<![CDATA[AERA Division A Newsletter - BLOG INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES]]>Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:45:27 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[The international school leadership development network:  a joint ucea and belmas research project]]>Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:52:33 GMThttp://aeradivisiona.org/blog-international-initiatives/the-international-school-leadership-development-network-a-joint-ucea-and-belmas-research-projectBruce barnett, university of texas at san antonio (united states)
howard stevenson, university of nottingham (united kingdom) PictureDr. Bruce Barnett
One of the effects of globalizing educational policies and practices is the formation of regional and international networks of nations, non-governmental organizations, and multi-national companies (Pashiardis, 2008). The field of educational leadership preparation and development also is becoming more engaged in international collaboration (Lumby, Crow, & Pashiardis, 2008); however, creating these networks poses substantial challenges, including the tendency for pro-Western views to dominate projects and the lack of financial and organizational support (Brown & Conrad, 2007; Walker & Dimmock, 2000). To counteract these problems, Walker and Townsend (2010) have discovered successful cross-national partnerships: (a) congregate a small group of “like-minded energetic people” who are able to locate funding, create a vision, and establish political support, (b) rely on linkages with existing professional networks, (c) embrace and encourage diversity and differences, (d) establish high-profile events in different locations, and (e) promote activities, events, and products that support colleagues from different countries who otherwise would not be able to participate.
Picture Dr. Howard Stevenson
Guided by these principles of effective cross-national partnerships, in 2010 the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) and the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society (BELMAS) launched an international comparative study examining the preparation and development of school leaders, referred to as the International School Leadership Development Network (ISLDN). Two research strands of the ISLDN have emerged: (1) preparing and developing leaders who advocate for social justice and (b) preparing and developing leaders for high-need schools. The Social Justice Leadership strand involves 28 researchers, who have conducted interviews with principals in 15 different countries. Twenty members of the High Need Schools strand have conducted studies in 10 nations.

Our studies of social justice leaders in high-need schools confirm and expand the findings from research conducted on effective turnaround school leaders (e.g., Barnett & Stevenson, forthcoming; Bryant, Cheng, & Notman, 2014; Duke, 2012). Several trends have emerged in how these leaders serve their communities while combating the educational, social, and political challenges they encounter:
  • School leaders altered the school’s vision and culture by clarifying and communicating desired values and performance expectations, developing integrated intervention plans using comprehensive data collection and decision-making processes, being organized and planning thoughtfully, and relocating teachers to other schools if they were unable or unwilling to meet new performance expectations.
  • After gaining a better appreciation of the chronic problems facing families living in poverty, school leaders utilized school resources to purchase food for students; worked with local agencies to provide medical, social, and educational services; organized multicultural activities for parents and community members; and provided job training for disabled adults.
  • Principals utilized teachers’ expertise and developed their capacity by engaging teachers in decision making and involving them in determining areas for improvement, planning and implementing goals, and reviewing progress.
  • Principals improved and monitored the teaching and learning process in their schools by retaining talented teachers, redesigning classroom assignments across the entire curriculum, utilizing externally-mandated resources to stimulate reform in their schools, and acknowledging community needs and interests in designing curriculum.
  • The underlying motivation and rationale leaders employed in working in these challenging circumstances revealed their desire to be student-centered, community-centered, and politically astute while acknowledging how their own personal life experiences have shaped their values.
More information about the ISLDN can be accessed from the project blog site (http://isldn.wordpress.com/).

References:

Barnett B., & Stevenson, H. (forthcoming). International perspectives in urban educational leadership: Social justice leadership and high-need schools. In M. A. Khalifa, C. Grant-Overton, & N. W. Arnold (Eds.), Handbook of urban school leadership. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Brown, L., & Conrad, D. A. (2007). School leadership in Trinidad and Tobago: The challenge of context. Comparative Education Review, 51(2), 181-201.

Bryant, M., Cheng, A., & Notman R. (2014) (Eds). Exploring high need and social justice leadership in schools around the globe. Special issue of Management in Education, 28(3), 77-120.

Duke, D. L. (2012). Tinkering and turnarounds: Understanding the contemporary campaign to improve low-performing schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 17, 9-24.

Lumby, J., Crow, G., & Pashiardis, P. (2008) (Eds.). International handbook on the preparation and development of school leaders. New York: Routledge.

Pashiardis, P. (2008). The dark side of the moon: Being locally responsive to global issues. Keynote presentation at the Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration and Management Conference, Durban, South Africa.

Walker, A., & Dimmock, C. (2000). Mapping the way ahead: Leading educational leadership into a globalised world. School Leadership & Management, 20(2), 227-233.

Walker, A., & Townsend, A. (2010). On school management - International Council on School Effectiveness and Improvement, Commonwealth Council on Educational Administration and Management (pp. 681-697). In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education. Oxford, England: Elsevier.

]]><![CDATA[spotlight: international successful school principal project]]>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:31:16 GMThttp://aeradivisiona.org/blog-international-initiatives/spotlight-international-successful-school-principal-project
Dr. Christopher Day, founder and current coordinator of the International Successful School Principal Project, speaks about the project, its germination, and where it's headed in the future. Day is Professor Emeritus in the School of Education at the University of Nottingham in the UK.
]]><![CDATA[Division A International Initiatives]]>Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:37:37 GMThttp://aeradivisiona.org/blog-international-initiatives/division-a-international-initiativesMaking a Difference: The Educational Effectiveness and Improvement Field
by alma Harris
Picture
Occasionally, influential research findings find their moment in time, only to peak, trough and fade into oblivion. For the educational effectiveness and improvement research field, this has not been the case. The empiricists and theorists within this research tradition, including those who are members of Division A, remain a formidable intellectual force.

Since the early 1980s, the work of a wide range of international scholars including Sam Stringfield, Charles Teddlie, Bert Creemers, Anne Lieberman, Janet Chrispeels, Andy Hargreaves, Michael Fullan, David Reynolds, Daniel Muijs, Christopher Chapman, Karen Seashore Louis, Louise Stoll, Pam Sammons and Amanda Datnow has focused upon the central question of how to make schools, and latterly systems, more effective. The depth and rigor of the academic work in this field has provided a clear and powerful mandate for action and a clear message that school improvement is possible.

While some policy makers may have turned their attention elsewhere over the past few years, the international comparative assessments of performance such as PISA and TYMMs have sparked renewed interest in educational effectiveness and improvement. The evidence about effective schools, effective systems, effective pedagogy and effective classrooms is now of increasing interest to those seeking better educational outcomes and higher system performance. 

For more than 30 years, the educational effectiveness and improvement partnership is one that has persisted and prevailed, despite some differences. The pedigree of the scholarly work and the reputation of the researchers working in this area continue to be of the highest quality. The relationship with Division A remains an important and integral one, as issues of organizational change and leadership are deeply connected to the intellectual make-up of the educational and effectiveness field.

As President of the ‘International Congress for School Effectiveness and School Improvement’ (ICSEI) I take great pride in the fact that ICSEI 2015 will be in Cincinnati, USA. Not only is this a wonderful venue but the theme of ‘Think Globally Act Locally, Educating All Children to Their Full Potential’ reminds us all of the moral purpose that drives our collective work.

Without question every ICSEI Congress involves the collective effort and energy of the many; it is distributed leadership in action. But it also requires the vision and commitment of an individual to see this possibility in the first place. So my thanks to Sam Stringfield - you have made ICSEI 2015 both a possibility and a reality.

I look forward to welcoming Division A members to ICSEI, 2015 in Cincinnati.

Professor Alma Harris

ICSEI President

almaharris@um.edu.my

]]>