case studies on good policy practices in the field of school leadership

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)

of 101

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. 1

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

[email protected]

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.


of 101

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.


of 101

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


of 101

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 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.

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.


of 101

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),

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

o 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.


of 101

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.


of 101

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 leaders’ 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:


of 101

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 “soft” 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 nation-

wide 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)


of 101

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.


of 101

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


of 101

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 country’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 – 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 co-

operation 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 stakeholders’ knowledge, skills, experience for higher learning quality.


of 101

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.

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.

Figure 3: The implementers of the good practices

6

2 3 4 1 2 1 1 0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2 5 5

7 7 4

2 2 1 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%


of 101

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.


of 101

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):

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)

2. 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


of 101

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/epnosl-

vilnius-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-discourse-

school-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-inclusive-

education-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-leadership-

perspective-equity-and-learning

http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/epnosl-vilnius-pla-day-2-jacky-lumby-article.pdf

http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/epnosl-vilnius-pla-day-2-jacky-lumby-article.pdf

http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/deliverable/critical-factors-discourse-school-leadership-perspective-equity-and-learning


http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/exploring-inclusive-education-for-school-leadership-2013_5.pdf

http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/exploring-inclusive-education-for-school-leadership-2013_5.pdf




of 101

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-year-


of 101

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,

[[email protected]]

Christoph Hofbauer, M.A., Pädagogische Hochschule Niederösterreich, Baden,

[[email protected]]

Prof. Dr. Michael Schratz, Dept. of Teacher Education and School Research, Dean of School of

Education, University of Innsbruck

[[email protected]]

Websites:

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

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


of 101

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 role-

taking 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

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

http://www.neuemittelschule.at/

http://www.nmsvernetzung.at/

http://www.nmseltern.at/

http://www.virtuelle-ph.at/

http://www.lernforschung.at/


of 101

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 Zürich and IOS Hamburg

Tanja Westfall-Greiter, MA, University of Innsbruck, School of Education

Christoph Hofbauer, M.A., Pädagogische Hochschule Baden.


of 101

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 Pädagogische Hochschule Niederösterreich 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 14-

year-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

http://www.leadershipacademy.at/index.en.php


of 101

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.


of 101

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


of 101

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

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

Figure 6: The House of NMS


of 101

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.

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


of 101

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 41 345

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


of 101

Carinthia 70 532

Lower Austria 255 1.438

Upper Austria 204 1.327

Salzburg 56 357

Styria 164 1.123

Tyrol 107 807

Vorarlberg 53 560

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.

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

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

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

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


of 101

11. Sustainability

Innovation must be so widely adopted that it is able to sustain itself and become part of the “way we

do things around here”. Rogers’ 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


of 101

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.


of 101

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 non-

denominational 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.


of 101

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 – by means of the board of school heads – 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.


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.


of 101

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


Specify contact persons and/or published materials (e.g. WWW links) which can offer further inside

information about the good practice.

Marc Leunis ([email protected])

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 – 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.

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.bellon.ugent.be/english.html


of 101

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)




9. Effectiveness

The system of communities of schools has been evaluated by academic researchers from the

universities of Ghent and Antwerp.




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);




of 101

- 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 didn’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 upper-

school 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.


of 101

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 theory-

practice 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.


Lejf Moos, Department of Education, Aarhus University, email: [email protected]

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


of 101

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; Schön, 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.


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).


of 101

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.


of 101

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


of 101

equity and learning. The 2015 event will explore organisational, legal and financial frameworks and

existent leeway to encourage school development towards equity and learning.


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: Bernd Jankofsky (LISUM) – E-mail: [email protected]

brandenburg.de

Dr. Katrin Basold (NLQ) – E-mail: [email protected]

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.


of 101

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.



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.


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%) – 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.


of 101

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.


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.


of 101

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


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.


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.


of 101

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.


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).


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.


of 101

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.


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.


of 101

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.


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).


of 101

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.


of 101

Case study from Latvia – Initiative “CHANGE OPPORTUNITIES FOR

SCHOOLS” (Developing Schools in the Multifunctional Community Centers)

Aija Tuna, Guntra Kaufmane


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.


