School Leaders as Network Leaders and Their Influence on Subject Knowledge in Teachers’ Networks

Author(s):

Brit Bolken Ballangrud(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

26. Educational Leadership

Format:

Paper

Session Information

26 SES 04 A, Leadership vis a vis Teachership

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-24

09:00-10:30

Room:

OB-H1.51

Chair:

Ulf Leo

Contribution

Teachers’ networks can play an important role in teacher learning in reforms and organizational changes. Still we know little about why some networks support individual and organizational learning. Researchers have been more concerned about processes and relations in networks than the content dimensions (Coburn, Mata, & Choi, 2013; McCormick, Fox, Carmichael, & Procter, 2011). Therefor the focus in this study is: How can network leaders influence the quality of their networks’ content, and more specific, the subject knowledge? The network leaders in the study are all department leaders in upper secondary. They lead networks for teachers and leaders in their county, and they deal with implementing new curriculum in different school subjects.

In this study I consider different levels, both the district policy, different teachers’ networks in the district and the schools. I highlight the network leaders’ sensemaking with their understanding of the school subjects and what constitutes “good instruction” and students learning, and how they create conditions for teachers’ professional learning in the networks. Theories of sensemaking (Coburn, 2005, 2006; Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002; Weick, 1976) and integrating political science (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012; Gu & Johansson, 2012; Lindensjö & Lundgren, 2000), curriculum theory (Karseth, 2009) and education leadership theory (Abrahamsen & Aas, 2014; Gu & Johansson, 2012; Møller & Ottesen, 2011), theory with different perspectives and emphasis, will form the basis of the empirical study that enlighten the network leaders’ roles. With a cognitive approach to network leadership, I emphasize how school leaders’ affect teachers’ actions. Through their understanding of reform ideas and the counties policy, as well as through local adaption, they influence the learning processes in networks and schools (Coburn, 2005).

Method

To investigate how the network leaders are dealing with teachers’ networks and the subject content, I am doing a cross-case design. I draw data from policy documents and interviews in order to document the organizational processes the networks’ leaders are engaged in and how they deal with the content dimension (Yin, 2003). The case is from the implementation of new curriculum in the Knowledge Promotion Reform (2005-2009) in upper secondary schools. Interviews are from 2008. The documents are reform policy documents from national and county level. 15 interviews were conducted, of which 3 were employees at the County Administration, the remaining 12 were principals and department leaders at six different schools. The department leaders were also networks leaders. The network leaders/ department leaders were also responsible for their schools competence development in the reform. Both the principal at these six schools and the network leader/department leader were interviewed. They came from two vocational schools, two academic schools, and two combined schools. I combine cross-case analysis of interviews and analysis of documents in an institutional analysis where also a historic dimension to the school leaders’ roles are present (Stoker, 1995), and I describe changes in school leaders’ sensemaking (Coburn, 2005, 2006; Spillane et al, 2002).

Expected Outcomes

The mandate given to the networks was implementing new curriculum. The network leaders and teachers in networks should exchange experiences, and develop networks and schools as «learning organizations». The networks leaders’ experiences varied. The challenges for the network leaders were to develop learning processes in different networks, and to develop their subject focus and the leadership. They should develop the connections between the curriculum work with different subjects in the networks and the curriculum work in different departments in the schools. The teachers expect leadership closely connected to their work with the curriculum in the classroom. A general pattern in the network leaders’ sensemaking is that their understanding of “content” in the district policy, together with their understanding of their school subjects, influence their leadership in networks. A practice based approach to professional knowledge and professional development had priority. This underscores the understanding of the content dimension in the curriculum changes as something new. The work differed from earlier reforms based on an individualistic and theoretical tradition that emphasized rational didactic concepts and planning. Even if a theoretical rational curriculum approach is a rather profound tradition in the teacher profession. It was difficult to use these theoretical concepts. Emphasis on experiences and local adaptions seem new and challenging for the networks leaders and they lacked concepts. New didactic challenges arise when curriculum are transformed locally. The networks needed leadership in order to deal with curriculum challenges and to overcome barriers between networks and schools. How can we cope with these issues in leadership in upper secondary schools? Implications of development of more distributed approaches to leadership on network leaders’ and department leaders’ sensemaking, will be discussed.

References

Abrahamsen, H., & Aas, M. (2014). Avdelingsledere - en ny profesjon innenfor skoleledelse? In E. Elstad & K. Helstad (Ed.), Profesjonsutvikling i skolen. Oslo: Universitetsforl. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: policy enactments in secondary schools. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Coburn, C., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District Policy and Teachers' Social Networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203-235. Coburn, C. E. (2005). Shaping Teacher Sensemaking: School Leaders and the Enactment of Reading Policy. Education Policy 19(3), 476-509. Coburn, C. E. (2006). Framing the Problem of Reading Instrucion: Using Fram Analysis to Uncover the Micorprocesses of Policy Implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 343-379. Coburn, C. E., Mata, W. S., & Choi, L. (2013). The Embeddedness of Teachers’ Social Networks: Evidence from a Study of Mathematics Reform. Sociology of Education, 86(4), 311-342. doi: 10.1177/0038040713501147 Gu, Q., & Johansson, O. (2012). Sustaining school performance: school context matter. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 16(3), 301-326. Karseth, B., & Sivesind, K. (2009). Læreplanstudier - perspektiver og posisjoner. In E. L. Dale (Ed.), Læreplan: et forskningsperspektiv (s. 241). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Lindensjö, B., & Lundgren, U. P. (2000). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning. Stockholm: HLS Förlag. McCormick, R. E., Fox, A., Carmichael, P., & Procter, R. (2011). Researching and understanding educational networks. London: Routledge. Møller, J. (2010). Rektors ledelse av reformarbeid i skolen In E. Ottesen & J. Møller (Ed.), Underveis, men i svært ulikt tempo. Et blikk inn i ti skoler etter tre år med Kunnskapsløftet. Underveisanalyse av Kunnskapsløftet som styringsreform Delrapport 3. Oslo: NIFU STEP rapport 37/2010. Møller, J., & Ottesen, E. (2011). Rektor som leder og sjef: om styring, ledelse og kunnskapsutvikling i skolen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Spillane, J., Reiser, B., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cogntition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Edcational Research, 72(3), 387-431. Spillane, J. P. (2002). Local Theories of Teacher Change: The Pedagogy of District Policies and Programs. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 377-420. Stoker, G. (1995). Regime Theory and Urban Politics. In D. Judge, H. Wolman & G. Stoker (Ed.), Theories of urban politics (s. IX, 310 s.). London: Sage. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research : design and methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Author Information

Brit Bolken Ballangrud (presenting / submitting)

University College of Southeast Norway

Lunner

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.