the epnosl framework for school leadership action planning
DESCRIPTION
in the process of School Leadership policy planning there should be actively involved critical stakeholders such as school managers, teachers, parents, local education authorities, providers of training programmes for school leaders, academics and researchers in the field, etc.TRANSCRIPT
The EPNOSL Framework for school leadership action planning AN SL POLICY ACTION PLAN FOR EQUITY AND LEARNING IS AN OPERATIONAL DOCUMENT THAT OFFERS JUSTIFICATIONS ON WHY POLICY ACTION AFFECTING SCHOOL LEADERSHIP SHOULD BE TAKEN, OUTLINES THE OVERARCHING SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY GOALS, SETS PRIORITIES, AND PRESENTS WITH DETAIL THE STRATEGIES, PROGRAMMES, PROJECTS OR OTHER POLICY ACTIONS THAT SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED BY WHOM (ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES) TO ACHIEVE SPECIFIC GOALS OF A SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY. SUCH AN ACTION PLAN FURTHER SPECIFIES THE BUDGET AS WELL AS OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED AND THE TIMETABLE FOR EACH POLICY INITIATIVE, DELINEATES THE TARGETS AND EXPECTED OUTPUTS, AND ESTABLISHES THE INDICATORS AND TYPES OF INDICATOR DATA, POLICY ACHIEVEMENT BENCHMARKS AND MONITORING MECHANISMS TO ASSESS WHETHER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY ACTION PLAN AT ITS VARIOUS PHASES HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL. An EPNoSL assumption, supported and documented by the work conducted so far, is that in Europe there are established relatively discrete traditions in the governance of school education which essentially shape how leadership is practiced in schools. These traditions are identifiable at the level of autonomy that schools and local authorities historically have in deciding on matters of pedagogy, human resources and budget allocation, and at the level and type of provisions available for the initial preparation and professional development of school leaders. Furthermore, these governance traditions are identifiable at the level of established types of school accountability and their underlying logics as well as at the level of engagement of school stakeholders in day to day school matters. From a policy perspective, the development of a solid School Leadership Policy Action Plan for Equity and Learning at national level (one of the ultimate aims of WP4), is highly beneficial. It provides with credibility to the national SL policy because it shows to SL stakeholders and the school community at large the government’s commitment to put them into practice. It helps policy designers, stakeholders and implementers ensure that all issues related to the SL national policy have been given proper consideration. It makes clear to policy makers, other stakeholders and implementers what can be achieved and what is not possible to achieve given the budget and other available resources and timetable. Further, it promotes efficiency because it can help governments and implementers save time and resources and, finally, can enhance transparency in processes of policy implementation and accountability for all people and agencies involved in the formation and implementation of SL policies for equity and learning.
Action Planning on the basis of School Leadership policy goals School Leadership Policy Action Plan for Equity and Learning requires that a School Leadership policy has already been formulated, at least in its basic form. This means that prior to engage in action planning there should be developed a, preferably widely agreed, policy vision (what we want to become in view of the current state of affairs) and a set of policy goals (what we have to achieve in order to realise our policy vision). From this perspective, our work on the sample regional School Leadership Policy Action Plan for Equity and Learning should be based on the policy goals that have been
identified and discussed by EPNoSL. These policy goals, which are presented in detail in the EPNoSL briefing notes,1 are outlined below:
• POLICY GOAL I: PROMOTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ENABLING SCHOOL LEADERSHIP ENVIRONMENT
• POLICY GOAL II: PROMOTION OF PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS, EVALUATION AND RESEARCH ON SCHOOL LEADERSHIP FOR EQUITY AND LEARNING
• POLICY GOAL III: SCHOOL LEADERSHIP CAPACITY BUILDING FOR EQUITY AND LEARNING The generic regional School Leadership Policy Action Plans for Equity and Learning will unavoidably lack in detail. However, they are expected to outline a sample of indicative policy actions and point to related issues for further discussion in the Nice PLA, such as resources required, indicative timetable, benchmarks and indicator data, on one or more SL policy goals and sub-‐goals identified in the EPNoSL briefing notes. It is suggested that prior to the drafting of each regional action plan, partners responsible for this task discuss and decide with other EPNoSL partners in their region what policy goal or sub-‐goals they want to focus upon given that some goals (or sub-‐goals) may be politically more relevant in their regional or national context than others. A MAJOR OBJECTIVE OF THE PRESENTATIONS OF THE SAMPLE REGIONAL PLANS IN THE NICE PLA IS TO OPEN UP DISCUSSIONS ON WHAT SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY GOALS POLICY MAKERS AT NATIONAL (OR SUB-‐NATIONAL) LEVEL CHOOSE TO FOCUS UPON, DEPENDING ON THEIR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY VISION AND COMMITMENTS, AND WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR ACTION PLANNING. However, it should be pointed out that although it is often assumed that policy setting and decision making proceeds policy planning (which is viewed as more related to implementation),2 the two cannot be separated because planning is what makes clearer what policy decisions can be realistically achieved. In their simplest form, action plans can be summarised in tables, one for each policy (sub)goal (see example below). Building Leadership Capacity3 … principals cannot lead a literacy improvement effort alone. They need to figure out how to augment staff expertise in literacy and distribute roles and responsibilities for literacy improvement across the school. A literacy action plan should specifically describe ways to build leadership capacity. For example, it can specify allocation of resources for new positions and time for new committees to meet and for teams and department chairs to discuss implications of the plan for their work, and for specialists to co-‐teach, meet, or mentor others. The two examples of action plan goals in Figure 1 focus on strategies to build the leadership capacity of teachers by establishing demonstration classrooms and offering support for classroom-‐based research that examines student work. Figure 1. Action Plan Goals for Building Leadership Capacity
Goal Time Line Action Steps Person(s)
Responsible Resources Evidence of Success
Establish two literacy demonstration classrooms in each content area
Summer School year
Identify teacher leaders who can provide classroom demonstrations and modeling for their peers
Principal Time to meet during the summer, stipends, assessment instruments
Meeting agendas, formation of teams
1 Available at: http://www.schoolleadership.eu/sites/default/files/the_epnosl_briefing_notes_-‐_online_version.pdf 2 See for example http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/11_200.pdf 3 Source: http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/107034/chapters/Develop-‐and-‐Implement-‐a-‐Schoolwide-‐Literacy-‐Action-‐Plan.aspx
Provide professional development to demonstration-‐classroom teachers
Principal School literacy coach, outside professional development consultants
Classroom observations, teacher and student surveys, evaluations
Create opportunities for classroom visits to observe demonstrations and modeling
Principal, department and/or curriculum chairs
Time to plan, substitute coverage
Observation rubrics, teacher surveys, notes
Goal Time Line Action Steps Person(s)
Responsible Resources Evidence of Success
Engage in classroom-‐based research by examining student work
Summer School year
Identify teachers and teacher teams to engage in classroom-‐based research
Curriculum and/or department chairs
Time to meet during the summer, stipends, assessment instruments
Meeting agendas, formation of teams
Design tuning protocols for examining student work
Department and/or curriculum chairs
Time to plan, substitute coverage, professional materials
Sample protocols, examined student work, teacher and student surveys
Provide common planning time
Principal Substitutes; time for meeting outside of contract, if necessary; stipends; copying budget
Classroom observations, teacher and student surveys, evaluations
Provide time for constructive feedback and follow-‐up activities
Master schedule coordinator, department chairs
Flexible schedule, time before/after school, restructured days
Minutes of planning meetings, teacher surveys, evaluations, presentations of results
In action planning, various types of charts (i.e. Gantt charts) will also be used to visualize the relationships and sequence of policy actions, to monitor progress made etc. Action planning can also be supported by policy management software (usually proprietary).4 National or regional government action plans can be more complex than the example presented above. This is because SL policy action planning for equity and learning at these levels may require the coordination of very different types of actions (i.e. national-‐level SL training projects, local level initiatives promoting school accountability on issues of equity, sectoral initiatives that are aimed to support disadvantaged families5
4 See for example: https://www.soa.com/products/policy_manager, http://www.hiteclabs.com/solutions/grc/policyhub/about-‐policyhub/, http://www.navexglobal.com/products/policy-‐management, http://www.powerdms.com/compliance-‐management-‐software-‐solutions/policy-‐and-‐procedure-‐management-‐software.aspx 5 Given that the wider policy problem is equity and learning in schools and the promotion of SL for equity and learning is one among different policy paths to address this problem (see
etc) to be undertaken by different government or other agencies, which in turn require specific action planning on their own. Furthermore, national or regional action planning may not only inform lower level action planning but also get inputs from them. Therefore, it is to be expected that SL action planning for equity and learning at central level will inform but also get informed by action planning undertaken by other agencies operating at local or regional levels or agencies under the supervision of different government departments.
discussion in http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/deliverable/commonly-‐agreed-‐plan-‐content-‐and-‐form-‐epnosl%E2%80%99s-‐policy-‐influence-‐toolset).
