Principals´ Professional Learning - in everyday work and through a national training program

Author(s):

Pia Skott(presenting / submitting)Monika Törnsen(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

01. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations

Format:

Paper

Session Information

01 SES 13 B, Formal and Informal Learning Strategies for School Leaders

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-25

13:30-15:00

Room:

K3.16

Chair:

Sara Bubb

Contribution

Over the past decades school leaders have experienced decentralization and increased pressure of accountability. They have become responsible for managing change and building organizations, while striving to improve their schools’ effectiveness and enhanced student learning outcomes (Hallinger, 2003; Hargreaves & Fink, 2006, Nordin & Sundberg, 2014, Sivesind & Wahlström, 2016). Parallel, international research on successful and effective school leadership, has identified the importance of school leadership for school improvement and student learning (see e.g. Leithwood et al, 2012; Day et al 2007). As a logical consequence, there is a growing international concern that the preparation of educational leaders is insufficient to face the complexity and challenges in the 21^st century (OECD, 2008).

An increased interest in the professionalization of school leaders has been noticed globally (Young & Crow, 2016) including the Nordic countries (Uljens et al, 2013). In Sweden the the National School Leadership Training Program was launched in 2009 to better provide attendants with the knowledge and abilities needed to handle the complexity. The program is mandatory for all newly appointed principals in public and independent schools. National evaluations show that the program is valued by attendants. But a research overview (Johansson, 2011), identified a lack of research on the effects of Swedish principal training. Since 2014, we have investigated the program through two projects. We have observed a group of principals in training, and interviewed principals attending the program.

The aim of this paper is to explore how professional learning among principals can be understood and enhanced. Our research questions are:

How can learning in principal´s everyday work be understood? What are the prerequisites for their learning at work?
How can training programs not only enhance the principals learning but also link the learning to daily work? What are the prerequisites and possible hindrances for learning within the program?

Since the program can be understood as a governing mean to enhance learning for active professionals our theoretical framework combines curriculum theory with social learning theory.

The curriculum theory approach is developed to study curriculum processes, defined as activities within different discursive practices linked within a governing system (Skott, 2009). Analytically these practices can be divided into two arenas- for formulation and realization. In Sweden the parliament and the government formulate the laws and other regulations for schools. The realization takes place in schools by principals, teachers and other professionals, within municipalities or independent school. The program for principal´s training can be understood as a third and parallel arena. As schools do, the universities also follow national guidelines and enact those in practice. The training of principals not only aims at enhancing principals´ learning, but to enhance student learning outcomes as well. The school and the program practices are therefor to be interlinked through program activities. Understanding the program as a governing mean makes it possible to capture the program as a phenomenon.

Principals attend the program parallel to being practicing principals. We understand learning as a social activity taking part in everyday life, here combined with learning through the training program. To understand what happens when professionals attend mandatory courses, we took our starting point in Wenger´s social theory for learning, focusing on communities of practice (Wenger, 2008). By doing this we can analyze more closely the adult professional principals learning possibilities in everyday life, through what we have called primary meaning making communities. When universities run the program they must do it in the form of boarding sessions where we identify a secondary meaning making community- the little learning group.

All together we identify possibilities and hindrances for the development of principals’ professional identities.

