all the parties involved and as supportive to school leadership.

Page 44 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The evaluation of the practice was based on the analysis of questionnaires completed by school administrators and school staff in mainstream schools which operate special education classes.

Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended 9. Effectiveness The general assessment on the effectiveness of Committees for Educational Diagnostic Assessment and Support is that they adequately respond to their role to support pupils with disabilities and / or special educational needs. A high share of the Regional Directors of Education in Greece and the heads of the Education Directorates who participated in the evaluation research reported that the Committees had "great" efficiency (50% and 41.8% respectively). From the perspective of those directly involved, namely (a) the teachers of the Special Education Schools participating in the Committees and the (b) school leaders of these schools that functioned as moderators of the School Networks for Education and Support, described the effectiveness of the Committees as "great" or "moderate" (33.8% and 39.8% respectively). 10. Efficiency The proposed practice has shown that it can be cost effective, either in financial or in human resources because it facilitates their better distribution and use in mainstream schools where there are more pupils needing support. The human recourses involved in the Committees are already employed in special education schools or other agencies and therefore no extra funding is needed for their operation. 11. Relevance Pupils with disabilities and/or special education needs with the work of these Committees can be more empowered to study in mainstream primary and secondary education schools on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live and receive specialized support to develop to the best of their potential, interests and needs. 12. Sustainability The recommended practice is sustainable because it has been established by law and is based on new concepts and practices laid down by the International Covenants on Human Rights and on Education. 13. Synergies The work of the Committees is characterized by their collaborative and interdisciplinary character. To fulfill their aim Committees need to develop strong synergies between mainstream and special education schools in the area, involving school teachers, school principals, parents and other public bodies when necessary. 14. Transferability The work of the Committees could be extended to include all mainstream schools regardless of whether they have integration classes or not because there is not a single school that does not have pupils with special psychosocial needs (expressed or potential).

Page 45 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Currently, the Ministry of Education focuses on issues regarding the composition and size of these Committees in relation to the characteristics of the student population of each school cluster supported by a Committee. These issues are studied in order to maximize their potential to support pupils in mainstream schools. This practice has limitations that will be hopefully addressed in the future so as to establish the best possible system of provisions for the inclusion of pupils with special education needs or disabilities in mainstream schools. Despite the fact that so far the proposed practice makes effective use of the resources available without making demands for extra funding from the public government budget, it will certainly require more resources (both financial, and human) to ensure its global application, i.e. to all mainstream schools in Greece. In any case, this practice appears to be cost and time efficient. Overall, however, more studies are needed in the future in order to establish both the positive and the negative aspects of the work of the Committees in all their dimensions.

Page 46 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Latvia – Initiative “CHANGE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SCHOOLS” (Developing Schools in the Multifunctional Community Centers) Aija Tuna, Guntra Kaufmane 1. Context of application Provide contextual information regarding the good practice. e.g. Regional/National context where the good practice is evidenced Other context-specific info (historic, social, cultural or economic issues that frame good practice). The initiative started in 2009 during the economic crises in Latvia when government spending on education decreased considerably and local rural schools with decreasing number of students were under the serious threat of being close thus violating rights to access to education and participation. School leaders mostly in rural areas where encouraged to look for new solutions to lead and manage education institutions opening them for wider community and using them as community resource centers. This challenge demanded fresh, innovative and creative approaches as well as new competences to manage change. Cooperation and building new type of partnership with other stakeholders, such as parents/families, local governments, local NGOs, businesses etc. seemed to be o special importance. The initiative was implemented in two phases (two tranches of funding): „Development of small schools into community learning and culture centres” (2009 – 2011) and second „Schools as Community Development Resources” (2012 – 2013). More than 70 schools from 48 municipalities of Latvia (out of 112) took active part in the initiative. The network of schools continues to exchange information and experience after the end of funding with the coordination by the Education Development Center (EDC), Latvia. The aim has been to promote using small schools as educational, culture and social support centres and encouraging municipalities and local communities to see in the small schools intellectual and physical resource in the context of regional development which can provide a range of services relevant to the needs of local communities and promote the development of entrepreneurship. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice Initiative “Change Opportunities for Schools” has been implemented based on the holistic approach to problem solving and education and include activities which relate to several policy areas: Autonomy: Schools were in a position to decide, plan and implement different activities in addition to formal education and curricula both for students and adult audiences (teachers, parents, other community members. Main directions of activities include: 1) Maintaining and expanding “typical” functions of schools (ensuring implementation of the formal education programs); 2) Promoting lifelong learning, active citizenship and building skills for civic participation; 3) Promoting and implementing holistic, high quality support to young children and their families, and 4) Promoting entrepreneurship and increasing employability through adult education programs, vocational trainings, and motivation programs. Distributed Leadership: School leadership teams and staff developed and applied initiative, enthusiasm and commitment in order to reach their goals. They developed management, cooperation and communication skills acting within the school and in relation with wider community.

Page 47 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) New leaders grew out of the pool of teachers and new skills were developed that also influenced the quality of the direct responsibilities of the teachers. Other policies: Promoting balanced regional development, providing access to early childhood development services, increasing potential for employability and entrepreneurship; Diversifying employment opportunities by raising entrepreneurial skills and building culture of inclusion and social cohesion in the communities etc. 3. Main goals of the practice The goals of the Initiative were: - to promote school-based community development models at the regional and national level and support changes at the policy level to assure scaling up and sustainability of the initiative. - to promote revival of small schools in economically and socially depressed, rural areas, small towns and urban peripheries and to develop such schools into multifunctional community resource centres; - to support development of sustainable partnerships among schools, local communities and broader civil society. The main tasks were: - improving access to formal and informal education for all generations including expanding and improving early childhood provisions, - promoting civic participation and grassroots engagement in diverse activities, - diversifying employment opportunities by raising entrepreneurial skills and building culture of inclusion and social cohesion in the communities. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice The project was initiated and coordinated by the NGO Soros Foundation Latvia (SFL) with the funding from the Soros Emergency Fund of the Open Society Foundations to support educational and social needs of the Latvian schools in remote rural areas with decreasing number of students and local community members. Initiative was lead by the Director/main expert and Core team of the experts. During the first phase „Development of small schools into community learning and culture centres” (2009 – 2011) 53 schools and local communities participated and in the second stage „Schools as Community Development Resources” (2012 – 2013) 41 schools and local communities were involved. There was very significant role of the local municipalities/local educational authorities as they were principal partners of schools in the process of change. Schools were encouraged to develop more meaningful cooperation with local grassroots NGOs which also turned out to be a success. As the new types of activities were initiated by the schools all groups of local people were involved in different degrees. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Holistic approach to education and development was used where activities are closely linked and support each other towards greater social cohesion, economic activity/employability, cultural diversity and sensitivity, environmental awareness, wellbeing of individuals and communities. Thus this is difficult to single one main target group.

Page 48 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Meanwhile children and students can be considered as a main target group to assure their rights to access to quality education closer to family. Teachers and school administrators were important audience as they received long-term training and support to implement changes in the way school operates. Family members and diverse representatives of local communities (including senior citizens, people with special needs etc.) are both target audience and beneficiaries of the initiative and also have become more connected with schools ready to provide contribution of their knowledge, skills and experiences. As the process and results of the initiative was extensively communicated to the related ministries and other institutions in the country, we can consider that policy makers at all levels were are target audience for dissemination of gained experience to take it into considerations for following policy decisions. In the autumn of 2014 professional development courses commissioned by the Ministry of Education of Latvia for school administration include one day module on the development of school as community resource, based on the experience of the described initiative. 6. Contact information/on-line information Website: www.parmainuskolas.lv (section in English with limited content also available) Aija Tūna, coordinator of the initiative „Change opportunities for schools”, Education Development Center, Latvia: aija.tuna@latnet.lv, +371-29416341 Documentary “The Second Bell for http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIaD_JCANk

Change”

English

available

There are also two impact evaluations, collections of the best practices etc. available at the website (mostly in English). Some papers have been published including: Tuna, Aija (2014). Development of the School as Multifunctional Community Resource in Latvia: Opportunities and challenges. // Sabiedrība, integrācija, izglītība. Starptautiskās zinātniskās konferences materiāli 2014. gada 23. – 24. maijs. 1. daļa. Rēzekne: Rēzeknes augstskola. ISSN 16915887, p. 496 – 504. Tūna A. (2014) Kad skola ir vairāk nekā skola: kopienas skolas modeļa attīstība un perspektīvas Latvijā” (When a school is more than a school: development and perspectives of the community school model in Latvia)// Latvijas intereses Eiropas Savienībā (Interests of Latvia in the European Union), 2014/1, Rīga, ISSN 2243-6049, p. 34. – 46. Tūna, A., Rubene, Z. (2013). Strengthening Schools as Community Development Resources: The Case of Latvia. // Bochno E. (Editor). School in Community – Community in School. International Forum for Education. No. 1 (5). 157. – 172. lpp. Tūna A. (2011) Pašu skola pašu valdībā. Iespējamie darbības virzieni skolas ilgtspējīgai attīstībai pašvaldībā. (Own school in own municipality. Possible directions of actions for sustainable development of the school in the municipality) 40 lpp. UNESCO LNK, Sorosa fonds – Latvija, Rīga ISBN 978-9934-8119-3-7 Page 49 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) etc. 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice Following ways were chosen to implement the initiative: - to provide funding for schools/communities committed to re-profiling into multifunctional learning community centers - to build capacity of local change agents: providing/offering know-how to support the re-profiling of schools It means that activities took place both at the local level (in each involved school and community) and at the national level as professional development events, exchange of experience, mentoring and supporting, collecting and dissemination of the information. Activities at both levels were exclusively built of the need of the people/entities involved. The fact that even the activities, included in the grant proposals for funding going to schools/communities could be adjusted if the local situation changed turned out to be powerful way to increase involvement, responsibility and informed decision-making of all involved, especially school representatives involved in project management. The experience gained by the schools has affirmed that community school is not a universal, one fits all, but open and flexible tailor-made model of small rural schools which is changeable depending on the inner resources of the particular school, local context, municipality infrastructure, needs and interests of the community. The schools have become a valuable resource in local communities in various aspects, both in the viewpoint of schools themselves and the communities. Schools see not only their contribution to building and improvement of local people competencies, but are also aware of their possibilities to get involved in identification and solution of wider problems within local communities. Looking at a school as a local community resource local governments consider that as a result of activities implemented by schools, participation of local people in various processes and their self-confidence has increased, more positive mood dominates in the community and social relationships between local people are improving. To expand its functions the school must build cooperation and partnership with other players or agents â&#x20AC;&#x201C; houses of culture, community centres, libraries, local NGOs, the parish administration and district municipality, entrepreneurs, local farmers etc. The cooperation is a precondition for combining local resources to address common challenges and improve the quality of life. The model shows that a school is best placed to assume the coordinating role for these inter-institutional networks while any other of the participants in this network can become the coordinator as well â&#x20AC;&#x201C; it can be either parish administration, library or community house. The most decisive point is ability (willingness) to understanding the goals of a community school and reaching agreement on the most efficient way to reach these goals. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice i. Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence: The Foundation Baltic Institute of Social Sciences was contracted to carry out the evaluation of the SFL initiative. Within the evaluation of the 1st stage the project experience was summarized

Page 50 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) analysing the activities implemented by schools, target groups involved, building cooperation with various local agents (municipalities, NGOs, entrepreneurs, etc.), and the impact of projects on the capacity of local communities in-depth. Also sustainability assessment of schools projects was done in four dimensions – social, financial, political and institutional sustainability.5 The ultimate target of the second stage assessment was to carry out the analyses of activities and sustainability of a community school as a small school model in the context of local communities’ capacity building, to investigate implementation mechanisms of community school models and factors influencing the sustainability of their activities, to evaluate the impact of multi-functional schools on the implementation of formal education and the vitality of the community. At the moment doctoral theses are in the process of development, based on the results of the initiative. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended Initiative promoted changes in attitudes, thinking and action of school leaders and their teams as well as improved the relationship among schools and communities thus developing bases for competence based learning and active civic involvement. Initiative demonstrated how schools can provide access to quality education for pupils, school staff and other community members consolidating their resources (financial, human, etc.) and cooperating with other stakeholders. Initiative allowed to develop models that have been taken further by several local governments who provided co-funding thus showing that education is a priority in the society even during crisis and continue to fund activities after the formal end of the initiative; Activities of the initiative were based on holistic approach to education and development. Significant attention was devoted to building synergies among different parts of interactions, e.g., by providing access to formal and informal learning opportunities for children in the local schools. Families were supported in multiple ways, such as offering education opportunities, social support, and consultations for jobseekers, etc. 9. Effectiveness In 2010/2011 and in 2013 Baltic Institute of Social Sciences – BIIS carried out a research on effectiveness and sustainability of the initiative “Change Opportunities for Schools”. The aim of this research was to collect and evaluate project implementation experience; sustainability of project results as well as the effectiveness of the approach to develop country schools into multifunctional local community centres. It is important to mention that only one from involved schools has been closed since 2009, all the rest admit that their position in the community and relationship with municipality have improved as they see the role and potential of the school better. Range of adult informal education activities and number of participants has increased. Also cooperation among school and local grassroots NGOs has

The full text of the impact evaluation report of the 1st stage of the SFL initiative „Change Opportunieties for Schools” can be found: http://www.sfl.lv/upload_file/2011%20gads/Parmainu_skolas_ietekmes_novertejums.pdf (Last seen on 19/11/2013).

