Category Archives: education reform

Can Vietnam transform the conventional model of schooling? Educational improvement at scale (Part 1)

Posted on April 30, 2025 by | Leave a comment

Could the developments of the education system in Vietnam show one pathway to establishing – and then transforming – conventional schooling? Drawing on a series of interviews as well as a trip to Vietnam, the first post in this 4-part series from Thomas Hatch discusses how Vietnam has achieved near universal education at a relatively high level of quality. Subsequent posts will examine the efforts to shift the Vietnamese educational system to a focus on competencies and some of the critical issues that have to be addressed in the process. For other posts related to Vietnam, see Achieving Education for All for 100 Million People: A Conversation about the Evolution of the Vietnamese School System with Phương Minh Lương and Lân Đỗ Đức (Part 1); Looking toward the future and the implementation of a new competency-based curriculum in Vietnam: A Conversation about the Evolution of the Vietnamese School System with Phương Lương Minh and Lân Đỗ Đức (Part 2); Then Evolution of an Alternative Educational Approach in Vietnam: The Olympia School Story Part 1 and Part 2; and Engagement, Wellbeing, and Innovation in the Wake of the School Closures in Vietnam:  A Conversation with Chi Hieu Nguyen (Part 1 and Part 2).

What’s surprising about Vietnam’s educational system? For many, it’s Vietnam’s high performance on the PISA tests often used to gauge educational quality. Since 2012, Vietnam’s 15-year-olds have had some of the highest average PISA scores in reading, math, and science in comparison to other developing economies. Average math scores, in particular, are comparable to or better than the average scores of some of the richest economies in the world, including the United States. In addition, according to the OECD, 34% of Vietnamese students were “among the most disadvantaged students who took the PISA test in 2022,” yet their average score in mathematics was one of the highest for students of similar socio-economic backgrounds, and the gap between the students in the highest and lowest socio-economic categories was smaller than the OECD average.

As surprising as those results might be, as someone who has been studying “higher“ and “lower“ performing education systems such as Finland and Singapore, several other aspects of Vietnam’s educational system stand out as well:  

  • Vietnam has achieved near universal education at a relatively high level of quality in a country with almost 100 million people – roughly 10 times the populations of Finland and Singapore combined.
  • Despite these differences, some, though not all, of the key factors that support high system performance in Finland and Singapore seem to apply in Vietnam.
  • Vietnam has already launched major initiatives to shift the entire education system to focus on competency-based goals and more student-centered instruction, a move that “high performing” systems like Finland and Singapore are still trying to figure out how to make.

All of this has been achieved in a country with 54 different ethnic groups, where the city of Hanoi, on its own, has a larger population than all of Singapore and where the budget is about 22 Billion USD, compared to about 95 Billion USD in Finland.   

In another 20 years, will Vietnam be leading the way in transforming the conventional model of schooling that has dominated education for more than 100 years?  To explore this question, in the first part of this series of posts, I share some of my observations about the key developments in the Vietnamese education system over the past thirty years.

“Will Vietnam be leading the way in transforming the conventional model of schooling that has dominated education for more than 100 years?“

Improvements in enrollment and access to schooling for all students

As many countries with developing education systems continue to try to provide access to education for all students, Vietnam has achieved school enrollment rates near 100% in kindergarten, primary, and lower secondary schools. A significant amount of that growth took place in less than 20 years, between 1990 and 2012. Enrollment in secondary schools in particular tripled in only 14 years, rising from about 23% in 1992 to almost 75% by 2006. Although secondary school enrollment remains a concern, as there has been only a slight increase since then, the mean years of schooling for adults in Vietnam is still higher than expected, given its per capita income.

A Review of Vietnam’s Education Trends in the Past 20 Years and Emerging Challenges

Evidence of Educational Quality & Equity: PISA and beyond

Although many countries are working to expand access to schooling, educational quality remains a critical concern around the world. But the results of the 2012 PISA tests suggests that Vietnam has been able to increase both access and quality significantly. Those results showed that by 2014, Vietnam’s 15-year-olds were 17th in math and 19th in reading out of 65 countries. More astoundingly, that performance made Vietnam an outlier – performing significantly higher in both reading and math than other education systems with a comparable GDP.

RISE Project, 2018

These striking outcomes garnered considerable attention and generated a number of critiques that have raised legitimate concerns about the accuracy of the results. Notably, students who drop out of school in Vietnam after 9th grade are not included in the sample taking the PISA test, inflating the average PISA scores. In addition, one report suggests that some Vietnamese students participating in the PISA tests have been encouraged to do their best to “bring Vietnam honor,” and in one case, students received t-shirts identifying them as PISA participants. At the same time, this report concludes that, although these problems could have had some effect on Vietnam’s scores, statistical adjustments for those issues “do not change the overall finding that Vietnam’s PISA performance was exceptional” and that it substantially outperformed other countries of similar income levels.  

Several other sources of data confirm the significant growth in Vietnamese students’ educational performance. First of all, by 2019, 96% of the population over 15 could read and write. Vietnam’s own tests of mathematics and language in 2001 and 2007 also show what analysts describe as “very large increases over six years.” Comparisons with other developing education systems in India, Peru, and Ethiopia carried out by the Young Lives project show that the scores of the Vietnamese students continue to grow significantly over time, leading to the conclusion that a year of primary school in Vietnam is “considerably more productive in terms of quantitative skill acquisition” than a year of schooling in the other countries. As a consequence, in Vietnam, almost 19 out of every 20 10-year-olds can add four-digit numbers, and 85% can subtract fractions – proportions of correct answers similar to many OECD countries and substantially higher than those in other countries with similar GDP.

Although there are still some differences in the enrollments and performance of students from different ethnic minority groups, particularly at the upper secondary level, Vietnamese education policy and funding explicitly recognize the rights of all students to learn their own language and preserve their cultures. Article 11 of the Vietnamese Constitution states: “Every ethnic group has the right to use its own language and system of writing, to preserve its national identity, to promote its fine customs, habits, traditions and culture.” In addition, Phuong Luong, a researcher from Vietnam National University and the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences estimates that the Vietnamese government has over 130 different policies to support ethnic minorities, including 10 key policies on introduction of ethnic minority languages and cultures into curriculum; more than 20 policies for financial support/scholarships, exemption or reduction of tuition fees, housing and accommodations for ethnic minority students; and five different policies for recruiting ethnic minority teachers. Most recently, the Vietnamese government has implemented regulations abolishing school fees for public education from preschool to high school. Previously, even public schools charged families fees for things like uniforms, textbooks, and other purposes. Although estimated to cost the government about 1.3 billion USD, these new regulations, along with new limits on costly supplementary tutoring sessions, are designed to ease the financial burdens of education for all students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Next week: Building the capacity for high quality education at scale: Can Vietnam transform the conventional model of schooling (Part 2)

Leave a comment

Posted in education reform, Educational Policy, Interviews, Teachers

Tagged ,

Anti-discrimination policies in Massachusetts and socioeconomic education reform in Türkiye