Method

The paper builds on two interlinked projects. In the first project we have studied the enactment of the national principal program mainly though observations of one group of 55 principals and two trainers. The observations have been carried out during the three-year part-time principal training program. We observed all the teaching given to participants during boarding sessions. In all, we observed the whole group for 24 days when the participants left their schools to attend the program. During those days the group where at times divided in smaller learning groups. The final year we observed specifically one of those, which included two participants who were interviewed in our second project. We further recorded the work of other small learning groups. Our aim was to investigate in what ways the altogether nine groups established themselves as meaning-making learning communities. The observation of the little group was possible since our presence the first year of the project had built trust between us and the whole group – even though we did not interact with the participants. It was important for us to establish ourselves as subjects “…withdrawing from (the object) in order to observe it from above and from a distance… (establishing) practical activity as an object of observation and analysis, a representation.(Bourdieu, 1977)” Besides the observations and recordings, we also collected individual reflections on the work in the smaller groups from 48 of the participants. A qualitative content analysis was carried out (Bergström et al, 2000). The reflections were first read and analyzed separately in order to identify themes. Thereafter the reflections were sorted in accordance with the nine existing smaller groups. This made comparisons between groups possible. Using three different methods allowed for us to triangulate between sources. In the second project we have studied effects of national training programs. We have followed 12 selected individuals, taking the program at two different universities. They were interviewed at their home school three times, once each year they attended the program. These interviews were carried out with a life history approach (Goodson & Sikes, 2001). The last interview round was also complemented with interviews with persons as important others for their everyday work (and learning). The principals chose for example principals, vice principals and superintendents, that is, not necessarily colleagues in the school leadership team.

Expected Outcomes

The aim of this paper is to explore how professional learning among principals can be understood and enhanced. First we investigate ´learning at work’. On the individual principal and local school levels we identify that learning leadership is a complex matter. It can be understood from a multifaceted setting of time and space, including different prerequisites for principals to develop professional identities. Time exists in individuals, organizations and the surroundings history (like structures on different levels). This totality shapes what the principals are dealing with and hence have a possibility to learn about. They all develop their professional identities while working as principals. But they have severe differences regarding the surrounding learning structures. While some belong to learning communities together with colleagues, under the leadership of an area leader or superintendent, others do not. This is not only important for every day learning, but for how they can learn through the program. Second, we focuse on the learning within the program. The overall results show, that it is challenging to design for learning by switching between daily work, boarding sessions with lectures for all and small group activities provided by universities. One aspect of the challenge concerns how theoretical and practical knowledge can be understood and combined. Some of the small groups seemingly provide better possibilities for learning than others. Group composition is of importance as regards the educational background and experience of the group members. Where some groups can challenge each other, others are more careful to maintain good relations. They establish different possibilities for learning. All together principal learning is a complex matter, which is not easy to provide for locally or through national programs. Through awareness of how parallel learning communities can be strengthened and interlinked it is however possible to design for better learning environments.

References

Bergström, G., Boreus, K.(200). Textens mening och makt. Metodbok i samhällsvetenskaplig textanalys. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Bourdieu, Pierre (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. Day, C., Sammons, P., Leithwood, K., Hopkins, D., Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Gu, Q., Penlington, C., Mehta, P., & Kinton, A.. (2007). The Impact of School Leadership on Pupil Outcomes. Research Report DCSH-RR018. National College for School Leadership, University of Nottingham. Goodson, I. & Sikes, P. (2001). Life history Research in Educational Settings: learning from lives. Buckingham: Open University Press. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass OECD. (2008). Improving school leadership: Policy and practice. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Johansson, O. (2011, red.) Rektor- en forskningsöversikt 2000-2010. Vetenskapsrådets rapportserie 4:201. Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (2012). Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Nordin, A. & Sundberg, D. (2014). Transnational Policy Flows in European Education – The making and governing of knowledge in the education policy field. Oxford: Oxford Studies in Comparative Education Sivesind, K. & Wahlström, N. (2016). Curriculum on the European policy agenda – Global transitions and learning outomes from transnational and national points of view. European Educational Research Journal, 5 (3/4). Skott, Pia (2009). Läroplan i rörelse. Det individuella programmet i mötet mellan nationell utbildningspolitik och kommunal genomförandepraktik. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 2009. Uljens, M., Möller, J. Ärlestig, H. & Fredriksen, L. F. (2013). The Professionalization of Nordic School Leadership. In: L. Moos (ed.), Transnational Influences on Values and Practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 133-157) Dordrecht: Springer. Wenger, E. (2008). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press Young, M. D., & Crow, G. M. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of Research on the Education of School Leaders (2nd Edition). New York: Rutledge.

Author Information

Pia Skott (presenting / submitting)

Stockholm University

Department of Education

Stockholm

Monika Törnsen (presenting)

Umeå University, Sweden

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.