Page 51 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) improved in many cases and bring about tangible results: fundraising, organizing community activities etc. As qualitative data shows not only community members but also involved teachers see benefits from extended activities as they learn new teaching methods that can be used also in the formal education, they improve relationship with students and their family members, they become more involved in the life of the community and start using it as a recourse for students learning. With regard to changes in motivation to study school representatives have noticed positive changes based on greater understanding between students and teachers. Involvement in organizing various activities allows teachers to develop and express their creativity when working with schoolchildren. Participation in project activities has given teachers possibilities to acquire new teaching methods which can be successfully implemented in formal education process as well. Furthermore, some teachers say that now they perform their work duties with confidence that learning can be different â&#x20AC;&#x201C; not only in classrooms or during lessons. The experience and results of the initiative have been used in the policy development processes at the local and national level as the idea about development schools as community resource centers has been included in the national strategic documents and need for special support to rural school has become active topic of policy discussion. 10. Efficiency In the process of implementation and also in the evaluation it was discovered that limited additional financial sources are needed to open schools for communities and to involve students in more diverse forms of informal and non-formal learning. Developing synergies among diverse stakeholders including funders at the local level as well as using resources (physical and intellectual) of the school more effectively all members of the local community benefit and more can be achieved. 11. Relevance Needs-based activities was the strong focus of the initiative emphasizing that each school has to develop its own model taking into account existing context, availability or lack of specific resources etc. The evaluation showed that the schools involved in the initiative started acting as life-long learning centres covering a wide range of target groups from pre-school children to seniors which is very important taking into consideration the access to educational services in rural areas. Several schools are developing the functions of social help or support but it cannot be considered a typical small school function yet. The most important arguments supporting the school as a multi-functional model are, first, the fact that it has been confirmed in practice in a lot of places that schools have become the local community life centres; secondly, schools have the necessary human resources and the material and technical base to implement other functions as well, not only formal education; thirdly, this kind of a school model is the base for local community development. In the opinion of the schools involved in the initiative, they will consolidate their new model as it is determined by the community demand, the access to necessary resources and conceptual support from the local government, entrepreneurs and NGOs. 12. Sustainability

Page 52 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The proposed practice has very strong potential for sustainability as it does not demand much additional funding. Emphases are put on building synergies and partnerships and reorganization of the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s practice. On another hand, widening partnerships with NGOs and engaging in multisectoral activities schools can attract more diverse sources of funding and even more extend their contribution to quality learning for students and development of the local community. Meanwhile there is a need to incorporate results of the initiative in the policy at the national level what requires better coordination among several ministries (education, culture, regional development, social welfare etc.) and agencies. Schools and teachers need more authority and autonomy for planning and implementing diverse activities in the school and beyond. 13. Synergies Building synergies was very essential part of the initiative to promote shared responsibility, exchange of information etc. Several partnerships have been extended that will contribute to the sustainability of the achieved results, especially with the Education Development Center (where the coordination is situated now), Latvian Rural Forum, Latvian Rural parliament etc. Successful cooperation has been developed with the Ministry of Regional Development as they are very interested in the extending of the role of the school in the community. Ministry of Education has been using examples developed within the initiative in searching for more efficient ways of school administration in the situation of the declining number of students. 14. Transferability Experience gained during the initiative already has been disseminated throughout Latvia. After studying examples of community schools in other countries it is clear that extending functions and cooperation networks is useful solution not only for the small or rural schools as openness of the school and partnership with the local community and wider society contributes are important for the quality of learning and applying gained knowledge, skills and attitudes in the real life situations. To transfer the experience of the initiative main principles should be taken into account: needsbased holistic approach and building partnership with the vision of quality education and active citizenship at the core. Lessons learned from this initiative can be applied in any school (urban, rural, large or small number of students etc.); however in any case the context and specific needs should be taken into account and activities should respond and promote development, learning and cooperation in the LLL framework. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications The many facets of evaluation of the initiative and school projects suggests that the community school has asserted itself in practice as a social and educational innovation with high potential, although, in Latvia for the time being, with insufficient political and financial support, which largely determines the sustainability risks of the model. The groups of schools involved in the initiative can be absolutely considered as one of small schoolsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; policy pilot projects which can be used for further development of the policy at the national level. Experience, gained in Latvia, contributes to the collective knowledge about development schools into multifunctional community centres (know in different countries as expanded schools, community schools, full service schools etc.). Case of Latvia has revealed four main areas of activities: 1. Page 53 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Maintaining and expanding “ typical” functions of schools; 2. Providing adult education activities and increasing potential for employability; 3. Providing specific services for young children and their families in the school premises or in coordination with the school; 4. Acting as a community meeting point for promoting and facilitating civic engagement. Methodology which can be applied in other countries include 1) Providing funding for local activities/subprojects in the schools/communities committed to re-profiling into multifunctional learning community centers; 2) Building capacity of local change agents: ongoing support, mentoring, offering know-how, promoting exchange of experiences etc. through seminars, conferences, exchange visits etc. as it is not enough “ to train” teachers and local people; it is crucial to provide place, time and opportunities and encourage people to reflect, provide feedback, share, internalize, develop sense of ownership to new ideas and activities.

Page 54 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Lithuania – NordPlus Horizontal programme project “Development of School Management in the Baltic Region“ (2008-2010) Danguole Salavejiene 1. Context of application In 2008 work group of the Institute of Professional Competence at Vilnius Pedagogical University (VPU) (recently Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU)) conducted in-service training needs’ research which results have shown that the requirements for school heads are very high and school heads, deputy heads feel lack of competence in some specific areas of school management and leadership such as strategic planning of school activity, development of motivation systems, capacity to manage organizational change, development of cooperation links with social partners, searching for and management of human, material and financial resources, evaluation of school activity results, team building and team work, realization of democratic values and etc. The Institute of Professional Competence at Vilnius Pedagogical University (VPU) (recent Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU)) team has started to look for possibilities how to contribute to this issue solution in Lithuanian educational sector. One of the possibilities was to work together with partners from Latvia and Estonia in the framework of NordPLus programme. Team of specialists from Vilnius Pedagogical University (VPU) (recent Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU)) (Lithuania), Tartu University (Estonia) and Daugavpils local administration (Latvia) has created cooperation project “Development of School Management in the Baltic Region” and submitted for funding to the NordPlus programme. Later the project has been submitted to Lithuanian Government for cofunding. The project activities aimed to increase cooperation between different stakeholders (schools, universities, local administrations, Ministries) in the Baltic region (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) and to raise awareness on the common key issues and possible solutions in the field of school management and leadership, develop common in-service training programme and learning materials, conduct in-service trainings for schools’ heads and deputy heads. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice Good practice example was related to the School Leadership (SL) policy area “Educating School Leaders”. The project activities consisted of a common Baltic research, Baltic workshops, Baltic inservice training programme and learning materials development, shared good practice examples in SL in the Baltic region, national trainings. The main work topics were: “Strategic Planning of School Activity”, “Development of School Cooperation with Social Partners”, “Team Building and Team Work”, “Management of Human, Material and Financial Resources”, “Development of Motivation System”, “Realization of Democratic Values at School”, “Capacity to Manage Organizational Change”, “Evaluation of School Activity” and other. 3. Main goals of the practice The main project goal was to unite and cooperate the Baltic stakeholders’ knowledge, skills, experience in school management and leadership for higher learning quality in schools and more possibilities for children and youth. Other goals were: - to encourage cooperation and mutual understanding between different actors in national educational systems (Ministry, local government, school, university); Page 55 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) - to encourage mobility and cooperation, establish a collaborative network in the Baltic region; - to take more attention to the problematical areas of school management and leadership and schools of national minorities; - to contribute to the Baltic educational leaders’ and managers’ professional development. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice The project was initiated and coordinated by the team from the Institute of Professional Competence at Vilnius Pedagogical University (VPU) (recently Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU)). Head of the project was Dr. Algimantas Sventickas, coordinator Danguole Bylaite- Salavejiene. The final project version was developed and the project was implemented in cooperation and partnership with Dr. Hasso Kukemelk, Tartu University, head of Estonian group, Olga Duksinska, head of Latvian group, Tamara Fadejeva, coordinator of Latvian group, from Daugavpils city administration, Latvia. In different project activities there have been involved 200 participants in Estonia, 162 participants in Latvia, 423 participants in Lithuania. Total number of the participants was 785. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Direct target group: school administrators (school head, deputy head, head of sector/teachers’ group) Indirect target group: school students, school community. 6. Contact information/on-line information Contact people: Danguole Bylaite- Salavejiene, Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences, Lithuania; Dr. Hasso Kukemelk, Tartu University, Estonia; Tamara Fadejeva, Daugavpils city administration, Latvia. Publications: Newspapers: Zana Chaikina. Govorim – direktor, porozumevaem-menedzer (in Russian)//Seichas (local newspaper in Daugavpils, Latvia), 17-06-2010 Danguole Bylaite- Salavejiene. Mokyklu vadovu kvalifikacijos tobulinimas(is)-geresnei ugdymo(si) kokybei (in Lithuanian)//Mokslo Lietuva (Science in Lithuania) Danguole Bylaite- Salavejiene. Mokyklos kaita pokyciu visuomenėje.//Sviesa, June 2, 2010, p.12. Look at: http://mokslasplius.lt/mokslo-lietuva/2006-2011/node/2860.html Articles in informational and news portals: www.d-fakti.lv, articles 03-12-2009; 05-05-2010; 29-06-2010 (in English and Latvian) www.gorod.lv, article 30-11-2010 (in English and Latvian) www.daugavpils.lv, article 27-11-2009 (in English and Russian) www.daugip.lv, 2008-2010 articles and announcements about the project events (in Latvian) www.ipd.lv, 2008-2010 all information about project

Page 56 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) http://www.lyderiulaikas.smm.lt, 2008-2010 project presentation and announcements (in Lithuanian) http://projects.5ci.lt/socpedagogika, 2008-2010 project presentation (in Lithuanian) http://www.pkti.vpu.lt, 2008-2010 project presentation, announcements, articles, pictures (in Lithuanian and English); http://www.vpu.lt; 2008-2010 project presentation, announcements, articles (in Lithuanian and English) http://www.ht.ut.ee/784743, 2008-2010 all info about the project events (in Estonian) http://mokslasplius.lt/mokslo-lietuva/node/2860, 17-06-2010 (in Lithuanian) http://www.slideshare.net/smpf/2008-m-bendrosios-nordplus-programos-lietuvos-institucijkoordinuojam-projekt-svadas-1779548 (in Lithuanian) Radio programmes: Radio “Alise+” programme 01.04.2010-25.06.2010 (Latvia) Radio “Ziniu radijas”, show “Raktas”, 25-09-2008 (Lithuania) Radio „Kuku”, announcements in the news programmes, 05-10-2009; 09-10-2009, Estonia. TV programmes: Daugavpils local TV (Latvia). News programme. Interviews about the project activities. June 2010 Books: “Skolas menedzmenta attistiba Baltijas regiona”.-Daugavpils, 2010 (in Latvian and English) Koolijuhtimise Hea Kogemus Eestis, Latis ja Leedus (NordPlus Horizontal).-Tartu, 2010 (in Estonian) NordPlus Horizontal programos projektas “Mokyklų vadybos tobulinimas Baltijos regione”.-Vilnius, 2010 (in Lithuanian and English). Postcards: Project postcards (in Lithuanian), 2009 Project booklets: Booklets in Latvian, 2010 Booklets in Lithuanian, 2010 Booklets in Estonian, 2010 Calendars: Project calendar in Lithuanian, 2010-2011 Moodle systems: http://school.management.vpu.lt http://www.ipd.lv/moodle/ https://moodle.ut.ee/course/category.php?id=45 Page 57 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The project „Development of School Management in the Baltic Region“ (2008-2010) has successfully met its overall objectives. The implementers have successfully established a collaborative network of the Baltic Region (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) researchers (Vilnius Pedagogical University (VPU) (recent Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU), Daugavpils University and Education Department of Daugavpils City, Latvia, Tartu University, Estonia) and practitioners in the field of school management (school heads of Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian educational establishments: kindergarten-schools, primary schools, secondary schools, gymnasiums, lifelong learning and education departments, specialists from Lithuanian, Estonian, Latvian Ministries of Education and Local Government). Three regional workshops were held: 1) in Vilnius, February 2009, took part 38 specialists; 2) in Tartu, October 2009, took part 24 specialists; 3) and in Daugavpils, December 2009, took part 25 specialists. The workshops had the aim to discover common key issues in the field of school management in the Baltic region; exchange experience of good practice by means of presentations, group discussions, school visits; to work in groups on the issue of common Baltic research in the field of school management and in-service training programmes and learning materials development. After face to face meetings the Baltic project team members continued communication via e-mail and telephone; local group members in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia continued to have regular face to face meetings at partner institutions and schools. Additionally 2 meetings of the project team members were held in 2010. During the project period three regional project workshops were conducted in Vilnius, Daugavpils, Tartu, and 2 meetings in Vilnius, in which 115 specialists took part in total. Two national project results presentations were organized in Vilnius and Daugavpils, in which 61 specialists took part in total. During the NordPlus Horizontal programme project „Development of School Management in the Baltic Region“ (2008-2010) examples of good school management practice in Vilnius (of 12 educational establishments), in Tartu (of 12 educational establishments) and in Daugavpils (of 12 educational establishments) were presented by means of visiting, presentations, articles and discussed at the project meetings, published in books, e-books, put in a „Moodle“ (virtual learning environment) system. The Baltic project specialists’ team has created an innovative in-service training programme and learning materials for school heads and deputy heads, which include such topics as Strategic Planning of School Activity, Development of School Cooperation with Social Partners, Team Building and Team work, Management of Human, Material and Financial Resources and Development of Motivation System, Implementation of Democratic Values at School, Capacity to Manage Organizational Change, Evaluation of School Activity, Development of Manager Personal Characteristics, Research Implementation at School. Learning materials: 3 books, 2 e-books, „moodle“ (Virtual Learning Environment) systems http://school.management.vpu.lt; http://www.ipd.lv/moodle/ https://moodle.ut.ee/course/category.php?id=45 (in 4 languages: Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian,English, in 3 countries: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania). Pilot trainings for school heads and deputy heads were held in Vilnius and Tartu in 2010, where took part 204 specialists in total, 96 training hours in total. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice

Page 58 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) i.

Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence.

The project activities and results have been evaluated by the project Baltic team, project participants, as well as outside independent experts, invited by the NordPlus Horizontal programme. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended The project is recommended because it concentrates attention and common efforts toward common goals in the field of school management and school leadership, creates greater integration, awareness, mutual understanding and cooperation between different stakeholders in the region. It reduces “positions” and creates communication as equal specialists having different expertise. The project activities helped to develop regional dimension. The project partners’ involvement was equal without one partner domination. Rotation principle was implemented in the project management and the activities implementation. The project philosophy included the aspects of respect for national contexts and cultures. 9. Effectiveness Regional workshop in Vilnius, Lithuania, (February, 2009) has been evaluated by the participants as the event which has met participants’ expectations, was very well organized considering the workshop purpose, content, work forms, possibility to learn practical and applicable knowledge. The most actual discussions as showed the participants’ evaluations there were on the issues of modern school management and head competences, as well as qualifications needed for modern school manager. The workshop participants have mentioned that it was interesting and useful to learn about the educational reforms and educational policy tendencies in other Baltic states. The participants liked to work in the Baltic mixed work groups. They evaluated that such a work was effective and promising high results. During the workshop the participants raised questions on the national minorities and immigrants’ integration, schools’ autonomy, financial and material base issues. Regional workshop in Tartu, Estonia, (October, 2009) has been very high evaluated by the participants considering fulfilled expectations, organization, content, work forms and practical knowledge. The most interesting and actual topics were: presentations and discussions on the issue of in-service training programme and the Baltic research issues, good practice case presentations and schools’ visits. Participants liked the possibility to learn more about the changes in Estonian educational system. Regional workshop in Daugavpils, Latvia, (December, 2009) has been very well evaluated by the participants considering fulfilled expectations, organization, content, work forms and practical knowledge. The most interesting and actual topics were: shared and discussed good practice examples in the Baltic states, aspects of creative and successful school management. Participants liked visiting schools in Latvia. After the Baltic research public presentations to a wider audience in Vilnius, Lithuania, and Daugavpils, Latvia, (June, 2010) the participants have mentioned that it was important for them to know the research results and learn more about the differences and common tendencies in school management and leadership in the Baltic region, to learn more about the strengths and common challenges, possible solutions and developments. The participants of the events have mentioned the

Page 59 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) importance to share good school management practice and experience, to increase cooperation and partnerships for professional development and school improvement. Pilot trainings (March, 2010) have been very well evaluated by the participants. Working on the issue of educational change the participants liked to acknowledge why there is a need for a change, to understand the role and activities of school head in a change process, to learn about possible reactions to a change, as well as how to manage it, how to activate and involve school community members (students, teachers, parents). The participants evaluating training on the school head competencies especially liked playful atmosphere and active involvement, ideas and developments of “a school friendly for a change”. Discussing trainings on the issue of democratic values realization in educational establishments the participants highly valued shared good practice examples. After the training on the issue of strategic planning, the participants highly evaluated the possibility to practice in strategic thinking and planning, to acknowledge the importance to rethink, evaluate and make changes in a strategic plan and a year work plan, as well as to learn more about the procedures and methods, how to involve school community in a strategic planning process, how to decide on the institutional priorities. The participants liked shared good practice examples. Evaluating the training on the issue of team building, participants highly evaluated practical work in groups. At the training on the issue of human, financial, material resources management, the participants have raised questions how to decrease red-tape in schools which is not directly connected with educational process but takes time and efforts. Especially actual topic for school heads and deputy heads was human resource management. At the training on the issue of motivation systems’ development, the participants have mentioned team work as a very perspective and motivating method, rethought existing motivation systems and developed ideas for creation the new motivation systems in educational establishments. The research in Latvia (Olga Duksinska, 2010), in Lithuania (Algimantas Sventickas, 2010) and in Estonia (Hasso Kukemelk, Tiia Lillemaa, 2010) results have shown a common tendency in increasing school heads’ understanding of the importance of school head in discovering didactic and educational potential of each teacher, creating staff unity and involvement into collective work for school improvement and students’ higher performance and wellbeing. Discussing the project impact on the partner institutions, Lithuanian team has mentioned that common activities helped to develop links between educational institutions in Lithuania and other Baltic states, had a very positive impact to the professional competence development and personal growth. Another important aspect was mentioned that the Institute had sufficient financial resources to produce products (develop the new in-service training programme, publish books, develop moodle system materials and etc.) and implement activities (workshops, meetings, trainings). The Institute had an opportunity to propose higher quality in-service training events for school heads and deputy heads. Latvian project team has mentioned that the project provided an opportunity to look deeper and broader at school management issues and challenges; to find similarities as well as differences within Estonian, Lithuanian, Latvian school systems; project partners have met together in order to make a new, modern, different look at the management quality. Daugavpils school managers and their deputies had a possibility to express their own points of view, to share experiences, to ask and to answer questions during workshops and trainings. Daugavpils city Education Department and school heads valued this opportunity and experience highly. Estonian partners have mentioned that there was a positive impact: the project has changed principals' in-

Page 60 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) service training course, research results were used in lecturing to courses in teacher and principals' education, increased understanding the developments in neighboring countries’ educational systems, created many new good contacts. The final project evaluation consisted of 2 parts: self evaluation and outside experts’ evaluation. After the submitted self evaluation report the NordPlus Horizontal programme experts came to Vilnius, Educational Exchange Support Foundation, and had discussions with the project coordinators. The NordPlus programme project “Development of School Management in the Baltic region” has received high evaluations both during self evaluation process and outside evaluation process. The project team has received recommendations from the outside experts to continue work on the issue of School Leadership and School Management by increasing and strengthening cooperation network. 10. Efficiency There is a need for human and financial resources for the increased further project management and activities implementation, products’ production. 11. Relevance There is a huge need and wish of school communities to widen their understandings in the field of SL and have regional, European cooperation links. Otherwise school communities have some difficulties in these needs realization. 12. Sustainability The project has made an impact on the participants’ knowledge and attitudes, and the project results have been sustainable in a certain level. Critical factors for sustainability were: assigned/attributed human and financial resources. Published materials have been in use to train new school heads. 13. Synergies Educational institutions and specialists in Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania have developed cooperation links. 14. Transferability The proposed good practice can be a good example for regional cooperation development and can be transferred to other educational and cultural contexts having the needed human and financial resources. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications This practice realize on policy level importance of school leadership, leader’s personal qualities and attitudes as important variables to provide high level leadership. It was also pointed out that starting development from the same point final results could be quite different. Trust professionals in educational system.

Page 61 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Malta â&#x20AC;&#x201C; All Together Now 2014-2024: Reflective Practice, Inclusive Leadership, and Student Engagement Salvina Muscat 1. Context of application This professional development project (programme and its implementation and evaluation) arose out of the current context in Malta. In 2013-2014 The Ministry for Education and Employment commenced a thorough national process of consultation in response to the Framework for National Strategy for Education for Malta 2014-2024. This Strategy is based on the principles of equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity. In order to support and to be consistent with the principles of the Strategy, we developed a professional development programme for all middle management in Government schools in Malta. The good practice described here consists of the programme we developed and the implementation and evaluation of the programme based on written feedback from over 1000 participants. While the National Strategy recognizes the improvement that has been made in education in the last two decades, it also explicitly addresses ways of dealing with current crucial challenges including â&#x20AC;&#x153;reducing the gap between boys and girls and between students attending different schools, decrease the number of low achievers and raise the bar in literacy, numeracy and science and technology competence, increase student achievement, support educational achievement of children at risk of poverty and from low socio economic status, and reduced the relatively high incidence of early schools leadersâ&#x20AC;? (page 3). The general aim of the professional development is to improve the quality of leadership and teaching in schools as an aid to deal with the above challenges. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The National Strategy strongly encourages professional development of all educators involved in Government schools. The good practice identified here was developed in support of this call. The professional development programme implemented supports all educational policies related to school leadership and management. The programme is based on the principles of inclusive and critical-democratic leadership. It has implications for employability policies in Malta. While the principles underlying the programme are consistent with those that guide EPNoSL, the programme also addresses several themes that EPNoSL has been dealing with, particularly, those of distributed leadership, accountability, policy response, and educating school leaders. 3. Main goals of the practice The goals of the good practice are: (i) to provide a meaningful professional development for all middle management personnel in the Ministry of Education and Employment, Malta, and in all government schools that helps them better understand and enact the principles of equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity; (ii) to provide them with a theoretical framework and hands-on experiences in relation to inclusive and critical-democratic leadership and its implications for substantive student engagement; (iii) to assist in developing an ethos of meaningful professional development that they may be able to enact in their working contexts. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice

Page 62 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The good practice was developed by Ms. Salvina Muscat and Professor John P. Portelli with the full support of the Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta. The programme was implemented under the auspices of the Director General Office for Curriculum who is responsible for the professional development of teachers. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Middle management personnel in the Ministry and in government schools, and school teachers. 6. Contact information/on-line information Salvina Muscat at: salvina.muscat@gov.mt John P. Portelli at: john.portelli@utoronto.ca 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice As stated earlier this good practice was developed and implemented to support the basic beliefs and values of equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity as identified in the Framework for a National Strategy of Education for Malta 2014-2024. The one full day professional development programme consists of three parts: Reflective practice and inclusive leadership; student engagement and the problem of deficit mentality; social justice, equity, diversity and inclusive leadership. The premises of the programme include a robust notion of equity (which goes beyond equality) and the belief in diversified learning. Through a reflective process the participants are invited to engage in the consideration of how and why deficit mentality creates injustice and inequities in the educational systems. As an alternative they are introduced to hos inclusive leadership can support meaningful engagement that is consistent with diversified learning and equity. Each part consists of mini lectures and hand-on activities. The one full day has been provided to all middle management in the Ministry of Education and Employment, Malta and in government schools (Directors, EOs, Assistant Directors, College Principals, Heads of Schools, Assistant Heads of Schools, Head of Departments in schools) for a total of over 1000 people over 34 individual sessions. We attribute this success to the truly and meaningful meshing of theory and practice throughout the programme, as well as the fact that each session was limited to up to 30 people. We truly attempted to practice the very beliefs and values (equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity) and conception of leadership (criticaldemocratic and inclusive leadership) we tried to explain and demonstrate to participants. We learnt that participants are thirsting for more sessions of this kind that can truly make a difference in their daily lives in educational institutions and organizations. The major challenge we had was of time pressures to carry out all the sessions in 6 months -- over and above the other work we do. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice The good practice being described here is primarily, though not exclusively, an example of a Fieldtested good policy practice, and a Promising policy practice. The programme was offered to over 1000 educators (middle management, heads of schools, and teachers) from a variety of state schools. Qualitative anonymous written responses were collected at the end of each session. However, given the extended experience of Ms. Muscat and Professor Portelli, including the involvement of many research projects on the focus at hand, the good practice is also supported by extensive research evidence. Research evidence shows that student engagement is more successful when it is not just seen as a technique but becomes a way of being for educators â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a way of being Page 63 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) that is based on a pedagogy of hope rather than deficit, critical ability rather than conformity, and enacting a curriculum of life. In addition research also shows that a more participatory and inclusive leadership has the potential to create a school ethos that supports and enhances meaningful student engagement that incorporates alternative ways of learning and teaching. For more details consult the publications and research reports in the following web page: www.john-peter-portelli.com Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended (i) Participants found it very meaningful and helpful (ii) It integrates in a substantive way theory and practice (iii) It is based on real cases and supported by earlier research on student engagement, criticaldemocratic and inclusive leadership (iv) It is based on and consistent with the democratic values of equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity (v) It truly supports the National Framework for an Education Strategy in Malta 2014-2024. (vi) Participants have been requesting for more such workshops. More research is planned to assess the impact of the programme. 9. Effectiveness The participants found the programme very refreshing both in its content and delivery.It has been very effective -- based on formal written anonymous feedback from all participants; informal verbal feedback; and the frequent request by participants to have follow-ups. 10. Efficiency Notwithstanding time constraints, the practice produces results within a reasonable level of demands for resources. However, we learnt that the resources can be available if the structures in the Ministry are revised. The Ministry is currently developing an Institute for Professional Development that would include support for the practice identified here. 11. Relevance Given the context of Malta and the launching of a national framework of education for the next 10 years, the proposed practice is very relevant to the needs and circumstances of the participants. 12. Sustainability With changes in the structure of departments in the Ministry and the development of an Institute for Professional Development in Malta, the practice will be very sustainable. These changes will also offer possibilities for others to be actively involved in the implementation of the practice. The Ministry for Education and Employment is very committed to professional development and is currently engaging in discussions with the Teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Union so the professional development will be part of the collective agreement. 13. Synergies The practice has created a very positive synergy among participants. Many participants explicitly stated during the sessions that this was their first ever experience of meeting people outside of their particular department or context. They also strongly stated that they learnt a lot from each other. Page 64 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The synergies created also helped to break the perceived gulf between the Ministry of Education and Employment and the field. It was extremely helpful to have people from different departments in the Ministry and the field get to know each other in a professional session. Some of them have already initiated joint projects (for example, sharing views and practices on the development of school development plans, and cooperative leadership). The practice also assisted in developing a positive relationship with the Malta Union of Teachers. 14. Transferability Given the flexible and open structure of the practice we believe that the beliefs, values, ideas and procedures utilized can be meaningfully applied to other educational contexts. Again, we make such a claim also on the basis of earlier work and research that we have been involved in. However, it is always crucial that in transferring a proposed practice, the individual context and needs are taken into account. To do otherwise would fall into the fallacy of "one size fits all" which is the basis of inequities, marginalization, and deficit mentality. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications As stated earlier, this good practice was developed in support of the national strategy for education in Malta 2014-2024. The practice was developed also in response to professional development needs that were identified for middle management in the Ministry of Education and Employment and in government schools. Thus the practice is directly related to the national reality in Malta. The major changes are noted in the national strategy. Continuous professional development can continue to support the changes that are needed and that are consistent with equity, social justice, diversity and inclusivity. It is crucial that meaningful professional development work continues to be carried out. The introduction of a structure of professional development of various kinds that will be organize and directed by an Institute for Professional Development in Malta will assist in achieving the aims of the national strategy.

Page 65 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Poland – Leadership and management in education – design and implementation of a new model of headteacher’s training Tomasz Kasprzak Polish Ministry of Education decided to start work towards new model of school heads preparation, development and support. This project is focused on building new model of the preparing and implementation new model. It has started in July 2013 in cooperation between Jagiellonian University and Centre for Education Development. Project will end in July 2015. 1. Context of application Educational system in Poland, as in other countries has, till the 1980s neglected the necessity of thinking about management in schools. In the early nineties, together with political transformations and introduction of free market economy in Poland, people thinking about educational reforms started to raise the issue of educational management. Educational law in Poland concerning regulations of school heads preparation was established under very strong influence of managerial thinking about educational management. Looking from the formal perspective, it gives future school heads two possibilities to get required managerial training: special training courses in management in education run by Teacher Training Centres and other Training Centres or postgraduate studies at universities and higher schools of other type. First type of training can be organized by any type of training centre (not only educational ones) and has to be planned and run according to general curriculum framework set up by Ministry of Education. According to that regulation such training programmes have to last at least 210 teaching hours and have to deliver precisely prescribed programme in certain areas. Ministerial regulation allocates certain number of teaching hours to every programme area listed. The system of professional development of school heads does not exist in Poland or that it is far from what is needed. It becomes especially visible after more than twenty years of experiences with described forms and methods of school managers preparation. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The policy areas with which the good practice is related to:    

professional standards on SL, research on SL, SL capacity building, distributed leadership

3. Main goals of the practice The project aims at development of coherent curricula, contents, teaching and learning methods as well as teaching materials in three modules, for three different groups or levels of school leadership development.

Page 66 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice The process of design and development of training materials for three target groups has just started in July 2013 with participation of a group of more than 50 experts from different areas of educational management, leadership and education in general but also from other fields such as training and coaching centres, business and administration, professional bodies, trade unions, local and central educational authorities, etc. By the end of February 2014 three modules was to start pilot training of three target groups of several hundred participants in each of three groups: candidates for school heads, newly appointed school heads and heads with some years of experience in that professional role. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Main and direct target groups are:   

candidates for school heads (100 people) newly appointed school heads (300 people) heads with some years of experience in that professional role (500 people)

6. Contact information/on-line information http://www.przywodztwo-edukacyjne.edu.pl/ Leader of the project: Ośrodek Rozwoju Edukacji (Centre for Education Development) Partner: Jagiellonian University 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The main modules of the training programme are as follows: First module is addressed to all who want to become school heads in future, Second module is addressed to heads of schools that has just started their headship and need support during induction period; Third module is designed for experienced school heads that need continuous support and training during their professional life in their position. Three modules is different in teaching and learning methods and approaches, in lengths and formal structures, teaching materials and forms of organization. What will make them coherent is firstly the idea of continuing professional development that goes through different stages but has to be seen as one process and take into account necessity of connections between different phases and secondly coherence will be connected with the fact that all three modules will try to develop set of the same educational leadership competencies. The list of leadership competencies was based on theories of educational leadership and on diagnosis of Polish headteacher’s competencies. They were grouped in six broad areas. Below there is a list of those areas with examples of competencies to be developed during learning experiences prepared as parts of each training module for three different target groups:

Page 67 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Educational leadership – understanding specificity of educational organization, understanding of basic educational values and; building school culture, design of school programme, building school vision and mission, leading organizational change; etc.; Learning and teaching – understanding learning and its conditions, building resources for learning, developing individuals and teams for learning, linking school with environment to use its resources for learning, development of professionalism, evaluation and development based on its results, diagnosis of students needs and development, etc.; Educational policy – understanding the place of school in different contexts, building links with the world outside school, building social potential supporting learning in school, influencing social and political processes important for school, active citizenship for building school potential, influencing and leading educational policy in local and global contexts, etc.: People in organization – recruitment and selection of teachers, induction to team and school as a whole, diagnosis and development of potentials of teachers, development of cooperative skills, building participative decision-making, building material resources supporting development of teachers’ potentials, etc.; Strategic, legal, financial issues – strategic planning, collecting, analysing and using information, negotiation and communication, dealing with conflicts of different type, using educational law for good of learning and teaching in school, material resource planning and development, etc.; Personal development – understanding oneself, diagnosis of own potential and limitations, professional knowledge development, development of own social and communication competencies, dealing with stress and burnout, linking with other professionals for own professional and personal development, etc. Results (till the end of 2015): 5 reports on leadership competencies, and training and development managers in selected countries; 12 expert seminars (preparation of assumptions, plan and schedule work to develop a model of appointing, training and development school leaders); 3 models how to prepare and support individuals to perform a leader functions in education; 7 packages teaching materials related to the seven areas of school management and leadership; 100 people involved in the verification of the new model (min. 210 hours of workshops); 800 people involved in the verification of the new model of management development and support leaders based on mutual learning (peer learning). Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence: A strategy, policy program or project that has the highest degree of proven effectiveness supported by objective and comprehensive research and evaluation.

Page 68 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended 9. Synergies For example, collaboration between schools and school leaders, researchers, policy makers, administrators, associations, teachers, students, parents, etc.

Page 69 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Portugal – The use of self-evaluation in schools’ improvement Ana Paula Silva, Carmo Climaco 1. Context of application The schools’ evaluation regime, comprising self and external evaluation procedures, was put in force in 2002 and justified by the policy makers as a tool for “deepening school autonomy” and “improvement”, gave rise to some “insecurity” and “malaise” within schools. Therefore, hipperbureaucratization evaluation procedures have been adopted in many schools, which some studies indicate as a tendency and evidence of reduced autonomy. In contrast to that tendency, there are however some schools where self-evaluation good practices fostered teachers’ team work and self-evaluation specific procedures as tools to produce knowledge and reflection on the school as a whole. Against the “below expected school results” (got in standardized tests, a parameter of external schools evaluation), those self-evaluation procedures provided a basis to promote a positive self-image and self-esteem to counterbalance the negative schools’ image built just on standardized testing. This showed to be extremely important, once that way those schools were able to restructure, re-culture, distribute leadership and empower educators along school improvement processes, aiming at fostering equity and learning namely in socially deprived contexts. The above referred good practices were evidenced in some master courses dissertations, over 100, available in the on-line repository of Universidade Lusofónona. Those dissertations were produced by students enrolled in courses directed by Ana Paula Silva who decided that specific topics and issues to be worked and researched should be the students’ choice. Among these students there were top and intermediate school leaders who were very much concerned with self-evaluation procedures and their own schools’ improvement. Thus, within the scope of the master course, by the same token, students benefited their own institution on providing a sound feedback, empirically and theoretically based on recent literature, on which they could elaborate not only their dissertation, but also specific improvement plans for their own schools, conceived, and most of them carried out, through actionresearch methodology. Maria do Carmo Clímaco, as external examiner of some of those dissertations, agreed on selecting them as the Portuguese EPNoSL partner case study on good practices. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The implementation of the above mentioned good practices is directly related to research on SL, autonomy, accountability, policy response and SL capacity building, and indirectly with distributed leadership and inclusion, in the way by which improvement plans were conceived and implemented. It constitutes an approach to broaden the scope of school outputs and impact, as well as a way to contribute for social integration and equity, a major goal of the field work, considering that the studied and intervened schools are located in education priority areas. 3. Main goals of the practice To promote the capacity of school leadership in meeting authorities demands on school evaluation and improvement planning

Page 70 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) to enable school leaders to address issues of equity in schools, to leave more room to school leaders to define priorities and target resources for the purpose of tackling the issues of equity and learning in their schools: on involving teachers and other stakeholders in decision making processes on fostering teachers’ team work on promoting participation on distributing leadership on sharing responsibilities, and therefore to empower members of the school community to undertake leadership roles, to enhance school leaders’ engagement with new learning, namely teachers and head teachers CPD. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice Taking the policy response as a starting point, the conditions to undertake the dissertation work within the master course and the students’ choices, made both the university and school leaders the initiators. The latter were also the implementers of such good practices, since they were the ones who researched, conceived and implemented self-evaluation procedures and improvement plans for their own schools. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries The current beneficiaries are specific school populations, namely in problematic areas, which are benefiting from a new schooling experience, improving learning and outcomes. Teachers are benefiting from new opportunities for professional development, and schools as institutions, where namely the quality of school life is recognized by stakeholders and the local community. 6. Contact information/on-line information Research undertaken on the good practices analysed is available http://recil.grupolusofona.pt/ Search by the authors’ name, all of them have abstracts in English: Cardoso, Maria da Graça (2014), Fernandes, Anabela (2014), Freitas, Maria do Carmo (2014), Alves, José Carlos (2013), Bação, Maria Marília (2013), Caeiro, Alexandra (2013), Dourado, Maria da Graça (2013), Oliveira, Maria Luísa (2013), Nunes, Marina Alexandra (2013), Rodrigues, Carla (2013),Aleixo, Aida Maria (2013), Cruz, Maria Alexandra (2013), Grou, Maria da Graça (2013), Lopes, Isabel Leonor (2013), Almeida, Célia (2012), Almeida, Maria Manuela (2012), Almeida, Maria do Rosário (2012), Almeida, Sérgio (2012), Henriques, Jorge (2012), Henriques, Maria Teresa (2012), Pereira, Maria Luísa (2012), Vinhas, Maria Isabel (2012), Góis, Carina (2011), Palma, Cristina (2011) … 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The good practice was developed within the scope of the master course on school management and leadership “blended” by EPNoSL inputs. The related research work and the respective dissertations production were based on extended literature review and highly controlled field work, since the case studies were focused on contextual data collection and experimentation.

