This round table presents the findings and emerging issues from a research project on the piloting of a preparation programme for aspirant school leaders – the Flexible Routes to the Standard for Headship (FRH) established in Scotland. This project takes place against a background of global-wide concern with a number of factors related to the role of head teacher (or principal) recruitment and retention where strategies are being developed to ensure the nurturing and development of talent (MacBeath, 2006). The FRH pilot is an innovative approach that utilises a model of developmental coaching. This Round Table discussion draws from this research to consider the experiences and impact of coaching on aspirant school leaders and on those who coach them through four linked papers: Paper 1: School Leadership Preparation in Scotland: Approaches and Issues This paper will provide a short overview of the approaches to the development of school leaders in Scotland against a background of needing to sustain the pool of future headteachers. Alternative approaches are currently being trialled including the nationally funded pilot- the Flexible Routes to the Standard for Headship (FRH). The purposes and structure of the programme are outlined briefly. Paper 2: Being Coached: The Experiences of Aspirant School Leaders Executive coaching, as it is known, is a confidential, very personal learning process. As Witherspoon & White (1996, p. 127) suggest, coaching is a potentially powerful developmental process because it is able to accommodate each leadership learner’s unique knowledge, preferred learning style and pace of learning. This paper explores the experiences of the aspirant school leaders on the FRH who are supported by a ‘Professional Development Coach’. Paper 3: Coaching Aspirant School Leaders: A Multi-faceted Role While there are conceptual distinctions between coaching, mentoring, tutoring and assessing, what has emerged from the data is a multi-faceted role which formed and re-formed within the rhythms of the programme. The common feature across these roles is of the fostering ‘change’ however the possible tensions in the multiple roles that coaches are playing are explored. In addition, consideration will be given to the implications of the unique aspect of coaches in this programme - ‘coaching’ individuals to achieve a professional standard – the Standard for Headship (SE, 2005) and the significance of the coaches’ own previous experience of school leadership. Paper 4: Transforming schools and school leaders In the research both candidates and coaches report that the coaching process is facilitating candidates’ personal development and self-awareness and this paper explores the enhancement of leadership practice in schools. It also considers the interface between the coaching process (all coaches in the programme are external to the school) and leadership in school particularly the adoption of coaching styles. The contribution of work based learning and social networking of candidates in the programme are also discussed (Reeves et al., 2005).

The main focus of the research project was to examine the experiences and views of those directly involved in the FRH including all candidates, coaches and the project development managers as well as other stakehlders. The research was designed to track candidates’ progress during the second half of the pilot which allowed for the collection of qualitative data about the perceptions of the stakeholders and also enabled the team to: (1) document shifts in perceptions of the coaching experience during the course of the pilot programme (2) identify those factors (both positive and negative) which influence the quality of the coaching experience, in relation to attainment of the SfH, with a view to maximising the positive influences, in the event that the FRH becomes a permanent post-pilot alternative route to the SfH (3) map the dynamics of the coaching experience, in particular clarify the contribution of some of key components of the coaching relationship (e.g., counselling, psychological support, information- and advice-giving, training, mentoring) to leadership learning (Hall et al., 1999; Gray, 2006), and the learning and development of coaches and what it means to coach. Data was collected through interviews (one-to-one and group), observations and analysis of documents. There were two rounds of one-on-one interviews: at the start of evaluation (to ascertain progress so far) and at the conclusion (to obtain overall reflections) candidates, coaches, the project development managers. In addition, interviews were conducted with key stakeholders in local government and the professional body, General Teaching Council (GTC). Four focus groups (3 with candidates, 1 with coaches) were conducted mid-way through the evaluation. The purpose of these focus groups was to enable members of each cohort to share their experiences with one another and to identify other issues which may not have come to light in interviews. All interviews and focus group meetings were transcribed and subject to analysis to identify themes. Observations were conducted of the project/coaches team meetings and the assessment processes. The programme requires participants to devise and use a range of documents including a baseline self-audit against the SfH, Emotional Competences Inventory, a personal learning plan and learning log, a portfolio and reflective commentary on the school based development project. These documents were gathered and subject to a content analysis.

The coaching element of this FRH programme is regarded very positively by both candidates and coaches, with both groups valuing the time to focus on the development of the leadership of the individual candidates, seeing this as a rewarding developmental opportunity for both parties impacting on leadership practice in school. The role of the coach is highly complex and raises questions about their training and ongoing support and the selection of both coaches and candidates. Importantly coaching is one element in a complex set of development opportunities within the programme and the social networking dimensions of professional development appear to be critical also. The programme raises question about building of a ‘coaching’ culture and its contribution to the overall capability of schools to improve and the processes of assessing change in leadership practice and impact on learning in schools.