Posted on April 10, 2025 by | Leave a comment

In Part 5 of the Lead the Change (LtC) interviews, IEN shares excerpts from interviews with the presenters discussing “Critical analysis of policy and school reform: Reimagining more just futures” at the upcoming Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association.  For the other posts featuring presenters from this year’s AERA conference see Part 1 “Leveraging Partnerships, Networks and Teacher Collaboration for Educational Change,” Part 2 “Leaders, Leadership Practices, and Educational Change in the US, Korea, and Hong Kong: Lead the Change Interviews (Part 2),” Part 3 “Educational Transformation in Schools and Colleges in the US and South Africa: Lead the Change Interviews (Part 3),” Part 4 Teacher Education, Teacher Certification, and Teacher Meetings in Israel, Korea, Switzerland and the US: Lead the Change Interviews (Part 4). These interviews are a part of a series produced by Elizabeth Zumpe and colleagues from AERA’s Educational Change Special Interest Group. The full interviews can be found on the LtC website. 

‘Even-handed treatment of all sides’: A critical policy analysis of Massachusetts anti-discriminatory school committee proposals – Erin Nerlino (EN), Clark University, & Lauren Funk (LF), Boston University

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at American Education Research Association (AERA) can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?

EN & LF: By engaging in this work, we aim to enhance the knowledge that the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA have about how some threats to equal education and student belonging occur locally within cities, towns, and school district communities. While much attention has rightly been focused on states that have more widespread discriminatory laws in place, such as Florida and Texas (Johnson, 2020), local communities in states such as Massachusetts are also facing divisive and discriminatory policies. Educators, parents, students, and community members are organizing in response to resist such policies in many districts; however, an increasing number of these discriminatory and divisive policies are arising (Feingold et al., 2023). We hope to shed light on the communal threat that these policies pose and break the silos of individual districts facing these policies to share resources, strategies, and experiences in successfully resisting.

“Threats to equal education and student belonging occur locally within cities, towns, and school district communities.”

Furthermore, much of the language and concepts used in these policies can initially seem benign, suggesting that all viewpoints are just and reasonable. For example, the four policies under study in this work use words and phrases such as “neutral,” “unbiased,” and “even-handed treatment of all sides.” These phrases assert the false idea that presenting all sides of a social policy issue constitutes neutrality and that neutrality itself is ideal and not taking a position. Many of the underlying implications impact already vulnerable student populations and hamper the efforts of educators. To refer back to the previously-mentioned phrase of an “even-handed treatment of all sides” as an example, this assertion opens up the classroom as a space that has the potential to deny students’ identities as it allows for individuals to voice problematic ideas based on race, sexual orientation, religion, social class, etc., in the name of covering “all sides” of an issue. By elucidating some of the problematic language, we hope to prepare fellow allies in practice, policy, and scholarship to productively challenge ideas that might threaten the belonging of all students in schools.

Dr. Erin Nerlino 
Dr. Lauren Funk

The implications of educational change on socioeconomically disadvantaged students – Elif Erberk (EE) Van Yuzuncu Yil University, & Yasar Kondakci (YK) Middle East Technical University

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some of the ideas you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at American Education Research Association (AERA) can learn from your work related to practice, policy, and scholarship?

EE & YK: This study critically evaluates the impact of educational reforms on socioeconomically disadvantaged students and invites both policymakers and practitioners (e.g., teachers and principals) to tailor measures that mitigate the negative impact of the reform on those students. The active involvement of teachers and principals in the design phase of the reform, empowering them during the implementation by providing additional resources, and granting decision-making latitude to contextualize the implementation in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas are practices highlighted by the teachers and principals. However, specific recommendations are made for policymakers, who are encouraged to demonstrate participatory and democratic practices during the design phase of the reform. Additionally, fostering a collaborative climate and inviting both internal (teachers and principals) and external (e.g., universities, labor unions) stakeholders to contribute to the design and implementation of reforms is vital for diminishing the impact on socio-economically disadvantaged students. 

“Policymakers are encouraged to demonstrate participatory and democratic practices during the desire phase of the reform.”

Dr Yasar Kondakci
Dr Elif Erberk

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Educational Policy, equity, Interviews, Lead the Change

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Lead the Change Interview with Patricia Virella, Tayeon Kim, Lauren Bailes, and Elizabeth Zumpe

Posted on July 4, 2024 by | Leave a comment

This month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview features the new leaders of the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association, Patricia Virella, Tayeon Kim, Lauren Bailes, and Elizabeth Zumpe. This week IEN shares excerpts from those interviews focusing on the connections between their work and the work of the SIG and the wider field of educational change. The LtC series is produced by Elizabeth Zumpe and sponsored by the Educational Change SIG. A pdf of the full interview will be available on the LtC website.

Lead the Change Interview with Patricia Virella

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

Patricia Virella (PV): Over the past year, I prioritized immersing myself in school environments, spending approximately 30 days actively engaging with students, teachers, and staff. This hands-on experience allowed me to gain profound insights into the unique challenges that students are facing in today’s educational landscape, including mental health issues, ongoing crises, and persistent inequities. Witnessing the resilience and joy demonstrated by students in the face of these challenges was incredibly inspiring. It reinforced the importance of understanding the realities of schooling in the present moment. All of us must pause and truly comprehend the current state of education before forging ahead with our plans and initiatives. This firsthand exposure has deepened my commitment to advocating for comprehensive support systems that address the multifaceted needs of students and educators alike. It has also fueled my passion for promoting holistic approaches to education that prioritize well-being and equity. I am driven to leverage these insights to inform my work and to champion initiatives that empower schools to create environments where every student can thrive.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

PV: The idea of change is inherently exhilarating. While change often implies embracing entirely new approaches, I also ponder whether it involves a return to foundational concepts and theories that have yet to manifest their full potential, such as liberation, transformation, and experiential learning. This dual perspective prompts me to consider how we, as a collective of academics, can effectively support change that embodies the spirit of equity. I recognize that achieving equity can sometimes feel elusive, but it does not have to remain this way. My commitment to exploring the multifaceted nature of change and equity has deepened my resolve to advocate for inclusive and transformative practices within academic and institutional settings. By critically examining the intersections of change and equity, I am dedicated to fostering environments where all individuals have equal opportunities to thrive and contribute meaningfully. I am driven to channel these reflections into actionable strategies that promote systemic change and advance the realization of equity within educational and academic spheres.

Patricia Virella

Dr. Patricia M. Virella is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership at Montclair State University. Dr. Virella’s research focuses on implementing equity-oriented leadership through leader responses, organizational transformation and preparation. Dr. Virella also studies equity-oriented crisis leadership examining how school leaders can respond to crises without further harming marginalized communities.