Page 71 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Two analytical categories can be identified in the researched approaches to school self-evaluation and improvement planning: a) The whole school approach strategy The need to implement a school self-evaluation program, led to the organization of small internal "task forces" involving differently skilled elements from the school’s staff to collect, treat, analyse and discuss school data. The research highlights the relationship between the processes of institutional self-knowledge production and the promotion of a positive school image. It highlights the importance of the staff’s participation in the identification of areas for improvement to be prioritized and achieved, as expressed in the recognised general social well-being and its effects in the school life quality, or ethos, and in the students’ behaviour and satisfaction. Other cases studies are focused on how some schools, to guarantee the rigor of the process, opted for a readymade school evaluation model available in the market to be implemented by an external professional team (ex. CAF - Common Assessment Framework). Simultaneously, a set of internal processes of reflection on why and what for they needed "a school evaluation procedure" and on which data they need to collect to achieve it. As a consequence, the external team was dispensed, and these schools opted by capitalizing on previous experiences on school self-evaluation and on their acquired expertise. As a rule, they started by identifying and discussing the school development priorities and by analysing the available resources and expertise, as well as how to use the existing partnerships to improve teachers and students performances. In this process they identified both their strengths, recognised what they were doing well, and their weaknesses, and how to benefit from other specific partnerships as complementary school resources. This decision and the following cooperation contributed to reinforce the school self-esteem translated in the social wellbeing; the distribution of the leadership, in teachers' professional development initiatives, and in a stronger involvement of the school headship to conduct the whole school self-evaluation process and in the discussion and selection of the areas for improvement. b) Focused improvement approaches Other studies focused on teachers' evaluation and their professional development needs highlighting how teachers' classroom work benefitted from pedagogical supervision on contributing for the generation of collaborative dynamics among teachers, on leading them to share experiences and difficulties and on promoting professional autonomy and self-esteem. In other cases mention is made to the role of the Curricular Departments in promoting collaboration and team work among teachers, on setting up a set of workshops on classroom work to overcome the gap between the theoretical conceptualization and the classroom teaching practices. Issues of peer learning and peer evaluation were brought to the forefront. Concepts of "ethics" and "deontology" in teaching practices and in teachers' assessment have integrated the teachers' discourse and concerns. The processes followed by schools were different, each school followed its own path (the selected procedures that seemed more suitable to them), but all of them have some common aspects: -

Building up their own evaluation teams;

Gathering sound empirical data – to broaden and deepening self-knowledge;

Enlarged, participated and in depth data discussion and reflection;

Upon which change for improvement has been designed and “owned”. Page 72 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Moreover, it is worthwhile to note the mobilization of different agents, a more effective involvement, higher levels of satisfaction and achievement for students and staff. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice Specify under which of the following types the good practice example falls into: i. Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence:

According to the law, all the schools in Portugal are obliged to implement evaluation. Those processes are to be implemented every four years to be followed by external evaluation, which are treated, following comparative analysis, and published in specific national reports to be openly accessed, which have been worked upon by the scientific community. ii. Field-tested good policy practice:

As described in the previous item. iii. Promising policy practice:

Clusters of schools located in particularly deprived areas have been granted special conditions to promote social and academic achievement. It should be mentioned that not only the extra resources but also the continuous and consistent monitoring procedures on the use of those resources along with results have been showing a sustainable improvement. However, we should add that these clusters of schools benefit from higher levels of autonomy than mainstream schools. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended Under the following subheadings elaborate on the reasons why you recommend the specific practice. 9. Effectiveness Research data and testing results show the effectiveness of the followed approaches, as well as the increased level of leadership consistency, the teachers’ morale and stakeholders’ satisfaction. 10. Efficiency Yes, within the national context, but in the context of the crisis no more resources have been allocated to schools, just the contrary. Though the PISA results might be contested, research proves that Portuguese students’ results steadily improved in the last 15 years along with schooling massification and democratization. 11. Relevance The implemented practice and its results paved the way for granting higher levels of autonomy and the recognition of equity in learning as a condition for social integration. 12. Sustainability Teachers’ turnover is the greatest threat to the long term sustainability, followed by possible reduction in other resources and the increasing number of students per class, which jeopardize the current efforts and menace what has been achieved so far: the increased self-esteem, selfconfidence, learning conditions, teachers’ team work, parents involvement, namely by creating opportunities for raising their awareness concerning the learning progress and their responsibility as educators, on implementing what has been called “school of parents”. Page 73 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 13. Synergies Several school heads on being students in master courses had benefited from the required research effort impacted in their own professional performance and influenced their peers’ and school stakeholders’ involvement and work, highlighting the relevance of the knowledge / research based action to increase Involvement and confidence in the planned actions. 14. Transferability The proposed practice is transferable to the extent it exemplifies some steps required in the definition of a strategy in the identification of school needs and priorities, as well as the issue of rigor in the identification of the steps to be followed in each school improvement planning. The presentation and discussion of these good practices in the EPNoSL PLA in Nice raised the interest of different partners, which are introducing schools’ evaluation procedures in their national contexts such as the representatives of Cyprus, Hungary and Poland that approached us for details and asked to be kept in touch for further developments and collaborative work. However, more importantly than to recommend a practice is its contextualized implementation. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications Based on the reaction of some partners in Nice PLA, as mentioned above, we believe that the identified good practices on the use of school self-evaluation as a tool for improvement are related to wider realities, which therefore are “transferable”, to the extent that the research work under analysis responded to field needs recognized by the administrators and teachers to be common to different contexts.

Page 74 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Slovenia – E-competent headmaster (development and implementation) Vlasta Poličnik, Borut Campelj 1. Context of application Ministry of Education, Science and Sport and National Education Institute conducted a project Eeducation to establish new foundations in teacher training and education, to test and update the models leading schools towards e-competency. The target groups were teachers, pre-school teachers, headmasters, IT experts and ICT coordinators. There were also activities targeted at school leaders to enable them get e-knowledge and skills they need for effective school management. National level: Development of digital competences of different stakeholders, also headmasters (not basic skills, but skills for higher level of work of individual educator). Historic info: The practice is to ensure the sustainability and next level of the national project ICT in education from started from 1994 (Computer Literacy - seminars for headmasters were developed and implemented) and was several times upgraded and all them the role of headmasters and their skill played important role in the processes. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The good practice we would like to present is part of the national project E-education, the way towards E-competent school, which lasted from 2009 to 2013. One of the target groups were school leaders who were being trained to be able to set directions towards e-competent school. distributed leadership: team leadership of school informatisation (ICT-team, where headmasters’ role is essential) professional standards on SL: headmaster e-competences , there is also 6 interrelationships/connectedness with European Commission initiative “Opening up Education” and digital competences framework – IPTS report7 SL capacity building: development of the competences need for effective school management 3. Main goals of the practice Main goal: Activities are targeted at school leaders to enable them get e-knowledge and skills they need for effective school management. Also the development of competences of headmasters to integrate ICT in activities at schools: upgrade the level of school informatisation, higher level of quality education, effectiveness, equity, meaningfulness, team work, support for development projects at schools an between different institutions (school, research), school autonomy. to enhance school leaders’ engagement with new learning: personalization of teachers and pupils could be comprehensive developed by ICT only and could support an active role of pupils in

Opening up Education (European Commission initiative), http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/sl/initiative

Scientific and Policy Report by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission IPTS (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies), http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC83167.pdf

Page 75 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) classroom and move the central point in the classroom from teacher to pupil and development of learning analytics. promote the capacity of school leadership in addressing issues of equity in schools: headmaster and ICT team and other teams at schools need comprehensive information about teachers and pupils (supported by use of ICT) to plan and implement the upgrade and development of their new skills, where equity is essential and isn’t connected only to special group (like socio-economic groups, gender etc.), because every student deserves the best quality of education. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice Ministry of Education, Science and Sport had published the public tender for establishing a consortium of public and private institutions as well as NGO which had made an upgrade of existing situation and develop and implement the “e-competent teacher standard” as well as “e-competent headmaster standard” and “e-competent ICT-coordinator standard”. In one project cooperate different development groups of teachers and headmasters, researchers from National Education Institute and companies. Every stakeholder developed his own “mission”, like National Education Institute (development of new approaches in different subject and school leadership), schools (testing the results of the development), companies (implementation of good practice in cooperation with headmasters and teachers who train other headmasters and teachers). 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Direct beneficiary were headmasters and teachers (from 2009 – 2013) more than 36.000 participants in seminars and 36.000 participants in consultations. Indirect groups: pupils and students to gain new competences supported by ICT. 6. Contact information/on-line information Borut Čampelj – borut.campelj@gov.si (Ministry of Education, Science and Sport) Vlasta Poličnik, vlasta.policnik@solazaravnatelje.si (National school for leadership in education) Nives Kreuh, nives.kreuh@zrss.si (National Education Institute) Published materials (in English): The way towards e-competency solstvo_BILTEN_ANG_2012_screen.pdf)

(http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/bilteni/E-

video: E-education consultation (for headmasters https://video.arnes.si/portal/asset.zul?id=v1Nxacp8Tup6dICoMYIt0NBb

and

teachers)

- video – The right footpath (seminars for teachers and headmasters – new model and at least 50% on-line) http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/video/promocijski_video/film3_SIRIKT2012_PravaPot_verzija12angl.flv 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The aim of the training which was performed in the form meetings, presentations and workshops, as well as in on-line e-learning environment, was to follow the concept of reaching e-competency and to implement six key e-competencies, namely: Page 76 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) C1 – Knowledge and awareness of ICT, critical use; C2 – Communication and on-line collaboration; C3 - Search, select, process and evaluate data, information and concepts ; C4 – Safe use of the web, ethical and legal use of information; C5 – Design, produce, publish, adapt materials; C6 - Plan, perform, evaluate learning and teaching by using ICT. The e-competent standard were developed for teachers, headmasters and ICT coordinator at school. The objectives of the “e-competent headmaster standard” were: a) to prepare content for effective training of school leaders in the field of knowledge and critical use of technology in - organizational - administrative work, -

teaching administrative and pedagogical work. b) to provide training that will enable the principal review and knowledge of hardware and software for the needs of the school, demonstrate good solutions (monitoring work, analysis ...).. c) to train headmasters to effectively (on-line) communicate with all participants in the educational process (parents, students, employees, local community, other external collaborators, external partners, ministry, National education Institute, National School for leadership in education): portals, e-mail, virtual classroom etc. d) to train headmasters to effectively search, collection, processing and evaluation (critical assessment) data, information and concepts. e) to raise the awareness of headmasters for safe use and compliance with legal and ethical use and publication of information (across all media: web, TV, radio, classic material, ...). f) to encourage self-assessment process and a process of further personal and professional development (to be on the path to learning organization) g) to improve the quality and consistency of principals training with standards, assessment, and technological resources h) to ensure maximum interaction between educators and principals as trainees (face-to-face and on-line). Top down and bottom up approach: - Top down: headmaster professional development (seminars. 50% on-line, development and assessment of the competences). Four seminars were developed for each competence (C1 and C4 competences are included in all seminars). - Bottom up: consultations for headmasters and ICT-teams at schools. 6 level (at least one year) of consultancy includes revision of situation, upgrades of school plans, implementation of the plans, evaluation. Face to face and on-line consultations. On-line Cooperation of headmasters and support: e-communities (Slovenian educational network – www.sio.si)

Page 77 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The trainers of headmasters and advisors were headmasters, teachers and advisors at National Educational Institute. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice i. Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence: Seminars of headmasters – number of participants (out of ca. 800 headmasters from primary and secondary schools and some kindergardens): module 1 - 488, module 2 – 374, modul 3 – 236 and module 4 – 212. Consultations: more than 90% schools were involved in consultations. The evaluation were made every year and more then 95% headmasters were satisfied with seminars and consultations. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended 9. Effectiveness The evaluation was made every year and more then 95% headmasters were satisfied with seminars and consultations. The evaluation is in Slovene Language and could be translated, and include: - evaluation of the consultations: what are the current needs of schools and how they use ICT, content of the use consultations, cooperation between headmaters and advisors, also ICT-team and advisors etc. - evaluation of the seminars: used methods on the seminars, effectiveness, organisational part, impact at schools, gained competences, response of students 10. Efficiency Higher level of participations from all stakeholders at school is needed. Consultations: communication and teamwork at school Seminars: assessment of the gained competences and skills, at least 50 % on-line in virtual classroom 11. Relevance The consultation and seminars were developed and implemented for direct use at school (the trainers were headmsters, teachers) – “from practice to practice”. 12. Sustainability At most schools were established a critical mass of employees (headmaster and his assistant, ICT coordinator, at least 3-4 teachers and other staff) which encourage other teachers and employees. But new development should be done after the end of the e-education project and cooperation with other projects and activities at schools. 13. Synergies E-communities of headmasters were initiated, deeper cooperation at school between school leadership and others. Page 78 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 14. Transferability All the material is in digital form and under Creative Commons License (free use and possible changes, translations and upgrades) and used virtual classrooms Moodle. The Slovene model could be easily connected to the digital competence framework from IPTS (report2). No special limitations (only Slovene language, but everything could be translated). 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications The presented practice in directly connected to the strategy at national and local level and is response to the needs of schools. Also strategy of EU is included and should be upgraded with Opening up Slovenia initiative8. For further development and implementation is important international collaboration and exchange of good pratice and especial initiation of international project on school leadership.

