This week, IEN features the work of scholars whose research focuses on teachers’ abilities as leaders of educational change. This post is the sixth in a series featuring excerpts of interviews with presenters participating in the Educational Change Special Interest Group sessions at the upcoming Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association in Philadelphia in April. This post includes presenters from the session titled: “Teachers as Education Change Makers: What Empowers and/or Enervates Them.” For previous posts in this series, see: Practices, Programs and Policies for Instructional Coaching, Transforming Organizational Systems for Educational Equity, Organizational Change and Equity in Professional Learning, Arts and Sports Programs, and Summer Camps, Driving Change in Higher Education and Racial Justice and Educational Equity. These interviews are part of the Lead the Change series produced by AERA’s Educational Change Special Interest Group. The full interviews can be found on the LtC website. The LtC series is currently produced by Alex Lamb (Outgoing Series Editor) and Liz Zumpe (Incoming Series Editor).
A Critical Gender Analysis of State Educational Agency Policy during the COVID-19 — Erin Nerlino, Boston University
Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action. How does your research respond to this call?
Erin Nerlino (EN): My presentation, “A critical gender analysis of State Educational Agency Policy during COVID-19,” responds to the 2024 AERA theme as it employs a critical framework – feminist critical policy analysis (FCPA) – to state educational agency policy memos to reveal the ways that the feminization of the teaching force contributes to longstanding issues related to power, voice, agency, and autonomy that characterize the teaching profession. Per Marshall et al. (1999), FCPA challenges the patriarchal and hegemonic nature of assumptions embedded in state practices, policies, research, and action through the application of concepts such as power – possession of control over certain groups over others, patriarchy – a system that empowers men over all other groups, and economic exploitation – the taking advantage of unpaid or invisible labor. The ultimate goal of using this critical framework is to examine the underlying structures and assumptions at work in current policy in order to work toward more equitable educational possibilities for the teaching profession, students, and the health of the education system at large. In keeping with the 2024 conference theme, critical theory promotes analysis of the power dynamics that influence and operate within the education system; and working to apply one critical framework reinforces the use of other critical frameworks to unearth the many forms of oppression that exist within societal institutions.
Given the need to stem high teacher attrition rates and improve low teacher satisfaction rates to solve national school shortages, understanding how gender intersects with images, language, framing, and assumptions within policy documents is paramount. Such an understanding unearths the reality of the persistent and historical lack of teacher voices in arenas that make influential decisions. Studies show that including teacher voice has proven to decrease teacher attrition, increase satisfaction, and inform more lasting and transformative reforms (Gyurko, 2012; Johnson, 2019). Examining the issue through a critical, gender-based perspective can shed light on why teachers have so long been on the receiving end versus the constructing end of policy.
Understanding how gender intersects with images, language, framing, and assumptions within policy documents is paramount.
LtC: What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?
EN: The feminization of the U.S. K-12 teaching force has long been correlated with the lower status of the teaching profession, including lower pay, and fewer opportunities for leadership positions, among other problems (Symeonidis, 2016). Statistics show roughly 77% of the teaching force within the U.S. is female (National Center of Education Statistics). While the reasoning behind this feminization varies, some attributing it to industrialization opening other jobs for men, others pointing to the emotional labor and care involved in the work, and still others giving credit to changing employment trends among other explanations, it greatly impacts much of the discourse and perception around the teaching profession (Boyle, 2004; Rahayani, 2016). Despite the largely female teacher population, gender stratification characterizes roles that have more influence and power within educational spheres such as administrative, state, and federal policymaking roles. Applying critical and feminist theory to teacher response survey data and state educational agency policy memos from one specific state in the Northeastern United States, this study examines the role gender played in the enactment and the perception of state educational agency policy during COVID-19. One main finding of this work includes the tight control and power over teachers’ work – a manifestation of patriarchal power evident in the state educational policy documents over teachers’ physical work location even in the unprecedented circumstances of the pandemic. A second finding suggests the disempowerment of teachers’ voices, thereby perpetuating the historic subordination of women by ensuring they do not have influence of decisions that directly affect them. Last, a third finding documents the economically based motivation for the aims and purpose of schooling. This rationale for returning to school buildings in person despite pandemic-incited health and safety concerns paints the profession as a means for childcare.