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 life-

long 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.


of 101

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.


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.


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.


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.


of 101

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.


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: [email protected], +371-29416341

Documentary “The Second Bell for Change” in English available at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIaD_JCANk

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 1691-

5887, 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

http://www.parmainuskolas.lv/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIaD_JCANk


of 101

etc.


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 – 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 – 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.



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


of 101

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.


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

5 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).

http://www.sfl.lv/upload_file/2011%20gads/Parmainu_skolas_ietekmes_novertejums.pdf


of 101

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 – 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


of 101

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 school’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: needs-

based 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.


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 schools’ 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.


of 101

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.


of 101

Case study from Lithuania – NordPlus Horizontal programme project

“Development of School Management in the Baltic Region“ (2008-2010)

Danguole Salavejiene


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 co-

funding. 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.


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 in-

service 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.


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);


of 101

- 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.


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.


Direct target group: school administrators (school head, deputy head, head of sector/teachers’

group)

Indirect target group: school students, school community.


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

http://mokslasplius.lt/mokslo-lietuva/2006-2011/node/2860.html

http://www.d-fakti.lv/

http://www.gorod.lv/

http://www.daugavpils.lv/

http://www.daugip.lv/

http://www.ipd.lv/


of 101

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-institucij-

koordinuojam-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

http://www.lyderiulaikas.smm.lt/

http://projects.5ci.lt/socpedagogika

http://www.pkti.vpu.lt/

http://www.vpu.lt/

http://www.ht.ut.ee/784743

http://mokslasplius.lt/mokslo-lietuva/node/2860

http://www.slideshare.net/smpf/2008-m-bendrosios-nordplus-programos-lietuvos-institucij-koordinuojam-projekt-svadas-1779548

http://www.slideshare.net/smpf/2008-m-bendrosios-nordplus-programos-lietuvos-institucij-koordinuojam-projekt-svadas-1779548

http://school.management.vpu.lt/




of 101


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.








of 101

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.


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


of 101

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-


of 101

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.


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.


of 101

Case study from Malta – All Together Now 2014-2024: Reflective Practice,

Inclusive Leadership, and Student Engagement

Salvina Muscat


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

“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 leaders” (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.


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.


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.



of 101

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.


Middle management personnel in the Ministry and in government schools, and school teachers.


Salvina Muscat at: [email protected]

John P. Portelli at: [email protected]


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 (critical-

democratic 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.



The good practice being described here is primarily, though not exclusively, an example of a Field-

tested 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 – a way of being


of 101

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


(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, critical-

democratic 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 Teachers’ 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.


of 101

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.


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.


of 101

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.


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.


The policy areas with which the good practice is related to:

professional standards on SL,

research on SL,

SL capacity building,

distributed leadership


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.


of 101


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.


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)


http://www.przywodztwo-edukacyjne.edu.pl/

Leader of the project: Ośrodek Rozwoju Edukacji (Centre for Education Development)

Partner: Jagiellonian University


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:

http://www.przywodztwo-edukacyjne.edu.pl/


of 101

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).



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.


of 101


9. Synergies

For example, collaboration between schools and school leaders, researchers, policy makers,

administrators, associations, teachers, students, parents, etc.


of 101

Case study from Portugal – The use of self-evaluation in schools’

improvement

Ana Paula Silva, Carmo Climaco


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, hipper-

bureaucratization 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 action-

research 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.


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.


To promote the capacity of school leadership in meeting authorities demands on school evaluation

and improvement planning


of 101

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.


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.


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.


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) …


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.

http://recil.grupolusofona.pt/


of 101

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”.


of 101

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.



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


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.


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, self-

confidence, 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”.


of 101

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.


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.


of 101

Case study from Slovenia – E-competent headmaster (development and

implementation)

Vlasta Poličnik, Borut Campelj


Ministry of Education, Science and Sport and National Education Institute conducted a project E-

education 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.


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

interrelationships/connectedness with European Commission initiative “Opening up Education”6 and

digital competences framework – IPTS report7

SL capacity building: development of the competences need for effective school management


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

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

7 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


of 101

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.


