This research investigated the development and implementation of  centrally-led,system-driven innovative policies in a Catholic education Diocese in a large city in Australia. The focus of the innovation was to change the thinking and practices of schools, teachers, their teaching and student learning from  traditional to radical inquiry-led models in which school students took more responsibilities for their learning.. The policy was driven by the vision of the Director of Education within a continuing focus on faith-driven formation and inclusivity and was implemented over a twelve year period within changing contexts of external demographic, social, and external policy. The research was commissioned by the Diocese, and conducted between March 2018 and May, 2019. The primary research concern was to to investigate how centrally generated decade long values-driven, system-led change strategies had evolved, and the extent to which the leadership and teaching and learning thinking and practices in schools had been influenced.

The research used Bronfenbrenner’s (1995) ecological system’s theory in order to understand the connections between individuals and their communities and as part of a system. The underlying rationale for the use of ecological systems theory is a view that changes across systems, like progress in student learning and achievement, are unlikely to demonstrate a smooth, uninterrupted trajectory, but rather will be subject to ongoing, uneven, complex interactions within and between micro, meso, macro and exo and chrono level systems. This makes a rational, mechanistic model of system change challenging to plan and implement. In ecological systems theory, change is understood as complex, non-linear, interdependent, emergent, and uneven in its progress at and between different levels of the system. Thus, it is unlikely that simple, direct, causal relationships are able to be made between the application of any single change strategy and its effects. In order to examine system change over time, then, this research draws upon chaos and complexity theory, acknowledging that uncertainty about the uptake of new ideas, and the importance of building relationships within and between communities and their stakeholders over time and at critical points during the change process are key in understanding systems change, and whether, and if so how, success is generated and sustained (Levy, 1994; Lorenz, 1963; Marion, 2008).

The research found that the change leadership strategies were cumulative, inter-connected, and layered over time across six inter-connected key areas of support and change that reconnected stakeholders operating at different levels and in different locations throughout the system by: i) lateral capacity building through professional learning and development for school leaders; ii) ‘thought leadership’; iii) the introduction, development and embedding of new inquiry-led teaching and learning approaches; iv) sustained input by international scholar-practitioners; v)significant investment in changing the physical architectures of teaching and learning; and vi) Head Office re-culturing, restructuring, re-tasking. Whilst the intensity of effort assigned to each of these varied across the period, all were mutually supportive to the reform enactment intentions, and all were underpinned by formation and inclusivity. After twelve years full change had not yet been achieved across the system. However, i) a new language of teaching and learning had been created across all schools; ii) new teaching architectures and approaches were changing the practices of teaching and learning in CEDP schools. Nevertheless, iii) schools and their teachers were at different stages of take-up and use of inquiry-led approaches; and iv) there were different interpretations, patterns of use and impact of inquiry-led teaching and learning across different individual school contexts, resulting in varying levels of deep learning, student engagement, ownership and access to inquiry-led learning. The research findings though specific to this context, may have broader implications in practice internationally.

The research adopted a mixed methods, bringing together the complementary strengths of qualitative and quantitative research to provide multiple perspectives of innovation and reform over time. Through this multi-site case study approach the researchers collected data from six purposively sampled schools capturing thick descriptions of perceptions of change, by policy makers, principals, teachers, students and parents. This was achieved by means of semi-structured individual interviews with principals and key informants from Head Office, and focus group interviews with teachers, and students. Data were collected from six schools by means of 40 semi-structured individual and 27 focus group interviews with a total of 156 school leader, teacher, and student interviews, and 4 Head Office participants. Principals, teachers, students and parents from six schools were selected from a larger sample size provided by the CEPD. Criteria for their selection included: i) an equal number of primary and secondary schools; ii) a range of small and large schools; iii) a range of ICSEA value or socioeconomic status from low to high; iv) a range schools that were purpose built for inquiry-led learning; v) schools with original buildings; vi) Schools with principals who had been at the school for more than three years, with low teacher turnover. Three were primary schools and three were secondary schools. One of the secondary schools was purpose-built on one preschool to secondary school campus, with post-school options planned for the future. The six schools were each given pseudonyms. Interview transcripts and other forms of qualitative data were coded, categorised and transferred into analytical matrices (Miles and Huberman, 1994) which were used to identify patterns, focus subsequent data collection, and synthesize key attributes at and across individual levels. Documents produced by the CEDP over the twelve year period were collected and analysed together with data from six purposively sampled schools with significant variation in context, culture and leadership. A range of 143 documents relating to change during the CEO’s period in office were analysed. These included 53 strategic intent plans and statements, 5 implementation plans, 12 annual reports, 3 technical reports, 57 media articles and 12 months of twitter posts by the CEO; annual reports, scholarly literature texts, system planning, monitoring and evaluation documentation, budget material, demographic data, changes in patterns of enrolment, student behaviour, teacher turnover, and academic results. Documents were analysed using deductive categories within the context of the changing landscape of educational policies in the CEDP.

Relatively little research on system change focuses on the behaviours of individual agents, as this does, and the relationships between them in an ecosystem (Jacobson et al; 2019 p.113). Nor does system change literature often highlight the personal and professional qualities, actions and relationships of successful change leaders working from outside schools themselves. The radical, system-wide changes in the Parramatta Diocese education system and the structural, cultural and role identity changes that occurred were due not only due to the Executive Director’s management capabilities, but also his capacity to reconnect communities through his interpersonal skills, energy and human endeavour, resilience, persistence, and abiding belief that the reforms were ‘right’ for communities. He understood that, ‘the whole of a complex system is more than the sum of its parts’ (Jacobson et al; 2019, p.113). In this case study, a combination of mandated and voluntary implementation and consent enabled a degree of collegial autonomy. This was reinforced on a weekly basis through meetings between the systems change leader and school principals, his judicious re-deployment of principal ‘change champions’, and up-close involvement and active participation with the challenges faced. The research concluded that leaders of system change are likely to achieve success when they build powerful positional, personal, and interpersonal, productive and sustained relationships within the change stakeholders on all leadership levels, and when they utilize a combination of inter-connected, mutually supportive strategies over time which take forward the change narrative, whilst demonstrating rigor, care, support, and respect for the needs of those in their communities who are expected to enact them. The research, therefore, is able to connect the values, qualities, strategies, knowledge, skills and relationships of the system-wide change leaders with those who lead individual schools; raising research-informed issues about the interface between externally led and internally enacted change leadership.

Day, C., Grice, C. (2019). Change Leadership: A System Level Case Study, (pp. 4 - 56). Sydney, Australia: The University of Sydney. Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) (2011). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed). Sage publications. Miles, MB. & Huberman, AM. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Jacobson, M., Levin, J., & Kapur, M (2019). Education as a complex system: conceptual and methodological implications. Educational Researcher, 48(2), 112-119. Levy, D. (1994). Chaos theory and strategy: Theory, application, and managerial implications. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S2), 167-178 Lorenz, E.N. (1963). Deterministic nonperiodic flow. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 20, 130–141. Marion, R. (2008). Complexity theory for organizations and organizational leadership. In M. Uhl-Bien & R. Marion (Ed.), Complexity leadership (pp. 1-16). Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Wheatley, M. (2005). Finding our way: leadership for an uncertain time. San Fransisco: Berrett Koehler Publications.