8 Opening up Education: Slovenia As a Model State, http://www.mizs.gov.si/en/media_room/news/article/55/8712/49ef4689101384d235ef694a56668bb2/

Page 79 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from Sweden – The National Principal Training Program in Sweden Jonas Höög 1. Context of application A training program for principals has been offered in Sweden by the department of education since 1967. Until 2010 this was a voluntary program, but since this year the program is renewed and all newly appointed principals must go through it to be able to stay as a principal in the Swedish school system. The program is headed by the National Agency of Education and is executed by six universities in Sweden. The mission and role of The Swedish National Agency for Education The Swedish Parliament and the Government set out the goals and guidelines for the preschool and school through e.g. the Education Act and the Curricula. The mission of the Agency is to actively work for the attainment of the goals. The municipalities and the independent schools are the principal organizers in the school system allocate resources and organize activities so that pupils attain the national goals. The Agency supervises supports, follows up and evaluates the school in order to improve quality and outcomes. All pupils have the right to an equivalent education. The Agency focuses on the principal organizers of the school: school heads, school leaders and teachers in the preschool, the preschool class, different school forms in compulsory and upper secondary schooling, and also adult education. Sometimes pupils and parents are the target groups of the Agency. The Agency’s summarizes its mission as follows: 

Drawing up clear goals and knowledge requirements



Providing support for the development of preschools and schools



Developing and disseminating new knowledge of benefit to our target groups



Communicate to improve

How does the Agency work for a better school? 

National goals and steering documents

The Agency set up the frameworks and guidelines on how education is to be provided and assessed with the aid of syllabuses and subject plans, knowledge requirements and tests, as well as general guidelines. This is of special importance in the light of the ongoing reforms of the preschool, compulsory and upper secondary schools, as well as adult education. Major initiatives will be implemented to provide support for the implementation of the new reforms, covering conferences, web-based information, and different types of informational material. 

National knowledge assessment

Page 80 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The Agency is responsible for the national system for assessing knowledge. Together with universities and university colleges, we develop national tests and assessment guides for teachers to ensure pupils receive equivalent assessment. ď&#x201A;ˇ

Evaluation

By means of in-depth studies and analyses, the Agency evaluates schooling to identify and highlight those areas where national development is needed. Causes of variations in goal attainment among different principal school organizers and schools are analysed. The Agency takes part in international studies to benchmark their own education system and compare it with other countries. The Agency disseminates the results and outcomes by different means, such as reports and knowledge overviews. ď&#x201A;ˇ

Follow-up

The Agency is responsible for statistics in the school system and in childcare. The aim is to provide an overall view of schooling and material to follow up and evaluate at the national and local levels. Each year the Agency collects data on children, pupils, school staff, costs and education outcomes. The data is presented in statistical form by type of activity and school. This contributes to comparisons between different principal organizers and types of activities. National school development The Agency provides support to preschools, schools and principal organizers for their development. The support to be given should be nationally prioritized. This may involve general development initiatives, which are justified on the grounds of shortcomings and problems that have been identified by means of different national and international studies, such as in mathematics, languages, and reading and writing skills. It can also deal with other issues such as mobbing and bullying, gender equality, minority languages and the position of newly arrived pupils in Sweden. Competence development is also an important part of the work. The Agency is responsible for the National School Leadership Training Program and the initiative for professional supplementary training of preschool teachers and teachers. Conferences support and inspirational material, as well as web-based support are common forms for contributing to development. The Agency also disseminates knowledge on research and knowledgebased methods, as well as experiences of importance for school heads and teachers and is also responsible for distributing and evaluating government grants to stimulate goal attainment and ensure quality of schooling. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The program addresses school leadership in Sweden. In the National School Leadership Training Program the content covers all policy areas more or less. For details see the description of the program goal and courses further down. 3. Main goals of the practice Principals, heads of preschools and assistant heads all play a key role in centrally regulated education that is governed by the curricula. The task is to create a school and preschool of high-quality for everyone where the national goals are achieved and learning is experienced as meaningful,

Page 81 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) stimulating and secure. The National School Leadership Training Program aims at providing principals, heads of preschools and other school leaders with the knowledge and skills required to be able to manage their responsibilities and achieve the goals set up. 4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice The Ministry of Education and Research and The Swedish National Agency of Education are initiators. The Universities of Umeå, Uppsala, Stockholm, Karlstad, Gothenburg and the Mid Sweden University are implementers. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Direct beneficiaries are Principals and Preschool leaders. Indirect beneficiaries are teachers, pupils, parents and in the long run hopefully the Swedish society. 6. Contact information/on-line information http://www.pol.umu.se/CPD/ http://www.skolverket.se/kompetens-och-fortbildning/skolledare/rektorsprogrammet http://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=2492 http://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskildpublikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext% 2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D2254. 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice A training program for principals has existed since 1967 in Sweden. It was changed in 1986, 1993, 2000 and 2009 and will be changed again 2015. The changes have moved the training to a stronger focus on equity, learning, accountability, pedagogical leadership, distributed leadership and policy response. The training program covers three areas of knowledge: •

Legislation on schools and the role of exercising the functions of an authority

•

Management by goals and objectives

•

School leadership

These areas of knowledge are crucial for the practical implementation of school leadership. They are closely linked to each other, and principals must be able to manage them simultaneously since they form parts of a complex interacting system. The area Legislation on schools and the role of exercising the functions of an authority covers the provisions laid down in laws and ordinances. Emphasis is also put on how the school’s assignment is formulated in the national goals. The knowledge area Management by objectives and results covers measures for promoting quality which are required for the school to achieve the national goals of the education, and create the conditions for its development. The knowledge area School leadership covers how the work should be managed based on the national tasks of the principal and the principles set out in the steering system for bringing about development in line with greater goal attainment. The program is completed after three years when participants have achieved the course

Page 82 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) requirements of 30 higher education credits with 10 higher education credits in each of the three modules. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice Other: As is shown in the table a training program for principals have existed since 1967 in Sweden. The development of the latest version of the program (2009) was initiated in 2005 by the Swedish National Agency for School Development. A proposal was sent to a lot of stakeholders for consideration. It was heavily criticized especially by universities. There was an election 2006 and a new government was established. This government started a one-man investigation and after a consideration round the Ministry decided to finish the work with the new program in their coordination chancellery and then give the task to buy in suitable implementers at the universities. A Scandinavian expert group ranked the universities on different criteria and nominated six out of nine universities as proficient enough to take responsibility for the new Principal Training Program. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended In 2010 it was decided that the program should be mandatory for all newly appointed principals. It is designed for the advanced university level (Master) formulated in the Bologna process. It links to Master programs at universities. The course structure and goals follow the Bologna practice of expected study results: Knowledge and understanding, Skills and abilities, Assessment ability and approaches. The courses focus steering system, school as an organization and school leadership. After an invitation to interested parties and an evaluation from 4 international experts the responsibility to run the program was delegated to 6 universities. The collaboration with the Agency is well developed with frequent meetings between The Agency and representatives for the program at the universities. Also a seminar over a day in January and a three day conference for all instructors/trainers in the program is held. These days are filled with discussions about the program and presentations on how it is developed at the different universities. Research on schooling and school leadership presented by the research community as well news from the Agency/Ministry is disseminated. This builds a learning community that can secure a more updated and equivalent education. If this is spread to the school level the ambition to build equity in learning has a better chance to be fulfilled. 9. Effectiveness Results so far concluded in an evaluation made by the National Agency 

6500 school leaders have now completed the program and of these, 90% passed the graduation examinations.



About 3400 principals are in training this year.



This means that approximately 60% of Sweden’s principals and assistant principals either completed or are following the program.



The participants’ impression of the program is positive and this impression increases during the program. This is probably an effect of the universities’ ambition to meet the participatns based on the groups composition and the heterogeneity of participants’ individual needs. Over 95% of those who completed it consider the program to be quite of very good. Page 83 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

10. Efficiency The judgment of the National Agency 

Participants valued the training as good and well suited to their own experiences and professional role which is a good basis for the further work.



The cooperation that already takes place between universities and with the National Agency for education is basically very positive and important for course equivalency.



This co-operation should be further deepened and broadened on the basis of the experience gained. This collaboration can strengthen the integration of various course areas.



The exchange may contribute to a better understanding of how the training can be developed to further enhance attendees preparedness in being change and development agents in their own schools.

11. Relevance The relevance of this best practice is high. Sweden needs a development and modernization of school leadership. The assessment by PISA TIMMs PEARLS and other assessment instruments have shown the decrease of the results in the Swedish school system. One of the reasons to this could be the recruitment and development of school leaders. It has been carried through on a tool low academic level. The goals of the former Principal training program lacked content about policy response, accountability, pedagogical leadership, distributed leadership and other knowledge areas that in the new Program is paid attention to. 12. Sustainability The practice is sustainable. The program has been going for six years already (2009-2015). The National Agency of Education has late October appointed 6 universities to deliver the program for the coming six years (2015-2021). What happens after that is difficult to say, but since Sweden have had principal training programs by the government since 1967 it probably will continue after 2021. The increase of principals and preschool leaders that are examined in the program guarantiees a spread of the theoretical knowledge and better skills. 13. Synergies Collaboration between schools and school leaders, researchers, policy makers, administrators, associations. See above “why the practice is recommended”. 14. Transferability The design of the Principal Training Program is such that it should be transferable to other countries. The consensus on central school leadership constructs between partners in the EPNoSL project indicates that the Swedish program based on those could inspire other countries to develop programs with the same design. Possible limitations to the transferability could be the will and the resources on the political level. The most problematic feature of the program and at the same time perhaps the most important is Page 84 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) that it is mandatory. This demand on the local municipalities who are employers of the principals could be an obstacle. National and local level policy donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t always go hand in hand. The political situation and the relations between political stakeholders could affect the possibilities to transfer the mandatory feature of the program. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications The Training program covers all Swedish regions, universities in collaboration with The National Agency and Municipalities arranges conferences, writes books, and initiates courses in different areas connected to school leadership.

Page 85 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from the Netherlands – The approach to Early School Leaving: Policy in the Netherlands and provisional figures of the 2012-2013 performance agreements Huub Friederichs 1. Context of application Tackling the problem of early school leaving (ESL) is one of the priorities of the European Commission. Currently, 1 in 8 young Europeans leave school early without gaining a basic qualification. The aim is to reduce the average percentage of early school leavers to less than 10% by 2020. This will involve all young people aged between 18 and 25 who are not undertaking education/training. Measured according to the European definition, the Dutch target is 8% in 2020. The Dutch Government has decided on a more ambitious target than that for the EU, namely a maximum of 25,000 new early school leavers each year by 2016. The Netherlands compares well with other European countries. The average of the EU-15 fell from 14,7% in 2011 to 13,7% in 2012. In the Netherlands, the figures for 2012 again showed a decrease, from 15.4% in 2000 to 9.1% in 2011 and to 8,8 % in 2012, making the country one of Europe’s leaders in tackling the early school leaving problem. Better cooperation between the EU Member States, exchange of know‑how, best practices, and focussed use of EU funding can help solve the problem. EU Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou had this to say about the Dutch approach: “Tackling early school leaving is a challenge because it means so many sectors have to work together. In most Member States, this does not yet happen in a systematic way, though some countries such as the Netherlands show the way forward.”. A number of European countries have expressed an interest in the integrated approach and accurate record-keeping system adopted by the Netherlands. 2. SL policy area(s) related to good practice The school leader policy area's involved largely overlap each other: in the multidisciplinary approach to ESL, aspect of accountability, professional standards, distributed leadership policy response, etc. can be identified. There is also a great coherence with the wider context of the school and its stakeholders, and welfare, labour market, security organisations, monitoring institutions, etc. 3. Main goals of the practice Tackling the problem of pupils leaving school early is one of the priorities of the Dutch government. The target is for there to be no more than 25,000 new early school leavers each year in 2016. An early school leaver is a young person between 12 and 23 years of age who does not go to school and who has not achieved a basic qualification (i.e. a senior general secondary, pre-university, or level-2 secondary vocational diploma). Since 2002, the “Drive to Reduce Drop-out Rates” [Aanval op de uitval] has already led to a reduction from 71,000 in 2001 to 27.950 (provisional result for the 20122013 school year). The Netherlands is adopting a “prevention is better than cure” approach to the problem. Young people have better prospects on the labour market if they have a basic qualification. Partly due to the decreasing early school leaving rate, youth unemployment in the Netherlands is increasing only slightly during the recent crisis and is in fact compared to neighbourhood countries relatively low.

Page 86 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Studies show that finishing school has the effect of reducing the number of crimes and other offences against property. Reducing the early school leaving rate is not a project with a beginning and an end. For long-term success, preventing pupils dropping out of school will need to become one of the primary processes at schools and within municipalities. It demands a long-term perspective, systematic efforts and resources, an integrated approach focussing on prevention, and tight organisation at regional level. All the various links in the chain – education, the labour market, and care – need to form a good basis for preventing young people dropping out of school. In terms of school leadership the above goals require strategic thinking from school leaders, thus the following objectives can be formulated for school leadership: -

to identify local needs on the basis of environmental scanning,

to find localised solutions,

to build partnerships with local stakeholders from other sectors,

to involve teachers and support staff in the process in a way that they have a sense of ownership to realise the goals.