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).


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.


Borut Čampelj – [email protected] (Ministry of Education, Science and Sport)

Vlasta Poličnik, [email protected] (National school for leadership in education)

Nives Kreuh, [email protected] (National Education Institute)

Published materials (in English):

- The way towards e-competency (http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/bilteni/E-

solstvo_BILTEN_ANG_2012_screen.pdf)

- video: E-education consultation (for headmasters and teachers) -

https://video.arnes.si/portal/asset.zul?id=v1Nxacp8Tup6dICoMYIt0NBb

- 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


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:




http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/bilteni/E-solstvo_BILTEN_ANG_2012_screen.pdf

http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/bilteni/E-solstvo_BILTEN_ANG_2012_screen.pdf

https://video.arnes.si/portal/asset.zul?id=v1Nxacp8Tup6dICoMYIt0NBb

http://www.sio.si/fileadmin/video/promocijski_video/film3_SIRIKT2012_PravaPot_verzija12angl.flv


of 101

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)

http://www.sio.si/


of 101

The trainers of headmasters and advisors were headmasters, teachers and advisors at National

Educational Institute.




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.


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.


of 101

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).


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/

http://www.mizs.gov.si/en/media_room/news/article/55/8712/49ef4689101384d235ef694a56668bb2/


of 101

Case study from Sweden – The National Principal Training Program in

Sweden

Jonas Höög


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


of 101

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.

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.

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 knowledge-

based 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.


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.


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,


of 101

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.


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.


Direct beneficiaries are Principals and Preschool leaders. Indirect beneficiaries are teachers, pupils,

parents and in the long run hopefully the Swedish society.


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-enskild-

publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%

2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D2254.


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

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-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D2254




of 101

requirements of 30 higher education credits with 10 higher education credits in each of the three

modules.



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 co-

ordination 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.


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.


of 101

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


of 101

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 don’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.


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.


of 101

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


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.


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.


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 2012-

2013 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.


of 101

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.


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.


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.


Responsible department: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, Department Intermediate

Vocational Education, mr Hans Leenders, director Vocational and Adult Education.


of 101

http://www.aanvalopschooluitval.nl/userfiles/file/2012/2012026_OCW_VSV_UK-

versie_VSV_beleid_LR_internet.pdf

https://www.spd.dcu.ie/site/edc/staff/documents/Multi-

InterDisciplinaryTeamsNESETReportApril20123.pdf

information: Huub Friederichs: [email protected]


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.

http://www.aanvalopschooluitval.nl/userfiles/file/2012/2012026_OCW_VSV_UK-versie_VSV_beleid_LR_internet.pdf

http://www.aanvalopschooluitval.nl/userfiles/file/2012/2012026_OCW_VSV_UK-versie_VSV_beleid_LR_internet.pdf

https://www.spd.dcu.ie/site/edc/staff/documents/Multi-InterDisciplinaryTeamsNESETReportApril20123.pdf

https://www.spd.dcu.ie/site/edc/staff/documents/Multi-InterDisciplinaryTeamsNESETReportApril20123.pdf



of 101

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 level-

2 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


of 101

make the transition, many drop out in their first few months at the new school. August 2008 saw the

start of a “VM2” 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.



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.


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)


of 101

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 cross-

sectorial 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.


of 101

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.


– Pupils leaving school early – 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.


of 101

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.


of 101

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

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/resource/doc/337626/0110852.pdf


of 101

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


of 101

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 Career-

Long 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;


of 101

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.


of 101

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 self-

efficacy. 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 support materials can be found at:

http://www.gtcs.org.uk/standards/standards.aspx

Follow-up contact and further information can be gained from: [email protected]

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.

http://www.gtcs.org.uk/standards/standards.aspx


of 101

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


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


of 101

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 – but criticised for

seeing teachers as functionaries, curriculum deliverers.

Hybrid professionalism: professional wish for empowerment, innovation and autonomy – 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.


of 101

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

Figu

re 2

The

Hou

se

of

NM

S

case studies on good policy practices in the field of school leadership

Documents