As such, my hope is that this work presented at AERA contributes to the parsing out of where gender intersects with images, language, and assumptions within policy documents from other states and the federal level. From a practical perspective, creating forums for teachers to share their expertise and local knowledge of practice (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009) with the goal of co-constructing policy might assist in challenging the status quo and redistributing power for the betterment of the teaching profession and the students it serves.
Emergent teacher leadership through professional learning networks — Leyton Schnellert, Donna Kozak, Mehjabeen Datoo, Belinda Chi, and Miriam Miller, University of British Columbia; Swee’alt (Denise Augustine), British Columbia Ministry of Education and Child Care
Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action. How does your research respond to this call?
Leyton Schnellert, Donna Kozak, Mehjabeen Datoo, Belinda Chi, Miriam Miller, and Swee’alt (LS, DK, MD, BC, MM & S): In our research, we examine how teachers are leveraging and contextualizing British Columbia’s curriculum to meet local needs, develop competencies of 21st century learners, and develop pedagogies that draw from and lift up students’ funds of knowledge and identity. This case study examines how Education Change Networks (ECNs) can foster teacher leadership and collective work towards common goals in ways that respond to the needs of communities and welcome local holistic Indigenous ways of knowing and being. Teachers in the Growing Innovation in Rural Sites of Learning ECN contribute a wealth of expertise and experience about their local contexts, potential for community-based and community-engaged collaboration, and pedagogical practices. In partnership with the Ministry of Education who support seed funding grants, project leaders were invited to collaborate with local First Nations and Indigenous community members and focus on improving literacy and numeracy for Indigenous students using current research. Collectively, teachers in Growing Innovation in Rural Sites of Learning ECN are primarily from non-Indigenous and non-racialized groups, in contrast to the populations with whom they work.
LtC: What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?
LS, DK, MD, BC, MM & S: We reference our findings to Harris and Muijs’ (2004) four dimensions of teacher leadership: brokering, participative leadership, mediating, and forging close relationships. Our analyses related Harris and Muijs’ dimensions to teacher leaders’ actions, growth, and learning to these four dimensions. Teacher leaders’ brokering moves often involved strategic technical actions such as modelling, chunking, and scaffolding to support colleagues to develop and try innovations in their classrooms to foster student engagement and learning. In terms of participative leadership, teacher leaders developed and co-developed new strategies related to their innovations.
They fostered collaborative ways of working, and colleagues’ sense of ownership and agency. Teacher leaders played a mediating role. They supported colleagues to interpret data including student work and also helped them set goals, make plans, carry out these plans, monitor results, and responsively adapt plans and actions. They acted as a source of expertise and information and drew in additional relevant resources. Finally, and impactfully, they forged close relationships with and between colleagues that supported their learning and growth individually and collectively. Perhaps most significant in our study was that teachers within the Growing Innovation in Rural Sites of Learning ECN did not need to be directed to engage in more inclusive and equity-oriented pedagogies and structural change, this was already a central goal. In their particular contexts, students from local First Nations often comprised a significant portion of the student population, usually more so than in urban settings in British Columbia. What they valued most about the ECN was the opportunity to get emotional support and draw inspiration and energy from one another’s innovations.
Teachers did not need to be directed to engage in more inclusive and equity-oriented pedagogies and structural change, this was already a central goal.
They appreciated how the ECN provided a centrifugal force that values local ways of knowing and being, partnering with local community groups including local First Nations, situated innovation, and student and teacher agency. They had varying degrees of success involving colleagues in their innovations in their rural/remote context. Those who made the most progress in this regard found ways to welcome new members to their local innovation teams and made space for these educators’ insights and contributions.
Fostering Sustainable and Thriving Teams: An Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Driven by Teachers — Chun Sing Maxwell Ho, The Education University of Hong Kong; Ori Eyal, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ming Ming Chiu, The Education University of Hong Kong
Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action. How does your research respond to this call?