4. Key initiators/implementers of good practice Integrated approach to early school leaving: prevention. Initiated by the government after wide social debate. Since 2007, preventing pupils leaving school early has been a policy priority in the Netherlands. The “Drive to Reduce Drop-out Rates” programme has been successful in implementing various measures at national level: (1) qualification obligation, (2) personal education number, (3) digital absence portal, (4) career orientation and guidance, (5) transfer to follow-up education programme, (6) care structure at school. From these measures you can see that a great variety of professionals/institutions are involved in the implementation: national and local authorities, schools (their entire staff and organisational bodies, such as: parent's council, student's council), external consultants, labour market experts, career counselors, social workers, health system, national educational council, unions, etc. It means great complexity and tremendous amount of communication. 5. Current/prospective beneficiaries Main target group: students, in particular potential and actual early school leavers. The new early school leaver is a pupil between 12 and 23 years of age who leaves school in the course of the school year without a basic qualification (a senior general secondary, pre-university, or at least a level-2 secondary vocational diploma). The ESL percentage is the number of ESL’s as a percentage of the number of pupils enrolled in school at the beginning of the school year. It goes without saying that the whole Dutch society benefits from reducing the drop-out rates. 6. Contact information/on-line information Responsible department: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Department Intermediate Vocational Education, mr Hans Leenders, director Vocational and Adult Education.

Page 87 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) http://www.aanvalopschooluitval.nl/userfiles/file/2012/2012026_OCW_VSV_UKversie_VSV_beleid_LR_internet.pdf https://www.spd.dcu.ie/site/edc/staff/documents/MultiInterDisciplinaryTeamsNESETReportApril20123.pdf information: Huub Friederichs: h.friederichs@ijzee.nl 7. Description of the implementation of the good practice The Dutch approach to preventing early school leaving involve the following main elements: Governance aspects: 

the integrated effort is a close cooperation between local authorities (the alderman for education) and boards of schools in the region, usually 4-6 municipalities.



preventing early school leaving is institutionalised through signing covenant/agreement/contract between the players.



the implementation is steered by a steering committee and a project group.



there is a lot of political pressure from the national/provincial/local governments and a large amount of money is involved, sponsored by the government.



schools are enforced to take part in the project and will be punished (by budget cuts and replacing school leaders) if they do not show results.



there is a rather large space for freedom of movement action: creating decentralised actions/approaches like measures such as: training, extra monitoring on truancy , individual and group student guidance, experimenting with good practices, sharing bad practices, heighten ‘warm’ transfer (i.e. together with student, parent, teacher, receiving school finding a more fitting school, etc.



a advanced ‘health care system’ ( that how we call it) has been implemented, and the Dutch Inspectorate checks if these protocols are effective and efficient.



look attentively on a ‘personalised’ approach: a combined approach comprising ‘culturalist/structuralist’ (who look for causes and explanations for ESL in the culture, context, power relations) and ‘personalist’ (who look for explanations and causes in the personal characteristics and features of the student) in policy-making needs to be adopted in order to understand and prevent early school leaving. The results will not be a universal remedy but many more complex explications and no unambiguous and perspectives for action, so the idea is that measures should be localised.

School level governance and implementation: 

all of the teaching and non-teaching staff, management team, team leaders are involved: in many schools a team consultant regarding the subject is in place as well as an absence counsellor.



in general it took 2-3 years to convince teachers to collaborate with the project, first they wanted to see results (‘early winnings’), at the moment it is a steady state project and new positive results have recently been published, the effort needs a lot of perseverance and stamina. Page 88 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 

the role of the school leader: stimulating, facilitating, director of the activities, writing and executing the local policies, let protocols and handbooks be made.

The prevention plan consists of a number of national measures that are compulsory for every school: Qualification obligation: The qualification obligation was introduced on 1 August2007. Since then, young people have been subject to a compulsory school attendance and qualification obligation. This means that they must remain in education until the age of 18 (previously 16) until they have achieved at least a basic qualification (i.e. at least a senior general secondary, pre-university, or level2 secondary vocational diploma). Personal education number: All pupils have been allocated an education number, which makes it possible to track them. Each pupil at a publicly funded secondary or secondary vocational school is registered in BRON (the Basic Records Database for Education) with a unique number, name, address, date of birth, school, and school type. A young person who is no longer registered in BRON is classified as an early school leaver. This measuring system means that no early school leaver remain unregistered any longer. Statistics on early school leaving rates are available at national, regional, municipal, and school level. This data can be linked to socioeconomic data by region, town/city, and neighbourhood (including the composition of the population, percentage of Dutch natives and members of ethnic minorities, unemployment, benefit recipients, etc.). Digital Absence Portal: Since 1 August 2009, all schools have been obliged by law to register school absenteeism via the Digital Absence Portal [Digitaal verzuimloket]. This has greatly improved the registration of school absenteeism and early school leavers. Truancy and missing school are often signs that a pupil is at risk of dropping out and it is important for those in touch with the pupil – the school, the parents, and the school attendance officer – to respond quickly and efficiently. The purpose of the Digital Absence Portal is to utilise a simplified, computerised reporting procedure so as to focus time and effort on engaging with truants and guiding them back to school. Data from the Portal makes it possible to generate monthly reports on pupils who are “absent” or who are “deregistered without a basic qualification”. Transparency about the figures enables secondary schools, secondary vocational schools, and municipalities to identify where the problem lies and to take appropriate action. Career Orientation and Guidance: An action plan for career orientation and guidance has been drawn up. One of the primary reasons for someone to drop out of education is the wrong choice of programme. Pupils find it difficult to make the right choice, or they do not have a clear idea of what the occupation involves or how the job market is. Career Orientation and Guidance covers a wide range of activities intended to guide young people into the appropriate programme or occupation. The action plan involves more than merely providing information about choosing an educational programme or occupation. It also comprises mentoring, coaching, and personal guidance. There is also a direct link to business and industry, and work placements ensure that young people have good prospects on the labour market. Transfer to follow-up education programme: There has been a decline in the number of early school leavers after transferring from pre-vocational secondary education to secondary vocational education. The transfer to a follow-up programme at a different school seems to be a major stumbling block for pupils at a school for pre-vocational secondary education (VMBO). Some of them fail to register for a follow-up programme at a secondary vocational school (MBO). Of those who do Page 89 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) make the transition, many drop out in their first few months at the new school. August 2008 saw the start of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;VM2â&#x20AC;? experiment in which pupils in pre-vocational secondary education who wish to transfer to a secondary vocational programme do not need to switch to a different school. The aim of the experiment is to enable more pupils to achieve a basic qualification at secondary vocational level. They will continue to be taught within a familiar environment by teachers who they already know, by means of a single pedagogical and didactic approach. The first successful pupils in the VM2 programme received their diploma in June 2011. Care structure at school: The care structure at school and locally has been strengthened. The gap between education and care has become smaller in recent years, with improved coordination between the two. The growth in the number of care coordinators plays an important role in this. In 2010, 98% of schools had one or more care coordinators. The provision of socio-educational services has become a basic facility at all schools. This systematic approach is an important advance in identifying personal and social problems among pupils at an early stage. Quality characteristics of the good practice 8. Type of good practice The good practice example can be placed in all categories: Good policy practice supported by extensive research evidence; Field-tested good policy practice and Promising policy practice in the sense that we have to take into account that excellent register and reporting systems has to be in place. In any case it is not a practice that can be copied and implemented in the same way in a different context, the local situation has to be analysed and diagnosed by feasibility studies. Reflections on the reasons why the practice is recommended 9. Effectiveness The following chart shows the results over the years. (source: Policy in the Netherlands and provisional figures of the 2012-2013 performance agreements)

Page 90 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Please, also have a look on page 10 for the prognose for 2013-2015. 10. Efficiency Schools themselves have to organise the effort ‘drive to reduce drop-out rate’, but as you can read on page 8 of the brochure Policy in the Netherlands and provisional figures of the 2012-2013 performance agreements, under subsidy and measures, performance subsidies for individual institutions are put in place. 11. Relevance It is self evident that qualified students have a greater chance to enter the labour market at their own level. 12. Sustainability The effort ‘drive to reduce drop-out rate’ has been running for over 10 years now and it will go on for several more years, also because Europe puts a lot of emphasis on reducing early school leaving. 13. Synergies A fundamental element of the Dutch approach to preventing early school leaving is building crosssectorial partnerships and collaborations. Thus a strong emphasis is put on facilitating collaboration between schools and school leaders, researchers, policy makers, administrators, associations, teachers, students, parents, etc. 14. Transferability Generally speaking the fundamentals and the concept behind the proposed practice can be transferred to every school context, however preparation, analysis of the target situation, training, commitment, steering, and resources should be available. The project needs a long term focus and the people involved need to have endurance, and have to be able to deal with repeated setbacks.

Page 91 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Nevertheless, there are already initiatives of adopting and adapting certain elements of the Dutch ESL prevention approach. In particular, within the framework of an international pilot policy experimentation called CroCoos (Cross-sectoral cooperation focused solutions for preventing early school leaving) partners from Hungary, Serbia and Slovenia are experimenting with establishing early warning systems in their national contexts. 15. Relationship of good practice with wider educational issues and policy implications â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Pupils leaving school early â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is an economic, social, and individual problem. Each young person has his or her own aims, wishes and ambitions, and having a good education increases the likelihood of achieving them. The Dutch knowledge economy requires well-educated employees, while Dutch society also finds itself confronted by dejuvenation and the ageing of the population, with the pressure on the labour market consequently increasing.

Page 92 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010)

Case study from UK-Scotland – Leadership Capacity and Equity Building through the Review and Revision of the Scottish Teacher Education Standards Tom Hamilton 1. Context of Application GTC Scotland The General Teaching Council for Scotland is the independent professional statutory regulatory body which promotes and regulates the teaching profession in Scotland. It aspires to: 

be a world leader in professional education issues;



maintain and enhance standards of teaching and of teacher professionalism;



maintain the confidence of the public by always working in the public interest.

Originally established in 1965, GTC Scotland was the first such professional, regulatory body for teaching and teachers in the United Kingdom and one of the first teaching councils in the world. On 2 April 2012 the existing legislation that established and governed GTC Scotland was replaced by The Public Services Reform (General Teaching Council for Scotland) Order 2011 (the Order). This conferred independent status on GTC Scotland, with enhanced powers and greater flexibility of operation. As a result GTC Scotland became the world's first independent professional, regulatory body for teaching. Since its inception GTC Scotland had a wide range of professional responsibilities but until 2012 some decisions were subject to final approval by the Scottish Government. GTC Scotland has also always been financially independent as it was funded by teachers and not from the public purse. Under the Order GTC Scotland's general functions are to: 

keep a register of teachers;



establish and review the standards of education and training appropriate to school teachers;



establish and review the standards of conduct and professional competence expected of a registered teacher;



investigate the fitness to teach of individuals who are, or are seeking to be, registered;



keep itself informed of the education and training of individuals undertaking courses for the education and training of teachers;



consider and make recommendations to Scottish Ministers about matters relating to teachers' education, training, career development and fitness to teach as well as the supply of teachers;



keep such registers of other individuals working in educational settings as it thinks fit;



maintain a scheme of Professional Update for teachers.

Page 93 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) In carrying out its functions, GTC Scotland must have regard to the interests of the public and must act in a way which: 

is proportionate, accountable, transparent and consistent;



is targeted only where action is needed;



encourages equal opportunities;



is consistent with any other principle which appears to it to represent best regulatory practice.

GTC Scotland ensures that children and young people in Scotland are taught by qualified registered teachers and aims to promote equality and diversity in all its activities. GTC Scotland's Council is the body which formulates policy and signs off all Council business. It consists of 37 members with: 

19 elected teachers (including four Head Teachers);



11 nominated members (from Local Authorities, the Universities, the Churches, Parental Organisations, the Independent School system);



7 lay members (non-teachers).

Scottish Teacher Education With its population of just over five million, Scotland has an education system which is significantly different from the other parts of the United Kingdom. For example, since the turn of this century Scotland has had a suite of teacher education Standards which consisted of: 

the Standard for Initial Teacher Education (SITE);



the Standard for Full Registration (SFR);



the Standard for Chartered Teacher (SCT);



the Standard for Headship (SfH).

