Professional learning and leadership practice for supporting policy work in schools

Background: In Canada, contemporary collaborative professional learning models for educators utilise multiple forms of evidence to inform practice. Commonly, two forms of evidence are prioritised: (a) research-based evidence and (b) classroom-based evidence of student learning. In Ontario, the integration of these two forms of evidence within professional learning is increasingly facilitated by ‘middle leaders’ – school district level educators who support system change through sustained school- and classroom-embedded professional development with teachers.Purpose: This study investigated the role of the middle leader in supporting teachers’ use of research- and classroom-based evidence within the context of collaborative professional learning. It was guided by the following research questions: (a) What is the capacity of middle leaders to use research- and classroom-based evidence within professional learning contexts? (b) What challenges do middle leaders encounter in using research- and classroom-based evidence within professional learning contexts? and (c) How do middle leaders develop their capacity for evidence use within professional learning contexts?Programme Description: The context for this study was a three-year networked professional learning project that included nine school districts in Ontario, Canada. An evidence-based collaborative inquiry approach was used to explore the common goal of improving mathematics teaching and learning across the nine districts.Participants: A purposeful sample of 30 middle leaders (i.e. system facilitators) and 54 teachers (36 Primary/Junior school teachers [student ages 4–11] and 18 Intermediate/Senior school teachers [student ages 12–18]) across the nine school districts was selected based on these educators’ high degree of engagement in the project and willingness to participate in data collection. System facilitators were relative experts in mathematics instruction and provided differentiated and embedded support in mathematics pedagogy to school inquiry teams (i.e. school administrators and selected teachers), responsive to their local needs and goals.Design and Methods: A qualitative approach was used, comprising focus groups conducted at the end of each project year with study participants. Data collection yielded 27 system facilitator focus groups (nine per year) and 27 teacher focus groups (also nine per year), each transcribed verbatim.Findings: Standard thematic coding of focus group data was used to elucidate four emergent themes across system facilitators and teachers: (a) realising the need for data literacy in the construction of classroom evidence, (b) challenges to evidence use, (c) support enabling evidence use and (d) changing attitudes about evidence. Overall, findings indicated that both middle leaders and teachers required data literacy to use, successfully, classroom evidence within a collaborative inquiry. Although middle leaders encountered challenges to facilitating teachers’ classroom evidence use in collaborative inquiry, they developed their own data literacy through regular cross-district middle leader learning sessions and targeted support from pedagogical and research experts. While both middle leaders and teachers shifted their attitudes and practices with respect to classroom evidence use within the project, this finding did not extend to their critical interrogation of research evidence sources (i.e. research literacy).Conclusions: Middle leaders play a central role in promoting evidence use within networked collaborative professional learning. Diverse strategies are needed to support middle leaders’ use of both research- and classroom-based evidence throughout collaborative inquiry cycles, to inform and monitor classroom, school, district and regional impacts. While increased data literacy may enhance educators’ use of classroom evidence, it may not directly impact their uptake of research to inform their collaborative inquiries.

Background Middle leaders are well placed to exert a positive influence on teacher learning, due in part to their proximity to the classroom. However, to maximise that potential, more needs to be understood about the complex connections between instruction-oriented middle leadership and professional learning, particularly in non-Western contexts. Purpose This study, undertaken in a Chinese context, investigated how middle leaders, specifically those who headed teaching-research groups (TRGs), enacted their instructional leadership to influence teacher learning and build teacher capacity. Method A qualitative, multi-case design was employed. Participants included 6 vice-principals, 18 TRG heads and 24 classroom teachers. Data collection, in the form of semi-structured interviews, observations, and field notes, was conducted over four months in six schools in China. Data analysis involved the synthesis of participant narratives to identify how middle leaders made sense of, and promoted, teacher learning through their instructional leadership. Findings Analysis allowed themes and sub-themes to emerge, suggesting four domains of leadership practice: (i) nurturing teacher job-embedded learning, (ii) creating a climate conducive to teacher learning, (iii) engaging teachers in school-based action research and (iv) mobilising external resources to develop teachers. From this, an early-stage conceptual model was created, describing how middle leaders used their instructional leadership as a primary pathway of influence, and how they emphasised relational bonds and organisational structure to stimulate teacher learning. Conclusion The findings provide insights into middle leadership in the Chinese context, yielding a view into core practices of middle leadership for teacher learning, and drawing attention to teacher development practices that are relevant in other contexts internationally. Tapping into the potential of the middle leader to support teachers’ professional learning can contribute to wider school improvement, ultimately benefitting all learners.