Chun Sing Maxwell Ho, Ori Eyal, and Ming Ming Chiu (CSW, OE & MMC): Our research responds to the 2024 AERA theme, “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action,” by focusing on the role of entrepreneurial teachers (ETs) within entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) in schools. These ecosystems are composed of ETs who are dedicated to learning, experimenting, and fostering innovation in the educational environment. EEs in schools are characterized by their collaborative culture, where members collectively push the boundaries of traditional teaching methods to create new opportunities for learning and growth. This collaborative network supports sharing ideas, resources, and practices that aim to catalyze positive change and address the complex challenge of racial injustice in education. By fostering continuous pedagogical improvement (CPI) and adapting innovative initiatives, ETs are instrumental in addressing diverse student needs and enhancing educational equity (Askell-Williams et al., 2020; Ion & López Sirvent, 2022;).
ETs in EEs contribute to dismantling systemic barriers by creating and implementing inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogies. Their attributes and competencies, such as mitigating risks and advocating for innovation, enable them to challenge the status quo and introduce novel teaching strategies that cater to students from various racial and socioeconomic backgrounds (Gupta, 2019; Shen et al., 2022). The formal structures within EEs, including incubators and mentoring programs, provide operational support for ETs to engage in transformative educational practices (Apa et al., 2017; Crick et al., 2018). These structures can be leveraged to promote racial equity by ensuring that innovations in teaching and learning are accessible to all students, particularly those from marginalized communities.
This collaborative network supports sharing ideas, resources, and practices that aim to catalyze positive change and address the complex challenge of racial injustice in education.
Furthermore, the EE community, characterized by informal networks among ETs, allows for exchanging knowledge and resources that support initiatives aimed at social justice and educational inclusion (Cavallo et al., 2019; Stam et al., 2021). By nurturing collegiality and professional growth, ETs can collectively work towards dismantling racial injustice within their schools and the broader educational landscape. Our study illuminates how EEs serve as a fertile ground for enacting change and fostering an educational environment where racial equity is prioritized. By highlighting the positive relationships between ET attributes, competencies, formal structures, and community engagement, our research aligns with AERA’s call to action, underscoring the potential of EEs to construct educational possibilities that transcend racial barriers and promote justice.
LtC: What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?
CSW, OE & MMC: Our study contributes to understanding of how ETs operate within and influence EEs, offering actionable strategies for educators and policymakers to support educational change. Strategies within the realms of practice, policy, and scholarship are listed below.
Practice:
- Development of ET Competencies: Our findings highlight the importance of nurturing ET competencies, particularly among early-career teachers. By doing so, schools can foster a culture of innovation and continuous pedagogical improvement (CPI). Professional development programs should focus on enhancing ET attributes like risk mitigation and resource seeking, which our study shows are linked to increased competencies and, by extension, more robust EEs.
- Reflective Learning Communities: We suggest that schools leverage the competencies of ETs to form reflective learning communities, enhancing the collaborative aspect of the school environment and promoting a shared commitment to innovation and improvement.
Policy:
- Hiring Strategies: Our research can inform hiring policies, encouraging the selection of individuals with strong ET attributes and potential for competencies. School leaders can use these insights to create targeted recruitment processes that identify teachers capable of contributing significantly to the EE.
- Structural Support: Policymakers should consider the design and implementation of school structures that facilitate innovation. Our study’s correlation between ET competencies and formal structures implies that supportive policies can enhance the effectiveness of EEs.
Scholarship:
- Dynamic Development of EEs: The positive link between ET competencies and the formal structure and community within EEs suggests a dynamic interplay that warrants further scholarly investigation. Understanding these relationships can provide a more nuanced view of how to cultivate EEs in educational settings.
- Impact of Experience: Less experienced teachers have fewer ET competencies, indicating that entrepreneurial capacity can be developed over time. This opens avenues for longitudinal research on how teaching experience influences the development of entrepreneurial competencies and the overall EE.
“I Think it Made Me More Brave”: Uncertainty and Change During the COVID Pandemic — Lauren Yoshizawa, Colby College
Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action. How does your research respond to this call?