Lead the Change Interview with Taeyeon Kim

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

TK: My research offers several contributions to the field of Educational Change, focusing on three main areas: revisiting policy through the voices of equity leaders, critically examining policies and systems by centering racially and linguistically marginalized communities, and promoting cross-cultural dialogue using transnational and decolonial perspectives. Given that my work was previously featured in the Lead the Change series (See the Lead the ChangeOctober issue of 2023), I would like to highlight some insights from my recent publication on leadership learning.

As a leadership educator, I view learning as a core tenet of leading educational change. My scholarship on educational leadership and policy has led me to explore how to guide meaningful learning for aspiring leaders who pursue equity and social justice. My recent work, published in the Journal of School Leadership (Kim & Wright, 2024), presents a conceptual-pedagogical framework that on guides students through emotional discomfort when learning about inequities and injustice. This research underscores the importance of emotion in learning, which can drive change at both individual and social levels. When negative emotions are not properly addressed and processed, meaningful learning cannot occur, undermining leaders’ efforts to redress inequities, injustice, and harm. However, with appropriate guidance, emotional discomfort can be a valuable source for transformative learning and changes (see Mezirow 1997). Traditional scholarship on educational change often relies on rationalistic approaches; however, my recent study emphasizes the role of emotions and the holistic aspects of learning in effecting change. It also highlights the crucial role of facilitators and educators in developing equity leaders. 

Thus, my work reveals that effective leadership learning involves addressing the emotional dimensions of learning about social justice issues. By integrating these emotional and holistic aspects, educational leaders can foster more profound and lasting changes in their practice, policy, and scholarship. This approach can help prepare leaders, better equipping them to navigate and address the complex challenges of inequity and injustice in education.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

TK: The field of Educational Change is particularly exciting due to its emphasis on partnerships and interdisciplinary approaches, and its appreciation for international perspectives. As a transnational scholar, I often notice that AERA’s discourse tends to be US-centric and predominantly features scholarly thoughts and contexts published in English. This observation underscores the importance of the Educational Change SIG’s foundations and history, as it can potentially extend the boundaries of our educational scholarship.

To advance the field, I urge educational change scholars to critically engage with issues of geopolitics, coloniality, and global whiteness (e.g., Chen, 2010; Mignolo, 2008; Leonardo, 2002) that influence knowledge creation and dissemination. When we embrace “interdisciplinary” and “international” perspectives, it is crucial to interrogate whose knowledge is being prioritized and how it is being represented.

“To advance the field, I urge educational change scholars to critically engage with issues of geopolitics, coloniality, and global whiteness.”

With our new leadership team, I aim to extend the field of Educational Change through several focuses. First, I urge the field to integrate diverse onto-epistemological understandings. The field can benefit significantly from including non-Western, indigenous, and other marginalized ways of being and thinking. By incorporating these perspectives, we can challenge the dominance of Eurocentric paradigms and enrich our understanding of educational practices and policies. Second, educational change scholars need to consider the power dynamics involved in knowledge production and dissemination. This means questioning who has access to academic platforms, whose voices are amplified, and whose are marginalized. Future activities organized by the Educational Change SIG could better support multilingual scholarship and inclusive platforms that are accessible to scholars from various regions and backgrounds, ensuring that a variety of voices are heard and valued. This will eventually promote cross-cultural and transnational collaborations. Finally, integrating critical theories such as postcolonial theory, critical race theory, and feminist theory can provide valuable lenses through which to examine and address systemic inequities in education. These theories can help scholars and practitioners understand the historical and structural factors that perpetuate educational inequalities and identify pathways to more just and equitable educational systems.

By taking these steps, the Educational Change SIG can play a pivotal role in promoting a more inclusive and globally informed approach to educational change, ensuring that the field continues to evolve and respond to the complex needs of educational communities worldwide.

Taeyeon Kim

Taeyeon Kim is an assistant professor in the department of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska Lincoln. Her scholarship explores intersections of policy and leadership, with a particular focus on how educational leadership can challenge unjust systems and humanize educational practices to empower marginalized students and communities.The Educational Change SIG would like to acknowledge and congratulate Taeyeon Kim as the recipient of the 2024 Educational Change SIG Emerging Scholar Award. Her work was featured in the Lead the Change in October, 2023.

Lead the Change Interview Lauren Bailes

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

LB: I aim to share with the field a clear emphasis on systems change for equity, especially in the ways we think about who leaders are. My research focuses on identifying the systems, practices, and mindsets that perpetuate inequities in the careers of educational leaders. Most of my work problematizes the notion of ‘pipelines,’ especially in educational leadership and how career experiences like preparation, promotion, and evaluation are differentially distributed by race and gender (e.g., Bailes & Guthery, 2020; Bailes et al., 2023). When we consider careers to be pipelines, we might wrongly believe those pipelines are neutral, and that everyone has an equal chance of entering or flowing through the pipeline. That is fundamentally untrue: Women and People of Color, as well as people with intersectional identities, experience sorting at every career juncture, even when they are equivalently qualified relative to white or male peers. Further, these career inequities often result in adverse outcomes for faculty and students—especially faculty and students of color. 

“Most of my work problematizes the notion of ‘pipelines,’ especially in educational leadership and how career experiences like preparation, promotion, and evaluation are differentially distributed by race and gender.”

A second thing I hope to share is the critical importance of partnering with current practitioners and myriad ways of incorporating their perspectives to deepen, clarify, and implement approaches to and findings of research. The profound systems changes required to shift unjust organizational practices are unlikely to come only from the academy. While research like mine can and does inform practice, I value, seek, and incorporate the perspectives of folks who have experienced injustice in their career trajectories. They are uniquely capable of showing me what I might be missing and how to better capture and learn from what they have experienced or what they know might work to change the system. I also want to be clear that there is much I am still learning from colleagues in this SIG and throughout our field. I’m looking forward to deepening those connections and bringing my own learning to bear on my research and partnership efforts to shift systems in service of equity. 

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

LB: I think there is a broad appetite—among researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and families—for change in education. That appetite often results in misguided and harmful movements toward neoliberalism, isolationism, or the erosion of schooling as a public good, but there may be opportunity for broad and supportive coalitions for some of the interventions, innovations, and structures that do preserve and enhance equitable and accessible education for every student. 

Lauren Bailes

Lauren P. Bailes is an associate professor of education leadership in the School of Education at the University of Delaware, where she is the coordinator of UD’s EdD in Educational Leadership. After teaching middle school language arts in New York City, she earned her doctorate at The Ohio State University. Now, she researches school leadership preparation, promotion, and evaluation; school organizational characteristics; and the intersection of school leadership and policy. Lauren’s favorite days are still the ones spent in schools alongside teachers and leaders. 

Lead the Change Interview with Elizabeth Zumpe

LtC: What are some of the ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change can learn from your work to inform practice, policy, and scholarship?