Principles and Methodologies guiding School Leadership Policy Action Planning for Equity and Learning A SECOND IMPORTANT OBJECTIVE OF THE GENERIC REGIONAL SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY ACTION PLANS FOR EQUITY AND LEARNING, AND THEIR PRESENTATION IN THE NICE PLA, IS TO RAISE AWARENESS, SHARE EXPERIENCES AND PROMOTE DISCUSSION ON THE PRINCIPLES AND METHODOLOGY(-‐IES) THAT SHOULD GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL OR SUB-‐NATIONAL SCHOOL LEADERSHIP POLICY PLANS. In some EU countries and in other countries around the world, there are explicit government guidelines and established regulations regarding the principles and methodologies for the development and final approval of policy action plans developed by government agencies, local authorities etc. In other EU countries such principles and methodologies are less clearly articulated and mostly apply to policy programmes co-‐funded by the EU. In the context of EPNoSL we have, at least indirectly, identified and discussed challenges in the formulation of SL policy making and issues that need to be taken into account in the planning and implementation of SL policies.6 The EPNoSL case studies of good SL policy examples to be presented in Nice PLA are also anticipated to contribute to the identification of policy principles and methodologies that can promote good policy making in the field of School Leadership. Overall, the EPNoSL work has highlighted the need to take into account the following interrelated principles in School Leadership policy planning: PARTICIPATIVE PLANNING: in the process of School Leadership policy planning there should be actively involved critical stakeholders such as school managers, teachers, parents, local education authorities, providers of training programmes for school leaders, academics and researchers in the field, etc. This is because those who are expected to implement the School Leadership policies and those who are affected by them can offer invaluable insights regarding all aspects of action planning (i.e. the relevance of different policy actions, their applicability and sustainability, the viability of the targets given a timeframe, the indicators, the benchmarks, etc). Furthermore, participative planning can ensure the commitment of all actors involved as well transparency. ITERATIVE PLANNING: policy planning is not a fixed phase that follows policy making and precedes policy implementation. Planning, in order to remain relevant should be continuously open to revisions, taking into account both possible changes in SL policies or policy priorities as well as feedback from the implementation of policy actions. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING: policy planning should take into account all issues and policy areas related to the achievement of given School Leadership policy goals. For example, policy planning on the professional development of school leaders, while respecting necessary policy priorities, should be able to respond to the needs of school leaders in all types of schools and school levels. Furthermore, they should address related issues in the curricula of all types of initial teacher training programmes. Policy planning on school autonomy should respectively make sure that all types of schools in all levels of school education are provided with the room for manoeuvre that is necessary for school
6 See, for example, the paper by Bagley and Ward, at http://www.schoolleadership.eu/portal/resource/policy-‐response-‐critical-‐engagement
leaders to make those changes (i.e. in curricula, learning content, timetable, allocation and use of resources, etc) that they think are appropriate and relevant to the promotion of equity and learning in their schools. REALISTIC PLANNING: School Leadership policy planning that sets targets that are highly unlikely to be achieved within the chosen timeframe, ignore budget constraints, overlook human resource limitations, under-‐estimate the power of those who resist change (particularly those who are called to implement it), or disregard needs for training for the individuals or agencies responsible to implement policies, are doomed to fail. COHERENT PLANNING: School Leadership policies for equity and learning can be effective to the degree that they enhance coordination between related policies implemented by different government departments or other agencies. For example, coordination with other policies that support disadvantaged families or with policies that promote the regeneration of currently neglected neighbourhoods or rural areas can greatly enhance the capacity of school leaders to promote equity and learning in their schools. In drafting our sample regional School Leadership policy plans we should taken into account these principles and, more importantly, make sure that these are somehow reflect in them.