Lauren Yoshizawa (LY): I was really drawn to the idea of educational possibilities in this year’s AERA theme. My work focuses on organizational change and how practitioners respond to policy demands; one thing research has repeatedly shown is that we interpret and act on policy messages in ways that are deeply shaped by prior patterns, expectations, and assumptions (e.g., Spillane et al., 2002). This means that what teachers believe is possible is a strong predictor of what changes they actually make when the need or opportunity arises. As many scholars have already noted, the COVID pandemic disrupted old norms and structures in unprecedented ways, opening space to reimagine and reinvent schooling (e.g., Ladson-Billings, 2021; Reich & Mehta, 2021).
We have seen multiple calls to action, scholars and practitioners outlining visions for post-pandemic schools. And yet, extensive reporting has also shown the tremendous demands, anxiety, and isolation that teachers experienced during the pandemic (Kush et al., 2022; Will, 2022). Contextual factors from organizational routines that keep teachers collaborating to district messaging about priorities also shape what seems important and possible to teachers.
What teachers believe is possible is a strong predictor of what changes they actually make when the need or opportunity arises.
Talking to teachers during the pandemic made me curious to understand what new possibilities teachers created in their classrooms—what could they imagine and how did they make it happen? Rather than researching specific top-down initiatives, I started from the perspective that teachers decide what counts as change in their own practice. Along with my team of undergraduate student research assistants, we asked teachers to tell us what important changes they made during the pandemic, what was new about it, how it has impacted their students and themselves, and if and why it is lasting. We asked them to describe their school and what, if any, colleagues or resources helped them as they made their change. The aim of this research is to understand, from the ground-level voices of teachers across the state of Maine, how they achieved new possibilities—regardless how incremental or dramatic—and what this might tell us about the process of both conceiving of and realizing change.
LtC: What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?
LY: At AERA this year I will be presenting preliminary findings from part of our multi-phase study on changes that teachers made to their practice during the COVID pandemic in the state of Maine. In particular, I have focused on how teachers described the impact of their changes on students’ learning experiences and on their own experience as a teacher. I hope these findings will spark conversations on a couple different fronts. First, I was struck by the multifaceted role played by uncertainty in these teachers’ narratives about change. In general, the research literature accepts uncertainty as a persistent feature of teaching practice (Lortie, 1975). Yet as Yurkofsky (2022) argues, reform efforts are divided on whether uncertainty is better minimized, through more measurement, routines, and standardization, or instead leveraged, perhaps through critical reflection and efforts to innovate. The pandemic was a period of exacerbated uncertainty for teachers, both environmental uncertainty from outside pressures and technical uncertainty in the means of instruction and learning. In this study, I find that teachers’ explanations about the purpose and impact of their changes were similarly divided in how they responded to that uncertainty. Some teachers emphasized experiencing a need to create stability and predictability amid so much turbulence, or the benefit of rapid feedback loops and communication channels that mitigated day-to-day uncertainty for them and their students. On the other hand, some teachers described the impact of their pandemic changes as leaving them with skills or dispositions to try new things, or to embrace the variability of their students with student-centered curriculum and pedagogy. These were all understandable and meaningful ways that teachers navigated the pandemic. Yet in the future, ambitious changes—changes that ask teachers to rethink their beliefs, assumptions, and established practices—are going to require us to see uncertainty sometimes as an opportunity to leverage and learn from, rather than something that always ought to be minimized.
Second, I am also interested in the role of organizational context in how teachers experience and respond to uncertainty in their work. To that end, I am working on preliminary analyses connecting elements of the teachers’ schools (e.g., the presence of organizational routines, shared practices, culture of improvement) and their different approaches to mitigating or leveraging uncertainty. Given that there will always be uncertainty in teaching, are there ways schools and leaders can organize themselves to support teachers toward productive responses?