Empirical studies examining the impact of principal instructional leadership (PIL) as well as teacher self-efficacy (TSE) as a mediator to teacher leadership (TL) on teacher professional learning (TPL) practices are minimal. Theoretically, this study provides empirical evidence through the application of four models, namely the Leadership Development for Teachers (LDT), the PIL Model, the TSE Model, and the TPL Model, to enrich the understanding of TPL. Employing Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) analysis, survey data were collected from 522 teachers in secondary schools in Kelantan. The research strategy that has been used is a cross-sectional quantitative survey. The data were analyzed utilising the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of TL on professional learning practices. The results indicate that both PIL as a construct and TSE influence TL and TPL practices. In other words, teachers and principals with power as well as support are likely to deliberate and actively notice learning opportunities. This study takes a holistic approach by analyzing all of the components related to good leadership in education. Such insights shed light on how school policymakers and administrators can create atmospheres that promote ongoing professional development for teachers. In the future, it might be beneficial for researchers to investigate similar dynamics in other types of educational institutions in order to broaden our knowledge of ways to encourage various kinds of TPL.

Call for Papers - Innovative Professional Learning in Early Childhood Education and Care: Inspiring Hope and Action

Call for Papers - Innovative Professional Learning in Early Childhood Education and Care: Inspiring Hope and Action

This study examines how middle leaders – teachers who support their colleagues’ learning while maintaining instructional responsibilities – facilitate professional learning (PL). Through a qualitative study of two middle leaders facilitating classroom-embedded PL, we investigate how their facilitation practice supports teacher learning within and across PL sessions and what guided their practice. Analysis from two PL cycles revealed that middle leaders’ relational facilitation practices supported their relations with teachers and PL content, and teachers’ relations to the PL content. Our analysis showed that these practices were guided by three principles: (1) using instances of shared representation of instruction may generate robust teacher conversations, (2) specifying mathematics, classroom teaching, and student learning leads to generative dialogue, and (3) probing differentially on teachers’ contributions in light of their expertise supports teachers’ learning trajectories. We found that the facilitation practices, principles, and the PL structure reinforced one another, fostering teachers’ pedagogical reasoning about content, student reasoning, and teaching, as well as generative instructional dialogue about their future teaching. This study confirms existing research findings and contributes to the knowledge base of middle leaders, focusing on the facilitation practices of two middle leaders who learned on the job, rather than through formal facilitation training.

Middle leaders in schools are increasingly recognised as playing pivotal roles in school improvement. Although some school systems provide formal professional development for middle leaders, many middle leaders express a preference for job-embedded learning. Yet, international research has documented difficulties in providing intensive support from principals which instead is often ad hoc. This study examines how middle leaders’ professional learning can be supported through the development of appropriate organisational structures. It presents three principal-designed models distilled from qualitative data collected in 12 case study schools, inclusive of public, semi-private, and international schools in four East Asian societies. Each model contributed to the development of middle leadership capacity in areas relevant to the schools’ improvement agendas. The models vary in degrees of formality, resource intensiveness, and processes for engaging and developing leadership. The findings contribute to the growing literature on middle leader development, and the role of school infrastructure in professional learning by suggesting how school-based leader development strategies can be framed in coherent and intentional models that take into account of the available infrastructure and potential professional interactions to provide systematic in situ support for middle leaders.

This article aims to explore how distinct conditions affect qualitative differences at the micro level in middle leaders’ communicative practices for leading professional learning and development. Research on this subject is sparse. In a previous study, we explored how different leading practices formed what we call a web of leading, working towards the common goal of leading and developing teachers’ professional learning. We identified differences in the conditions – that is, the practice architectures – for two middle leading practices. In the present study, we strive to examine how the identified differences affect middle leaders’ communicative practices. Drawing on the theory of practice architectures and on quality aspects in communication for learning, we conducted a comparative analysis. The findings illustrate the qualitative differences in middle leaders’ communicative practices and their actions when leading and facilitating professional learning. The article concludes that different conditions for middle leading practices have a decisive influence on the quality of conversations for professional learning, indicating that they might have a decisive influence on the legitimacy of middle leaders.

There is a long and rich history of research, scholarship and publication on educational leadership, albeit that most of this has centred on the important work of principals and school senior managers/administrators. More recently there has been growing interest in middle leadership. We have been researching and publishing about educational middle leadership for about 10 years now, and this led us to propose this special issue of School Leadership and Management. To initiate the development of this special issue, we, the guest editors, put out a call for expressions of interest (EOI), and 25 were received from across 12 different countries, and this is indicative of the broad interest in this topic. From these EOIs, about half were invited to prepare full papers that were then subjected to all the usual reviewing and revision procedures. The result is this special issue, which brings together a collection of articles from international researchers that consider what drives change in education – specifically the important work and practices of middle leaders. Importantly, it continues the developing dialogue about, and theorisation of, middle leadership in ways that understand it as complementary to, but not the same as, principal leadership or senior school management.

This chapter takes up the ideas presented in Part II—times, spaces, bodies, and things as essential dimensions of professional practice and learning. The focus here is specifically on how professionals learning about, from and with the people they are there to help (in this case, families with young children), and each other. The chapter begins by laying out a distinctive conceptualisation of professional learning in practice. This sees learning and practice as entangled, but asymmetrically related. The idea of learning as involving the production, maintenance, restoration, repair and modification of textures is presented. These concepts are then entangled with empirical data, furthering the conceptualisation of attuning (introduced in Part II), and showing how learning performs crucial connecting and sensitising functions, through textural and epistemic work. A focus on handover practices reveals details of these ideas, and also provides a platform to explore professional learning in practice as choreographed to varying degrees. The whole chapter is framed in terms of the intensification of learning imperatives associated with partnership-based approaches to professional practice. The need to learn as a part of practice, and the need to act amid conditions of uncertain, incomplete and ambiguous knowledge is also highlighted. The chapter shows how a sociomaterial approach, combined with the novel framework presented here, offers valuable insights into challenges associated with contemporary professional practice.