EZ: Prevailing ideas about Educational Change tend to come from scholars and policymakers who work far from the realities of schools. Too often, these ideas rest upon wildly false assumptions about existing capacities in schools, overlooking how many operate amid chronic adversity. Chronic adversity occurs when schools regularly face inadequate resources to meet their community’s needs, unproductive pressures to improve, and a lack of support for the profession. When designed from afar, educational reforms tend to presume that school challenges stem from educators’ ‘lack’ of motivation or competence and that improvement thus depends upon intensive intervention from the outside. 

My research offers a different perspective: school improvement amid adversity as a struggle to develop collective agency (Zumpe, 2024). Agency is an inherent driver of human motivation and of educational improvement. But agency can become constrained when people are regularly subjected to demands for which they do not have adequate resources and experience inevitable failure.

As part of one RPP described above, I collaborated closely with a school facing challenging circumstances (Zumpe, 2024). At the start of our collaboration, we realized that our partnership’s theory of action had not considered this school’s needs and context. Across years of being labeled as ‘failing’ and facing daily struggles to ‘reach’ students and cover classrooms, the school’s leaders had tried various initiatives to improve. However, most of their efforts faltered and sputtered out, leaving conflict and cynicism behind.  By their own account, the faculty struggled with the “basics” to get along well enough to launch and sustain improvement. 

When the school’s leadership team invited me to help, I tried to capture their efforts to develop a foundational capability to work together to solve problems, which I called collective agency. Through participant observation with several work groups, I traced how their collective agency became enabled and what shut it down. I also launched and studied a new group using action research.

Comparing groups, I found that efforts to develop collective agency collapsed when educators faced overwhelming and complex problems for which they could see no solutions within reach. In these situations, they avoided their problems, pointed fingers at each other, and expressed a sense of helplessness that nothing could be done. On the flip side, efforts to develop collective agency surged when someone charged the group to ‘do something,’ and when this initiative was combined with a simple solution that the group felt they had the capacity to enact. In these situations, members affirmed each other, perceived the group’s potential for success, and pulled together to make progress towards addressing a problem.

These findings suggest a need for policies and reforms aimed at enabling school improvement in the ‘next level of work’ (City et al., 2010). To do this, we need to partner with educators in challenging circumstances to define and frame goals for improvement within reach and incrementally build organizational problem-solving capacity. Policymakers and scholars need to recognize educators as partners in research and development, without whom our educational system cannot remedy or repair.

LtC: What excites you about the field of Educational Change, and how might we further those ideas through the work of the Educational Change SIG?

EZ: I find hope in the growing number of education researchers seeking answers to existential questions about the role of research in education. Many educators and scholars are deeply concerned about the future of our planet and our democratic values. Looking around at the pernicious grip of racism, the fracturing of civic values, and the erosion of our public education system, many scholars are asking, how does our research relate to this? What are we – as scholars– doing about it? Out of our collective angst comes a growing willingness to expand how we think about academic research and to innovate.

I am excited by the growing number of scholars, especially early career scholars, working to build a more humanistic and justice-forward academic culture. Within our Educational Change SIG and scholarly communities working in RPPs and continuous improvement in education, I am inspired by efforts to actively build a culture in which academics care about each other as people, carry our status with humility, open ourselves to be vulnerable as learners, and treat social impact as a core value. 

To further those ideas, I think the Educational Change SIG should reimagine how we organize and schedule AERA sessions with the intention involving more PK-12 practitioners. One way the SIG can do this is to develop a conference call and session formats that encourage and elevate practitioners’ voices and expertise. The SIG might consider offering sponsored conference registration awards for presenting practitioners. The SIG executive committee can also advocate with AERA to schedule specially designated conference sessions for practitioners that are held during after work hours.

I think the Educational Change SIG should support the diversification of our membership and international learning as a facilitator of cross-national and trans-global exchange. One way to do this is by furthering our existing partnerships with the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (https://www.icsei.net/about-icsei/) and journals that explicitly seek scholarship with an international perspective, including the Journal for Educational Change. I would also like to see our SIG do more to promote and support international participation in AERA and other remote events for scholarly exchange throughout the year.

Elizabeth Zumpe

Elizabeth Zumpe is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Oklahoma. A former K-12 public school teacher for over a decade with National Board Certification, Elizabeth holds a Ph.D. in Education from the University of California, Berkeley.

References

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.

Virella, P., & Liera, R. (2024). Nice for what? The contradictions and tensions of an urban district’s racial equity transformation. Education Sciences, 14(4), 420.

Chen, K. H. (2010). Asia as method: Toward deimperialization. Duke University Press.

del Carmen Salazar, M. (2013). A humanizing pedagogy: Reinventing the principles and practice of education as a journey toward liberation. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 121-148.

Kim, T., & Mauldin, C. (2022). Troubling unintended harm of heroic discourses in social justice leadership. Frontiers in Education, https://doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.796200

Kim, T., & Wright, J. (2024). Navigating emotional discomfort in developing equity-driven school leaders: A conceptual-pedagogical framework. Journal of School Leadership, 10526846241254050.  

Leonardo, Z. (2002). The souls of white folk: Critical pedagogy, whiteness studies, and globalization discourse. Race Ethnicity and Education, 5(1), 29–50. doi:10.1080/13613320120117180 

Mezirow J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12.

Mignolo, W. D. (2008).  The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference. In M. Moraña, E. Dussel & C. Jáuregui (Ed.), Coloniality at large: Latin America and the postcolonial debate 

Bailes, L. P., Ahmad, S., Saylor, M., & Vitale, M. N. (2023). Quality or control: High-needs principals’ perceptions of a PSEL-based evaluation system. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 18(4), 622-648.

Bailes, L. P., & Guthery, S. (2020). Held down and held back: Systematically delayed principal promotions by race and gender. Aera Open, 6(2), 2332858420929298.

City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education (Vol. 30). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

J., & Steup, L. (2021). Research-practice partnerships in education: The state of the field. William T. Grant Foundation.

Mintrop, R., & Zumpe, E. (2019). Solving real life problems of practice and education leaders’ school improvement mind-set. American Journal of Education, 125(3), 295-344.

Mintrop, R., Zumpe, E., Jackson, K., Nucci, D.,& Norman, J. (2022). Designing for deeper learning: Challenges in schools and school districts serving 

Leave a comment

Posted in education reform, Educational change, Educational Leadership, Educational Policy, equity, Interviews, Lead the Change

Tagged , , , ,

The Desire for Innovation is Always There: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System

Posted on June 12, 2024 by | 1 comment

What’s changing in China’s education system? What might change in the future? Those are some of the questions that led Thomas Hatch to spend almost a month in China this spring. In preparation for that visit, he talked with Yong Zhao to get his perspective on what’s been happening in education in China in the past few years. Zhao was born in China and now works all over the world, including in China, exploring the implications of globalization and technology on education. In the first part of this two-part post, Zhao shares his observations about some of the educational innovations he’s seen in China and about some of the work he’s been involved in there. In part two, Zhao offers his impressions of recent changes in addressing students’ mental health and discusses the broader context of the Chinese education system and some of the challenges and opportunities for changes in the future. 