References:
A Critical Gender Analysis of State Educational Agency Policy during the COVID-19
Boyle, E. (2004). The feminization of teaching in America. Presented at the Louis Kampf Writing Prize in Women’s and Gender Studies. Cambridge. https://internationalednews.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/e7b4d-2004boyle.pdf
Cochran-Smith, M., Lytle, S.L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
Gyurko, J. (2012). Teacher voice. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 3505129. https://www.proquest.com/openview/a3f3feebee0a0e94671b104c5c3bdd38/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Hargreaves, A., Lieberman, A., Fullan, M., & Hopkins, D. (2014). International handbook of educational change: Part two (Vol. 5). Springer.
Johnson, S.M. (2019). Where teachers thrive. Harvard Education Press.
Marshall, C. (1999). Researching the margins: Feminist critical policy analysis. Educational Policy, 13(1), 59-76.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Characteristics of public school teachers. condition of education. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/clr/public-school-teachers
Rahayani, Y. (2016). Feminization of teaching. Journal of English and Education, 4(2), 13-24.
Symeonidis, V. (2015). The status of teachers and the teaching profession: A study of education unions’ perspectives. Education International.
Emergent teacher leadership through professional learning networks
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167272
Harris, A., & Muijs, D. (2004). Improving schools through teacher leadership. Professional learning. Open University Press and McGraw Hill.
Mcgregor, C. (2023, Oct. 13). Teacher leadership. [Conference presentation]. Canadian Association for Teacher Education Working Conference, Brandon, Manitoba.
Mundorf, J., Beckett, B., Boehm, S., Flake, C., & Miller, C. (2019). From the voices of teachers: Envisioning social justice teacher leadership through portraits of practice. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 10(2), 67-80.
Paris, D., & Alim, H.S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.
Pounder, J. S. (2006).Transformational classroom leadership: The fourth wave of teacher leadership? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 34(4), 533- 545.
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074003255
Fostering Sustainable and Thriving Teams: An Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Driven by Teachers
Apa, R., Grandinetti, R., & Sedita S. R. (2017). The social and business dimensions of a networked business incubator: The case of H-Farm. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 24(2), 198–221.
Askell-Williams, H., & Koh, G. A. (2020). Enhancing the sustainability of school improvement initiatives. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 31(4), 660-678.
Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., & Balocco, R. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystem research: Present debates and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15(4), 1291-1321.
Crick, J. M., & Crick, D. (2018). Angel investors’ predictive and control funding criteria: The importance of evolving business models. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 20(1), 34–56.
Gupta, A. (2019). Teacher-entrepreneurialism: A case of teacher identity formation in neoliberalizing education space in contemporary India. Critical Studies in Education, 62(4), 422-438.
Ho, C. S. M., Bryant, D. A., & Walker, A. D. (2022). Capturing interactions between middle leaders and teacher entrepreneurial behaviour: An examination through a person-environment fit model. School Leadership & Management, 42(5), 498-519.
Ion, G., & López Sirvent, E. (2022). Teachers’ perception of the characteristics of an evidence-informed school: Initiative, supportive culture, and shared reflection. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 33(4), 610-628.
Shen, H. Z., & Yang, H. (2022). Educational entrepreneurship in Australian community languages schools: An analysis of ethnic principals’ experience and practice. Cogent Education, 9(1), 1-16.
Stam, E., & Van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, 56(2), 809-832.
“I Think it Made Me More Brave”: Uncertainty and Change During the COVID Pandemic
Kush, J. M., Badillo-Goicoechea, E., Musci, R. J., & Stuart, E. A. (2022). Teachers’ mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Researcher, 51(9), 593-597. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189×221134281
Ladson-Billings, G. (2021). I’m here for the hard re-set: Post pandemic pedagogy to preserve our culture. Equity & Excellence in Education, 54(1), 68-78.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.
Reich, J., & Mehta, J. (2021). Healing, community, and humanity: How students and teachers want to reinvent schools post-Covid. Retrieved from https://edarxiv.org/nd52b
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387-431.
Will, M. (2022, April 14, 2022). Teacher job satisfaction hits an all-time low. Education Week.
Yurkofsky, M. (2022). Environmental, technical, and representational uncertainty: A framework for making sense of the hidden complexity of educational change. Educational Researcher, 51(6), 399-410.
International Education News 