2016 - Let the Fun Begin!

Friday 22 January - System Leadership Development

After a a lovely, relaxing and restful holiday, I have returned to work re-energised to continue my work as Leader of Learning : Primary Religious Education within the Southern Region Office.

My initial professional learning takes place today at the Southern Cross Vocational College where all Education Officers and Leaders of learning come together to develop a shared vision, mission and understandings of the new horizons of Sydney Catholic Schools.

The agenda today includes:

School/System Review and Improvement - Dr Mark Turkington & Dr Kate O'Brien
.

• Evolution NOT revolution - Dr Mark Turkington.

Research found in: 

• Ben Levan (8 characteristics), Hattie, Ontario System - How do we measure growth?
• McKinsey report (Barber and Mourshed, 2007
• New Horizons: Inspiring Spirits and Minds - To feel, hear and listen to the needs of the school and evaluate how we can best improve student learning outcomes.

Examples of School/System review and Improvement

• School Improvement through accreditation
• benchmarks

Examples of what is NOT creating uplifting organisations

1. Didn't make it their goal to be at the top

2. didn't follow others to the top

3. Didn't concentrate solely on hitting every milestone along the way

4. Didn't push people to the limi

5. Didn't race to the top as quickly as possible

Hargreaves, Boyle and Harris (2015)

• Dreaming with determination
• creativity and counter flows
• collaboration with competition
• pushing and pulling
• measuring with meaning
• sustainable success

What are the values that underpin the revision of School Review and Improvement processes to inform decisions?   

• Strong relationship building through trust, transparency, honesty, unity; being heard; respect diversity of thought, being inclusive, empowering others; equality, shared concern/ vision/ purpose; positive, open communication models; acknowledging the past and affirming what is already working well; nurturing wellbeing of the whole community; openness to feedback; honouring the Catholic Mission, maintaining spirituality and encouraging growth of faith, the whole child and each member of the community; making practical decisions that are operationally effective and efficient for the system and the individual. Connection with current values and explicit support with induction of new leaders and community members.

2. What has been the major impact of the School Review and Improvement Framework (2005-2015) on schools?

• Moved away from inspectorial model.
• Increased school ownership.
• Doesn’t always capture the reality of the school - perhaps a bit “soft” in some areas. There isn’t sufficient follow up with the school - either in support or challenge.
• May highlight the need for support and development of middle leaders.
• AIPs are helpful - and staff have growing familiarity with these in recent years.
• Promoted more strategic thinking.
• Opportunity for reflection and clear accountability for schools. Offers direction for future planning. Rating MUST always be on impact not effort! Develop an understanding of evidence. Development of whole-school practice. ALL staff involvement therefore more accountability- alignment of SRI with AIP and PPPR. We must prioritise- allow these priorities to come from data. More effective use of resources- try to align with system priorities so as to be able to use resources. Nature and purpose of SRI must be in place- all staff (must know rating system) and what time of the year are we doing it).
• Gave an annual focus within the 5 year cycle
• Gives schools a common language and a point of focus
• Evidence-based nature helped to keep focus and ensure that evaluation was verifiable
• Still some conflict between what school wanted to do and what is perceived as imposed by the system
• Challenging to get all stakeholders involved
• Looking back to plan for the future

3. What have been the major challenges of the School Review and Improvement Framework (2005-2015) for schools?

• There was very much a disconnect between School Leadership teams and the school staff, particularly in goal setting and /or evaluations.
• The challenge to harness all staff in the process and have a shared understanding of the purpose and how it is aligns with all tiers of work throughout the year.
• There is a subjective notion at times in the rating process.
• The tension between the reality of the school context and the “linear” approach of the SRI document.
• Consistent understanding of what each rating looks like in practice. High performing schools have high expectations and often rate themselves lower for SRI.
• Became a list of things we do (checklist) rather than a way of measuring improvement
• Initially did not drive improvement - has this changed in some schools?
• Lack of ownership - often driven by the executive.
• Challenge was that the productive discussion by staff was captured and acted upon
• Challenge was that groups were representative of the wide range of involvement of a staff when doing the ratings
• Challenge to remain honest with clear understanding of ratings
• Varied understanding of the processes and the criteria.
• Staff turnover at leadership level and at class level was significant, with limited induction processes at school level
• Thinking that the Ratings process is “SRI”

4. What basic principles should underpin the revision of the School Review and Improvement Framework in 2016?

• Needs to influence whole school effectiveness - not just the most recent plan.  Holistic view of school effectiveness.
• Needs a focus on innovation and response to need.
• Evidence based practices and purpose
• Maintain the emphasis on a collaborative, invitational approach to review.
• Need to be explicit about the right drivers - name what this is really about
• People first, processes second.
• Dual moral purpose a priority, focus on student growth, wellbeing of staff and students, partnerships with parents, parish, broader community; school input and drive/
• “Principles of strategic planning” from New Horizons.
• Principles should include: consultation, collaboration, celebration,
• (Build on what has been successful in previous revision processes)
• Clearer accountabilities (whilst having a no blame culture)
• Possibility of using a growth map (in alignment with other processes) instead of the 7 point score. This could allow for greater consistency and less open to local level interpretation.
• Alignment with current research.
• Evidence for improvement needs to include a broad range of data, more than NAPLAN and HSC.
• Authorship is the key to ownership - if schools have a voice in developing and reviewing the framework as they did in 2005 it will come alive in all schools
• The Principles should include, consultation with all stakeholders ( including parents, parish and local community)
• Since 2006 school improvement has been separated from the accountability of compliance?  It is timely to evaluate and review this.  Is there a gap between SRI/Cyclic review process and the directness of the current compliance process which incorporates compliance at a basic level rather than one of improvement or value-added.
• The “strengths basis” principle of the current model should be retained.
• Feedback is timely, meaningful and practical.