Thomas Hatch (TH): You’ve written extensively about China in the past, but I’m particularly interested in what’s happening in the Chinese education system over the last few years. Are you seeing some innovations or changes in classrooms and schools in China since the COVID-19 pandemic and the school closures? 

Yong Zhao (YZ): I think there’s a huge hunger for innovation in China. Let me give you an example. I was just talking to a group of school principals and heads of the Education Commission in the Chaoyang District in Beijing. It’s the largest district in Beijing, and it’s where most of the embassies and many foreign companies are located. We were planning to do a summer camp for students from different countries based on my education philosophy, which is very much child-centered, focused on uniqueness, personalization, project-driven instruction, and problem-solving. We wanted to make the camp very big, involving kids from different countries, and they were open to the idea. Alongside the camp, we planned to organize learning festivals to discuss topics like artificial intelligence and what I call “Re-globalization.”

Chaoyang District Beijing

We started this conversation in January, and the issue is that very few schools outside China are willing to send their students and teachers here at the moment, so we’re planning to do it next year. But this kind of summer camp is something I began working on before COVID, in May 2018 in Chongqing. Every year since, we’ve been running similar innovative programs in the summer. Even during COVID, we tried it out. The first year in Chongqing, we had students from US schools, Australian and British schools, with hundreds of students and teachers staying in the same dorms, interacting. 

In addition, in the public schools in Chongqing, we have students enrolled in a special course I helped design called ICEE, which stands for innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship education. It’s expanding in the public schools even though students have to pay extra to participate, which shows that parents and schools are interested in it. Beijing Academy is another school that is particularly innovative. I was partially responsible for co-designing that school. We formed a global advisory group, including people like Richard Elmore and Kurt Fischer and Ron Beghetto. It was an international collaboration. They built a brand-new school based on our advice. It just celebrated its 10th anniversary in Beijing. Now they have over 9 or 10 campuses. 

 ICEE – Innovation, Creativity, and Entrepreneurship Education Program

I think this shows that many parents and students and teachers actually want change. You cannot make massive changes like, for example, saying, let’s forget about the major policies like the double reduction policy, but many people are still trying to find ways to change. It also shows that working in the Chinese education system might be one of the most difficult things in the world. On the one hand, you have to do this. On the other hand, you have to do that. But ultimately, your school’s reputation matters, and innovation as a school leader in China is crucial. 

“I think working in the Chinese education system might be one of the most difficult things in the world. On the one hand, you have to do this. On the other hand, you have to do that. But ultimately, your school’s reputation matters, and innovation as a school leader in China is crucial”

TH: So, on the one hand, you can’t do anything, but on the other hand, you have to do something…

YH: Yes, exactly. It’s fascinating. I’m puzzled by this system, you know? Right now, I’m getting older. When I was younger, I didn’t really think a lot about it, but I cannot think of how human societies can be organized like that. You cannot do anything, but you have to do something. It’s a fascinating way to think about it, isn’t it?

 TH: It is! But if we step back for a second and try to characterize what’s happening with educational innovation overall right now, my understanding is that the education ecosystem in China has contracted. There were more innovative schools and smaller schools starting, more tutoring programs, more after-school programs. But now, following the school closures and the double reduction policy, in a sense, this seems to be period of consolidation. People I’ve talked to say it’s not a prime time for innovation. Is that the way you see it? (For more on the double reduction policy see “Surprise, Controversy, and the “Double Reduction Policy” in China” and “China reiterates implementation of ‘double reduction’ policy”)

YZ: Yes, your description is right from a general, outside perspective. You can see the contractions. Even the Gaokao has become more nationalized. It was decentralized, with some differences across regions, but it’s gotten more centralized. Now they’re all saying they are using the national tests and very few provinces use their own. The curriculum has become more centralized too with more centrally required courses and teaching materials. But honestly, I think the beauty of the Chinese ecosystem is that, at the same time, children are children, and parents understand that their children, growing up, need innovative education.

They do see the power of artificial intelligence, and AI is becoming more prevalent. They also see new geopolitical conflicts, or what I call “re-globalization.” China always has this happening, and what’s underground is different. Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there. It’s bubbling up everywhere, but it’s happening. Many local schools have to think about innovation, and even the government, if you look at the most recent speech by the Minister of Education, talks a lot about AI. They are thinking about it in every part of teaching and teacher training. I don’t know how well it’s been implemented, because it’s still very new, but the same is true in the US. China also issued a call last year for schools that were willing to be part of experiments with AI in education. The central government awarded several hundred of these grants to create pilot sites and to spread the message to other places. So, it’s a lot more complex in China than what many people think. The whole system is evolving.

“Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming more public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there…it’s a lot more complex in China than what many people think. The whole system is evolving.”

TH: Despite that, have you seen some schools or initiatives or afterschool programs or other things that you think are particularly interesting or innovative in the Chinese context?

YZ: In the book Let the Children Play, Pasi Sahlberg and William Doyle described an approach in the Zhejiang Province near Shanghai that developed genuine playhouses for preschool and kindergarten (Anji Play). It was really play-driven, play-based, and it started in one kindergarten and then it spread around the whole province. It wasn’t country-wide, but it was a model recognized by the Chinese Ministry of Education, and they began to promote it across the country. I don’t know how it’s going now, but that is something that I think it’s definitely worth looking at.

AnjiPlay

There are also a number of schools that are trying to do something different. The Beijing City International School just had me visit for three days. Their student population is over 90% Chinese students, and they are struggling with the fact that parents have invested significant amounts of money, expecting their children to attend prestigious universities like Harvard and Columbia.  But they also want to change, so they had me over to discuss transitioning to personalized education. Whenever someone has me presenting, they are willing to be challenged.

The Beijing National Day School and a couple of other public schools are also known for being innovative. Another interesting school is the one called #80 Secondary School in Beijing. I was just there, and I was impressed. If you are a good student in some areas, then you don’t have to take certain courses. They would allow you to explore on your own, which shocked me. It’s a Chinese government high school, and it’s quite powerful. 

Beijing #80 Secondary School

Thomas Hatch: Coming from Teachers College, where there’s a history of connection with China through John Dewey’s visits, I’m fascinated to see that there has been a long-term interest in China in progressive education. As I began to get ready for my trip, I’ve realized there are a number of educators in China over the years, who have become very well known for being innovative and supporting innovative education. Can you talk about any of those enduring traditions related to alternative education?

Yong Zhao: It’s a very interesting question. But first of all, let’s not underestimate the power of the Gaokao – the college entrance examination. Similar pressure is widespread, happening not only in China but also in Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. Let’s not forget that the Gaokao and the imperial exam tradition, dominates and controls parents’, students’, and teachers’ minds. But continuously, there has been talk about change in China, and I’ve found that the conversation about needing a different kind of student from the “Gaokao type” has never stopped. It’s always been there. 