Another aspect of this difference is seen in the priorities for Teacher Education in Scotland set in the Scottish Government's publication, Teaching Scotland’s Future (Donaldson, 2011) (www.scotland.gov.uk/resource/doc/337626/0110852.pdf). (This report is often referred to as the Donaldson Report - after Graham Donaldson who had been Her Majesty's Senior Chief Inspector in Scotland until retirement when he was commissioned by the Scottish Government to undertake a review of teacher education.) Teaching Scotland’s Future was generally well received by the educational community in Scotland. The Priorities for Teacher Education in Scotland The report recognised the strengths of Scottish teacher education but then went on to identify strategic priorities by stating that 'the two most important factors which promote excellent education are the quality of the teaching profession and of its leadership' (P82) before giving 50

Page 94 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) recommendations. These recommendations, 'through the lens of career-long teacher education', were intended to further develop the quality of the teaching profession and its leadership. When Donaldson reported, Scotland had had a set of Teacher Education Standards for close to a decade but three of his recommendations were: Recommendation 35 The Professional Standards need to be revised to create a coherent overarching framework and enhanced with practical illustrations of the Standards. This overall framework should reflect a reconceptualised model of teacher professionalism. (P95) Recommendation 36 A new ‘Standard for Active Registration’ should be developed to clarify expectations of how fully registered teachers are expected to continue to develop their skills and competences. This standard should be challenging and aspirational, fully embracing enhanced professionalism for teachers in Scotland. (P95) Recommendation 46 A clear, progressive educational leadership pathway should be developed, and embodies the responsibility of all leaders to build the professional capacity of staff and ensure a positive impact on young people’s learning. Account should be taken of the relationship between theory and practical preparation, including deployment to developmental roles. (P100) The General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) is the relevant Professional Statutory Regulatory Body (PSRB) which sets the Standards for teachers in Scotland. As such it accepted these recommendations and set about a major review which involved extensive consultation with the profession and other stakeholders. A Steering Group with a wide range of stakeholders, including parents and students, was set up and three writing groups formed. Face-to-face consultation meetings were held in four Scottish cities and online responses also sought. Social media (such as Twitter) were used and synchronous online consultation meetings through Glow TV were held to encourage engagement from remoter parts of Scotland. (Glow is Scotland’s National Intranet for schools which allows joined-up working the length and breadth of Scotland. Drafts of revised Standards were presented to a working group of GTC Scotland's Education Committee and eventually final drafts were presented to the full GTC Scotland Council for approval. The Standards which emerged from this extensive exercise were: 

The Standards for Registration (Provisional, Full)



The Standard for Career-Long Professional Learning



The Standards for Leadership and Management (Middle Leadership, Headship)

The Standards for Registration are mandatory requirements which all teachers in Scotland must meet. Provisional Registration is awarded on the completion of a GTCS accredited university programme of Initial Teacher Education (ITE) with Full Registration then following the completion of a probationary period, normally one year within the Teacher Induction Scheme. The Standard for Full Registration thereafter remains as the baseline Standard for competence which all teachers have to Page 95 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) maintain. The Standard for Career-Long Professional Learning addresses Donaldson's notion of a Standard which will be 'challenging and aspirational', relevant to classroom teachers throughout their careers. The Standards for Leadership and Management provide a pathway for those teachers wishing to move into Middle Leadership and ultimately, for some, Headship. Throughout all of the Standards a leadership thread will be found. In the Standards for Registration the seeds of leadership are sown with further development then coming in the Standard for CareerLong Professional Learning. Those teachers wishing to follow a specific leadership and management pathway, through gaining promoted posts will find the Standards for Leadership and Management, both Middle Leadership and eventually Headship, of real relevance. 2. SL Policy Area(s) Related to Good Practice The policy areas to which this case study relate are: 

the development of appropriate Standards acceptable to the teaching profession in Scotland, and with relevance to school leadership;



the use of open and inclusive practices in reviewing, revising and developing those Standards (a form of distributed leadership in itself), and



the capacity building of leadership and the development of equity across the Scottish education system.

3. Main Goals of the Practice The main goals of this exercise were: 

to involve teachers and other stakeholders in the active development of the revised Standards;



to have the revised Standards accepted by and then actively used by teachers in their ongoing work;



to encourage all teachers, from their earliest days as students in Initial Teacher Education and then as probationers in the Teacher Induction Scheme, throughout their careers up to, potentially for some, as Head Teachers to see that they have a leadership role to play;



to develop further the values within the Standards so as to encourage increased equity within Scottish education.

4. Key Initiators/Implementers of Good Practice As noted above, a Steering Group with a wide range of stakeholders, including parents and students, was set up and three writing groups formed. The Steering Group was chaired by a senior officer of GTC Scotland and encouraged to steer where the review should go as well as offering practical advice on what the key features of the revised Standards should be. The group, quite deliberately, consisted of a disparate set of voices so that as wide a range of views as possible was taken into account. Its membership was drawn from organisations such as: 

Education Scotland/Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education;



Independent Schools; Page 96 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 

Local Authorities (employers;



Non-Governmental Organisations;



Parental Organisations;



Private Training Providers;



Scottish Government;



Scottish Qualifications Authority;



Scottish Youth Parliament;



Social Work;



Unions;



Universities.

The three writing groups were deliberately kept small with a membership of six to eight in each group. Each group was chaired by an officer of GTC Scotland and had on it at least one from the following categories: 

Teachers;



Head Teachers;



Local Authority staff;



Union representatives;



University staff.

Both the Steering Group and the writings groups were designed to have a variety of voices but ultimately the intention was that they would be inclusive and this was indeed what happened. While a great deal of 'storming' happened within the writing groups this was followed by 'norming' with the development of consensual approaches, acceptable to all of the various parties. The materials developed by the working groups were subject to face-to-face consultation through meetings which were held in four Scottish cities and online responses were also sought. Social media (such as Twitter) were used and synchronous online consultation meetings through Glow TV were held to encourage engagement from remoter parts of Scotland. Previous reviews of the Standards had all involved consultation exercises but this was by far the most extensive consultation undertaken during a review of the Standards, with a genuine attempt being made to reach a variety of stakeholders and to empower the teaching profession through such engagement. GTC Scotland has an Education Committee and the Standards fall within its remit. It formed a small working group to consider the review of the Standards. The small working group contained members from the main constituencies which form the full Council. The small working group considered the drafts prepared by the three writing groups and finally signed them off before they went to full Council for its overall approval.

Page 97 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) Given the nature of Council and its range constituencies there was considerable debate even when it looked at 'final' drafts for approval but eventually the revised Standards were agreed and published. 5. Current/Prospective Beneficiaries The ultimate beneficiaries of the Standards are learners who have well qualified and professional teachers. However, teachers themselves benefit through having increased professionalism and selfefficacy. Their professionalism is recognised within the schools, the wider educational environment and ultimately within society. Teaching is a well regarded profession. 6. Contact Information/On-line Information Copies of the Standards and related http://www.gtcs.org.uk/standards/standards.aspx

support

materials

can

found

at:

Follow-up contact and further information can be gained from: tom.hamilton@gtcs.org.uk 7. Description of the Implementation of the Good Practice Much of the good practice regarding the review of the Standards has been outlined above. However, regarding the encouragement of equity it is worth noting that literally the same statement on values appears in each of the Standards. Scottish teachers are expected to consider as part of their professionalism: 

Social Justice;



Integrity;



Trust and Respect.

and to have a strong Personal Commitment. Each element is then spelled out in further detail. For example, the text for Social Justice sets out the following sub-elements: 

Embracing locally and globally the educational and social values of sustainability, equality and justice and recognising the rights and responsibilities of future as well as current generations.



Committing to the principles of democracy and social justice through fair, transparent, inclusive and sustainable policies and practices in relation to: age, disability, gender and gender identity, race, ethnicity, religion and belief and sexual orientation.



Valuing as well as respecting social, cultural and ecological diversity and promoting the principles and practices of local and global citizenship for all learners.



Demonstrating a commitment to engaging learners in real world issues to enhance learning experiences and outcomes, and to encourage learning our way to a better future.



Respecting the rights of all learners as outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and their entitlement to be included in decisions regarding their learning experiences and have all aspects of their well-being developed and supported.

Page 98 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) GTC Scotland is not naive and fully recognises that simply stating such things in Standards is no guarantee that teachers will 'live' these expectations - but there is a broad professional consensus that these elements are important in Scottish education and an encouragement to teachers to deliver on them. GTC Scotland has also been developing a scheme entitled Professional Update which takes as its focus the improvement of teacher professionalism through increased autonomy and well supported career-long professional learning, with a five yearly sign-off against the relevant Standard. This too acts as an encouragement for teachers to take seriously and actively address the Standards as part of what is legally set as a 'reaccreditation' scheme. In terms of encouraging the continuum of a focus on leadership, all of the Standards express a belief that all teachers should have opportunities to be leaders. The Standards for Registration then include a focus on leadership for learning. This is further developed in the Standard for Career-Long Professional Learning which includes both a focus on teacher leadership and leadership for learning, while in the Standards for Leadership and Management there is an expectation that leaders and managers will lead learning for, and with, all learners with whom they engage. They also work with, and support the development of, colleagues and other partners. The Standards for Leadership and Management therefore include a focus on leadership for learning, teacher leadership, and working collegiately to build leadership capacity in others. Quality Characteristics of the Good Practice 8. Type of good practice This type of good practice fits into field-tested good policy practice where a strategy, policy programme or project has been shown to work effectively and produce successful outcomes and is supported to some degree by subjective and objective data sources. Anecdotal evidence from teacher reports suggests that the revised Standards are well regarded and being actively used by teachers. More specific research statistics come from the use of the GTC Scotland website where the pages dealing with the Standards have had increased number of hits and are proving popular. Further research evidence comes from research completed looking at the development of Professional Update where significantly higher percentages of teachers year on year are reporting that they are making more frequent use of the Standards within their everyday work and ongoing professional learning. Reflections on the Reasons why the Practice is Recommended 9. Effectiveness The effectiveness of the inclusive nature of the review reflects a belief that teaching and teacher professionalism should be based on collegial approaches. A well known and widely accepted adage of change management is that any proposed change will be met by resistance by those subject to the change. However, the collegial and inclusive model of consultation used by GTC Scotland in the review of the Standards has meant that very largely they have been accepted by teachers in Scotland and integrated into their working practices. 10. Efficiency

Page 99 of 101

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) The review process was intensive and time consuming. It depended on the very real and extensive commitment of those involved but the costs were deemed to be worthwhile so as to ensure the likely acceptance and use of the revised Standards. 11. Relevance The relevance of the review of the Standards fits in with modern day conceptualisations of professionalism. Menter et al (2010) in a research review for Teaching Scotland's Future identify different types of professionalism: the effective teacher: standards and competence; accountability (Mahony and Hextall, 2000); the reflective teacher: reflective cycle; commitment to personal and professional development (Pollard, 2008); the enquiring teacher: teacher as researcher; curriculum developer (Stenhouse, 1975), and the transformative teacher: challenge to the status quo; progressive social change and greater social justice through education (Sachs, 2003). The model of the teacher presented in the GTC Scotland Standards also looks to other research and theorists who propose: Teachers as change agents (Fullan 1993); Activist teachers (Sachs, 2003); Teachers as adaptive experts (Darling-Hammond and Bransford, 2005), and Inquiry as stance (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2009). A third area of influence has been the work of Evetts (2012) in which traditional, occupational professionalism is contrasted with recent forms of organisational professionalism before she goes on to propose that contemporary professionalism should be a hybrid of the two: Occupational professionalism: commitment to altruism, high standards and ethics - but criticised for being a closed shop, self-interest, protectionism. Organisational professionalism: standards, targets, accountability, managerialism â&#x20AC;&#x201C; but criticised for seeing teachers as functionaries, curriculum deliverers. Hybrid professionalism: professional wish for empowerment, innovation and autonomy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; but recognising the public interest and a need for quality assurance and accountability. 12. Sustainability Standards have a shelf life of about five years so the intention will be to review them again after that approximate timescale. At that point evidence will have been gathered to gauge whether the current Standards have been effective and have influenced practice in Scottish education with a positive effect on pupil learning. 13. Synergies The involvement of such a wide range of stakeholders in the review process was very positive for the collegial and consensual nature of Scottish education. Page 100 of 101

Figu re 2 The Hou se of NM S

European Policy Network on School Leadership (EAC/42/2010) 14. Transferability Scotland is a small country with a high degree of consensus about the aims and implementation of educational policy. The view from GTC Scotland is that it is unwise (impossible?) for another system, another country simply to adopt such processes. However, it is suggested that it might be possible for other systems or countries to adapt elements of this process to their own ends and then accrue positive advantages. 15. Relationship of Good Practice with Wider Educational Issues and Policy Implications This case study looks at the national level - but albeit at the small nation level. It fits in with the broadly consensual approach taken towards education by the profession itself but very importantly it fits in with the Scottish political consensus too. Sources Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation, New York: Teachers College Press Darling-Hammond, Linda and Bransford, John (2005) What Teachers Need to Know: Foundational Knowledge for Teacher Education, San Francisco: Wiley Evetts, J (2012) Professionalism in Turbulent Times: Changes, Challenges and Opportunities - paper deliverer at Propel International Conference University of Stirling 9-11 May 2012 Mahony, P. and Hextall, I. (2000) Reconstructing Teaching, London: Routledge Falmer. Menter, Ian, Hulme, Moire, Elliot, Dely and Lewin, Jon (2010) Literature Review on Teacher Education in the 21st Century, Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research

Page 101 of 101