Professional growth that encourages the active learning of a new discipline of studies, like gifted and talented education, through reflection and engagement is called professional learning. Hence, for the many general educators, administrators, and support staff members whose primary training in gifted education lies in professional learning after completing the initial education in their fields, reflection is highly recommended. Because most professional learning in the field of gifted education occurs while educators are in the workplace, it is critical that the training received is the result of best practice. Training that promotes professional learning amongst school staffs is a necessity in gifted education where the ultimate goal is student impact. Educational leaders who develop and implement professional learning in gifted education can capitalize on the notion that the conceptualization of reflection and practice can be the individualized choice of the participant in order to increase the likelihood that reflective practice occurs.

This study explores the professional development learning needs of preschool teachers in the context of inclusive education in Latvia. Despite the global and national emphasis on inclusive education over the past two decades, its implementation remains uneven and highly dependent on the professional competence of educators. Recognizing that teachers’ professional learning needs are central to effective inclusive education, this research aims to identify the specific learning needs of preschool teachers and examine how these needs vary based on teachers’ length of service, level of education, preschool affiliation, and preschool type (municipal or private). The study employs a quantitative research design using a structured questionnaire administered to 99 preschool teachers across nine institutions in three Latvian municipalities. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVA. The findings indicate that the most critical learning needs include implementing differentiated teaching and learning processes, acquiring diverse teaching methods, understanding inclusive education, and managing behavioral difficulties. Significant differences were observed in learning needs based on institutional type and individual teacher characteristics, highlighting the necessity of a tailored, context-sensitive approach to professional development. The study underscores the importance of individualized and school-tailored strategies in teacher training for inclusive education. It also reveals gaps in teacher readiness to include certain groups of children – such as gifted children or those with sensory and physical impairments – pointing to areas requiring greater policy and training focus. These results contribute to the development of more effective, evidence-based professional development models that align with the realities of inclusive preschool education in Latvia.

Education policy and policy making is shaped through the activities of a complex network of educators, educational leaders, researchers, community members, as well as government and non-government officials and organizations. Educational researchers are a critical player in this complex network and their investigations of various educational phenomena can answer questions relevant to the design and implementation of education policy for school improvement. Educational research, however, often has limited influence in larger policy conversations and decisions (Orland, 2009), and this is due to many factors. Educational researchers can provide an evidence-based starting place for discussions about school improvement with the complex network of stakeholders engaged in policy development and implementation, but they must be more intentionally and systematically thoughtful about the connections of their work to policy and policy making. Furthermore, researchers can increase the relevance of their work for policy through the careful design and framing of research in collaboration with end-users, and an awareness of its implications. In so doing, researchers can spur the interest and dissemination of their findings to wider audiences. This book offers resources for education researchers, faculty, and advanced graduate students interested in maximizing the relevance of their research on policy for school improvement. In achieving this purpose, the book is organized into three sections: 1) A primer for education policy making in the United States; 2) Designing research to maximize education policy relevance; and 3) Engaging users of research to communicate its relevance to policymakers.This book is primarily for education researchers, faculty, and advanced graduate students seeking to improve the visibility and impact of their research on school improvement, particularly in the realm of educational policy and policy making. While this book is a volume in the book series for the American Educational Research Association Special Interest Group, Leadership for School Improvement, the importance and usefulness of the topics covered span education research more broadly. Further, the content of this book serves as a comprehensive guide for how education researchers, in general, can better situate their work to influence policy. The book is intended to be utilized by university scholars, graduate students in research or policy courses, post-doctoral fellows, as well as research associates or directors in various organizations relevant to education such as research consulting groups, non-profits which serve education causes, teacher unions, state agencies or state-level educator organizations/associations, and think tanks. Emerging or established researchers in any of these organizations who want to increase the relevance, significance and dissemination of their work into education policy will hopefully find this book useful.

This paper discusses the development of a conceptual framework for scoping, provisioning and reporting the complexities of in-service Professional Learning and Development (PLD) in the New Zealand secondary school sector with a focus on middle leaders. Government-funded PLD in the New Zealand context is a research and evidence-based service provided to schools in response to high-level government policy. These PLD contracts aim to address inequalities for young people by enhancing the quality and effectiveness of leadership and teaching practices which result in increased student achievement, especially for priority students and those from minority backgrounds. The rationale for developing a conceptual framework for understanding government-funded, externally provided professional learning and development will be discussed. Recommendations for policy makers and researchers on the complex ways research evidence and policy come together in the delivery of in-service PLD for leaders and teachers in schools will be highlighted and opportunities for improvement examined.

American Public School Administration: A Short Analysis