Even in the 1950s, Mao was very against the Gaokao exam. Regardless of who he was or what he is – I’m not debating that – he was actually very innovative in education. Ideologically, he never really wanted exams. During the Cultural Revolution, people think he destroyed the Chinese education system. But on the other hand, he was basically saying education does not need to be so pedantic, does not need to be traditional and academic in an ivory tower. He started education in my village. That’s how I went to school.  He said education needs to be shorter. It only has to be 10 years and it can happen in rural villages or in factories. If you think about that, that’s very much the progressive tradition. But the long tradition of using exams to select government officials has also always stayed in the Communist education philosophy, and the tradition of using exams to select and reward people is a long-standing cultural problem.

Next Week: Schools do not Change, But They’re Always Changing: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System (Part 2)

Dr. Yong Zhao is a Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas and a professor in Educational Leadership at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne in Australia. He previously served as the Presidential Chair, Associate Dean, and Director of the Institute for Global and Online Education in the College of Education, University of Oregon, where he was also a Professor in the Department of Educational Measurement, Policy, and Leadership. Prior to Oregon, Yong Zhao was University Distinguished Professor at the College of Education, Michigan State University, where he also served as the founding director of the Center for Teaching and Technology, executive director of the Confucius Institute, as well as the US-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Education and a fellow of the International Academy of Education. 

1 Comment

Posted in education reform, Educational change, Global Reports/Studies, Journal Articles, Lead the Change, Leading Futures

Tagged , , ,

Transforming the Educational Landscape Through Challenging Eurocentric Norms: Lead the Change Interview with Taeyeon Kim

Posted on October 25, 2023 by | Leave a comment

In this month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview, Taeyeon Kim shares her work in raising the voices of marginalized Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) scholars in the field of educational leadership. Her research places emphasis on the intersection of leadership and policy. Before serving as an Assistant Professor of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, she completed her Ph.D. in Educational Administration at Michigan State University. The LtC series is produced by Alex Lamb and colleagues from the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. A pdf of the fully formatted interview is available on the LtC website.

Teayeon Kim

Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action.” This theme charges researchers and practitioners with confronting racial injustice directly while imagining new possibilities for liberation. The call urges scholars to look critically at our global past and look with hope and radicalism towards the future of education. What specific responsibility do educational change scholars have in this space? What steps are you taking to heed this call?

Taeyeon Kim (TK): When I think about the 2024 AERA theme in the context of educational change, it’s all about asking ourselves, “What kind of changes are we striving for and how do we get there?” This year’s AERA theme strongly encourages us to focus on transforming the educational landscape, which has long been marred by racism and White supremacy, into a more humane and liberating space.

In response, it’s crucial for scholars in the field of educational change to take responsibility for harnessing our collective knowledge to create more equitable education systems. Traditional approaches to change, usually labeled as “reform” and “improvement” in education, have often been driven by accountability policies rooted in neoliberal thinking (See critique from Au, 2022; Lipman, 2007; Tuck, 2013). Many educational change scholars have pushed back against this trend, exploring system perspectives (Fullan, 2015), professional capital (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012), social justice (Flórez Petour & Rozas Assael, 2020; Rincón-Gallardo, 2018), and organizational learning (Mulford, 2005) as valuable tools for driving change. At the same time, it is essential to reevaluate these approaches through a critical lens and align them with more recent scholarship on disrupting institutional racism and Whiteness (Diamond & Gomez, 2023; Irby, 2022; Ishimaru & Galloway, 2021; Pailey, 2020; Ray, 2019).

As a leadership scholar, I see my role through three interconnected strands in my scholarship. First, my research focuses on reexamining policy through the lens of equity-centered leadership practices. This work closely aligns with my role as an educator, where I frequently emphasize the concept of the “administrative posture of neutrality” (Khalifa, 2020, p. 47). This concept underscores how administrators often concentrate solely on quantifiable factors and Khalifa (2020) warns that this tendency allows leaders “to avoid and deny racialized claims held against them by focusing on indisputable factors and maintain full control of the discourse around the school” (pp. 46-48). Through my research, I shed light on how policy mandates and rules shape administrators’ actions and how these,
sometimes inadvertently, perpetuate racism and White supremacy. This perspective informs my teaching as many of my students are aspiring educators looking to take on administrative roles. I take seriously my
responsibility of supporting them to critically analyze the system, imagine new possibilities for liberation, and empower marginalized students.

My research also amplifies the voices of racialized communities. For instance, in a recent collaborative inquiry (Kim et al., 2023), I had the opportunity to revisit and make sense of my own experiences as a racialized individual in the U.S. My co-authors and I challenged systemic racism and White supremacy by
collectively sharing counter narratives from Asian American communities. Another example is that I’ve been working closely with other Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) scholars, to convene AAPI-focused sessions the University Council of Educational Administration (UCEA) convention meetings. Despite being one of the fastest-growing populations in the U.S. (Budiman & Ruiz, 2021), research on this topic in P-12 leadership has been limited. Throughout these efforts, I aim to normalize and center the voices of marginalized AAPI communities in the field of educational leadership while challenging White and Eurocentric norms in research and practice.

“I aim to normalize and center the voices of marginalized AAPI communities in the field of educational leadership while challenging White and Eurocentric norms in research and practice.”

Furthermore, as a transnational immigrant scholar, I bring a global perspective to understanding racism. I acknowledge that racism operates differently in various parts of the world, often intertwined with imperialism, colonization, and capitalism in the global history. These historical factors have left a
lasting impact on many countries that were colonized and Global South. This transnational view enables me to explore multiple dimensions in shaping social construction of race and racism. While in the United States, racialized groups are often categorized as people of color, in other places like East Asian
countries, nationality and ethnicity play a significant role in shaping perceptions of race (See N.Y. Kim 2008, 2015; Yu, 2022). Consequently, I’m committed to promoting cross-cultural dialogues about racial injustice and “equity grammar” (Kim et al., 2023, p. 9).

LtC: In your work, you apply critical lenses and interrogate commonly used educational terms and
narratives to examine how educational leaders navigate accountability landscapes. What are some of the major lessons the field of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience?

TK: In my research on the intersection of leadership and policy, I’ve delved into the concept of “accountability.” While typically associated with responsibility, the term has taken on various meanings across different fields, leading to an expansive operational definition. Within education policy, accountability serves both as a means and an end goal (Suspitsyna, 2010). However, I’ve observed that the prevailing discourse on accountability, shaped by large policy initiatives like Every Student Succeed Act (ESSA), tends to emphasize high-stakes policies, at the expense of relational aspects of accountability working in P-12 schools. This led me to investigate how leaders in practice perceive and enact accountability in their day-to-day roles.

My research in this area urges Educational Change scholars to consider whose viewpoints are driving transformative changes. Drawing from my background as a former elementary school teacher in South Korea and a current leadership scholar, I focus on equity-driven leaders’ perspectives. Recognizing the power dynamics between policymakers at the top and practitioners implementing accountability
efforts for diverse stakeholders, I frame accountability based on how policies are enacted and how these professionals operate within their contexts. Informed by policy sociology (Ball, 1993, 2015) and the idea of street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky, 2010), my research resists confining accountability within predefined policy scripts (See Kim, 2022, 2023). My framing of policy from the viewpoints of leaders also aligns with my methodological approaches to understand accountability. I use qualitative methods inspired by portraiture (Lawrence-Lightfoot & Davis, 1997), which blends elements of phenomenology and ethnography. This approach enables me to reveal rich, contextualized narratives that shed light on the
intricate challenges of accountability enactment in school settings. These examples underline the importance not only of the nature of changes being pursued, but also whose interpretations hold significance. Recent trends in the field of Educational Change emphasize the importance of including voices from communities and students, providing deeper insights into fundamental questions about change and its implementation through policies.

“I argue that leaders must adopt a multidimensional comprehension of the change process, grounded in values of equity and social justice, to ensure sustainable and meaningful changes.”

Moreover, my research accentuates the human facet of leading change. In my Harvard Educational Review paper, I theorize the “human side of accountability” (Kim, 2023, p. 313). This concept spotlights the leadership space where school principals grapple with the dual pressures of meeting student needs and adhering to policy mandates while minimizing inadvertent harm to marginalized students. This might involve complying with the law and policy mandates they disagree with for job continuity. Navigating such complexities necessitates ethical decision-making and a dedication to rebuilding trust and prioritizing underserved students. Given the unpredictable and multifaceted nature of implementing
changes, I argue that leaders must adopt a multidimensional comprehension of the change process, grounded in values of equity and social justice, to ensure sustainable and meaningful changes. With COVID-19 and rapid technological advancement, our educational landscapes have become infused with AI and technology-induced transformations. Within this context, my research also prompts
questions to educational change scholars: How can we incorporate these non-human (or posthuman) elements into the endeavor of “humanizing” leadership for driving change?

LtC: In some of your recent work, you use AsianCrit to examine your experiences as a Korean woman living in the racialized context of the United States. This deeply personal and incredibly important piece shares the narratives of fellow early career scholars in higher ed as well. How might your insights help us realize inclusion and justice in higher education and K-12?

TK: In light of the profound impacts of COVID-19 on Asian American communities and the surge of Asian Hate crimes, my inquiry team of five early career Korean American faculty members explored our racialized experiences in the U.S. We approached this inquiry through the lens of AsianCrit (Iftikar & Museus, 2018; Museus & Iftikar, 2014), which is a subgroup of critical race theory (CRT) (See Kim et al., 2023). We initially formed a reading group to deepen our understanding of AsianCrit. Over time, this group organically transformed into an identity-informed peer-mentoring space, where we came to recognize the immense value of collaborative inquiry and collective storytelling. There are two significant
contributions our research makes in the pursuit of inclusion and justice.

First, our research underscores the utility of CRT, particularly AsianCrit, in empowering Asian-immigrant or international students as they navigate the process of “Asianization.” This term refers to the process of racially marginalized individuals in the U.S. becoming “Asian” due to the influence of Whit supremacy and nativist racism that shape our daily lives (Iftikar & Museus, 2018; Museus & Iftikar, 2014). Our study shows that AsianCrit can be a valuable tool for Asian Americans and Asians living in the U.S. to challenge the multiple labels placed upon Asian Americans through discourses like the model minority myth, yellow peril, and perpetual foreigner. Additionally, our stories provide insight for other racial groups to understand the systemic racism and biases that affect Asian communities in the U.S.

Our work also extends the AsianCrit scholarship by adding a layer of transnationality to AsianCrit, emphasizing an intersectional understanding of identities. As we found the images of Asian Americans being constructed by Western gaze, we argue that the existing AsianCrit scholarship does not fully address experiences and voices of the first-generation Asian immigrants and/or newcomers in the U.S. (Kim et al., 2023). In this way, our research aligns with decolonial efforts to challenge the prevailing Black-White framing of racialized experiences in building coalition for social justice and solidarity (See
Liou & Boveda, 2022). We urge leaders in K-12 and higher education to acknowledge the hybridity and complexities within the umbrella terms created to categorize racialized groups, such as Asian American, AAPI, and BIPOC.

Second, in fostering a sense of belonging and inclusion, my research suggests that higher education systems should recognize the value of identity-based communities where scholars can establish their scholarly positions, challenge multiple layers of marginalization, and foster solidarity and healing (hooks,
2003). We noticed that opportunities for discussing our racial identities were scarce during our graduate school experiences. Even though we often collaborate in academia, the support from the system often prioritizes research quantification and “funding” (Yoon & Templeton, 2019). Contrary to university Diversity Equity Inclusion (DEI) statements, international students, especially non-native English speakers, are sometimes viewed through a deficit lens (Wang & Sun, 2021) and seen merely as revenue
sources (Yao & Mwangi, 2022). Our research prompts essential questions: What does “diversity” truly mean? For whom? How can we create genuine support networks? In navigating these questions, it’s worth noting that peer-mentoring can provide enhanced chances for collaboratively building knowledge and fostering relationality. Unlike traditional mentoring, peer mentoring fosters equitable partnerships and creates a “third space” (Gutiérrez, 2008) where members can feel safe to share and revisit themselves. This ultimately can contribute to racial identity development toward solidarity.

“What does “diversity” truly mean? For whom? How can we create genuine support networks?”

LtC: Educational Change expects those engaged in and with schools, schooling, and school systems to spearhead deep and often difficult transformation. How might those in the field of Educational Change best support these individuals and groups through these processes?

TK: There are various approaches to consider, and one valuable insight I’d like to share is rooted in the scholarship that views leadership as organizing, moving away from the traditional heroic and individualistic approaches that still dominate the field of educational leadership, even within discussions of social justice leadership (Kim & Mauldin, 2022). To shift this mindset and challenge the status quo, as
highlighted by Ethan Chang in the Lead the Change issue of February 2022, it’s crucial to reconceptualize leadership as a praxis of organizing (Ishimaru, 2013). This means building systems and partnerships that prioritize equity and solidarity with those who are most affected by the changes we seek to implement. Embracing power “with” approaches (Loomer, 1976) to lead change is instrumental in creating a space for a more nuanced perspective on the challenges we face and the potential solutions. By adopting these power “with” approaches to leadership, I think the field can foster discussions about the types of systems that can be most effective and how these systems can be utilized to promote more
equitable educational experiences. This shift in perspective has the potential to open up new avenues for dialogue and action, ultimately contributing to a more just and inclusive educational landscape.

LtC: Where do you perceive the field of Educational Change is going? What excites you about Educational Change now and in the future?

TK: To answer this question, let me start by reflecting on some key moments in my life that resonate with the field of Educational Change. One standout memory goes back over a decade when I first delved into the second edition of the Handbook of Educational Change. I was captivated by the interdisciplinary nature of the theories and their application to empirical evidence across various educational contexts. This experience had a profound impact on me, leading me to choose the analysis of professional capital as the topic for my Masters’ thesis. Another significant moment occurred at the art museum in Toronto during the Educational Change SIG meeting at the 2019 AERA conference. I found myself surrounded by scholars from different regions and with diverse disciplinary backgrounds. We sat together, engaging in dynamic conversations about the essence of change in education – not just the “how” but also the
“why.” During this meeting, I had the privilege of connecting with both established leaders and enthusiastic students based in Toronto, further enhancing my perspective on educational change. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted Educational Change scholars to generate knowledge and innovative ideas, challenging the conventional grammar of schooling. This collective effort was exemplified in the special issue titled “The Changes We Need: Education Post COVID-19,” in which I had the opportunity to contribute an essay informed by a project in Korea.

“Educational Change is a field that thrives on partnerships and foundational knowledge.”

Reflecting on these moments, it becomes evident that Educational Change is a field that thrives on partnerships and foundational knowledge. It is open to embracing diverse perspectives and has strong capacities to organize and foster changes that prioritize equity and justice, transcending geographical
and epistemological boundaries. In fact, the Journal of Educational Change has published papers that delve into racism in global settings (e.g., Arber, 2003; Rizvi, 2003; Tomlinson, 2003) and critical examinations of biases within educational practices and policies (e.g., Gatimu, 2009; Giroux & Schmidt, 2004). I envision Educational Change as a field that should revisit these foundational principles and actively engage with the latest theoretical advancements in the realm of racial equity to
advance knowledge and practice. By embracing an equity- and justice-oriented mindset with a
sense of urgency, Educational Change can become a catalyst for critical hope (Freire, 2021) in driving meaningful and transformative changes in education.

References

Arber, R. E. (2003). The Presence of an-other: The prescience of racism in post-modern times. Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000006163.10946.13

Au, W. (2022). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. Routledge.

Ball, S. J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. The Australian Journal of Education Studies, 13(2), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0159630930130203

Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education, 36(3), 306-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279

Budiman, A. & Ruiz, N. G. (2021). Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group in the U. S. Retrieved from https://pewrsr.ch/3tbjILO

Chang, E. (2022, Feb). Lead the Change Series Q & A with Ethan Chang. Lead the Change Series, 126, 1-9. Retrieved from https://www.aera.net/Portals/38/docs/SIGs/SIG155/Lead%20the%20Change_EC_Feb%202022.pdf?ver=ExiALXp7L6gxlYoYk-NIOg%3d%3d

Diamond, J. B., & Gomez, L. M. (2023). Disrupting White supremacy and anti-Black racism in educational organizations. Educational Researcher, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189×231161054 

Flórez Petour, M. T., & Rozas Assael, T. (2020). Accountability from a social justice perspective: Criticism and proposals. Journal of Educational Change, 21(1), 157–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09361-3

Freire, P. (2021). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press.

Gatimu, M. W. (2009). Undermining critical consciousness unconsciously: Restoring hope in the multicultural education idea. Journal of Educational Change, 10(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9087-5

Giroux, H. A., & Schmidt, M. (2004). Closing the Achievement Gap: A Metaphor for Children Left Behind. Journal of Educational Change, 5(3), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000041041.71525.67

Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164. https://doi.org/10 .1598/RRQ.43.2.3

hooks, b. (2003). Rock my soul: Black people and self-esteem. Washington Square Press.

Iftikar, J. S., & Museus, S. D. (2018). On the utility of Asian critical (AsianCrit) theory in the field of education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(10), 935–949. https://doi.org/10 .1080/09518398.2018.1522008

Irby, D. (2022). Stuck improving: Racial equity and school leadership. Harvard Education Press

Ishimaru, A. (2013). From heroes to organizers: Principals and education organizing in urban school reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(1), 3-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X12448250

Ishimaru, A. M., & Galloway, M. K. (2021). Hearts and minds first: Institutional logics in pursuit of educational equity. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 57(3), 470-502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20947459

Khalifa, M. (2020). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press.

Kim, N. Y. 2008. Imperial citizens: Koreans and race from Seoul to LA. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Kim, N. Y. 2015. The United States arrives: Racialization and racism in post-1945 South Korea. In Race and Racism in Modern East Asia (Vol. II): Interactions, Nationalism, Gender and Lineage, edited by R. Kowner, W. Demel, 274–295. Boston/the Netherlands: Brill

Kim, T. (2022). Reimagining accountability through educational leadership: Applying the metaphors of “agora” and “bazaar”. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Online Advanced. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221132100 

Kim, T. (2023). The human side of accountability: Dilemmas of reaching all learners. Harvard Educational Review, 93(3), 313-341. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-93.3.313

Kim, T., & Mauldin, C. (2022). Troubling unintended harm of heroic discourses in social justice leadership. Frontiers in Education.  https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.796200

Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Davis, J. H. (1997). The art and science of portraiture. Jossey-Bass.

Lipman, P., & Haines, N. (2007). From accountability to privatization and African American exclusion: Chicago’s “Renaissance 2010”. Educational policy, 21(3), 471-502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904806297734

Liou, D. D., & Boveda, M. (2022). The coloniality of false racial binaries: Intersectional consciousness as antiracist expectations for multiracial coalition-building. Educational Studies – AESA, 58(3), 368–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2022.2033751

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.

Loomer, B. (1976). Two conceptions of power. Process Studies, 6(1), 5–32.

Mulford, B. (2005). Organizational learning and educational change. In Extending educational change: International handbook of educational change (pp. 336-361). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Museus, S. D., & Iftikar, J. (2014). An Asian critical theory (AsianCrit). In M. Y. Danico (Ed.), Asian American society: An encyclopedia (pp. 95–98). SAGE Publications and Association for Asian American Studies. 

Pailey, R. N. (2020). De‐centring the ‘white gaze’of development. Development and Change, 51(3), 729-745. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12550

Ray, V. (2019). A theory of racialized organizations. American Sociological Review, 84(1), 26-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418822335

Rincón-Gallardo, S. (2018). Social Justice: Section Introduction. In Future Directions of Educational Change (pp. 11-15). Routledge.

Rincón-Gallardo, S. (2020). Educational change as social movement: An emerging paradigm from the global south. Journal of Educational Change, 21(3), 467-477.

Rizvi, F. (2003). Globalization and the cultural politics of race and educational reform. Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 209.-2011. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JEDU.0000006274.28470.68

Suspitsyna, T. (2010). Accountability in American education as a rhetoric and a technology of governmentality. Journal of Education Policy, 25(5), 567-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930903548411

Tomlinson, S. (2003). Globalization, race and Education: Continuity and Change. Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jedu.0000006161.69737

Tuck, E. (2013). Neoliberalism as nihilism? A commentary on educational accountability, teacher education, and school reform. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(2), 324-347. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/117718011300900407

Wang, X., & Sun, W. (2021). Unidirectional or inclusive international education? An analysis of discourses from U.S. international student services office websites. Journal ofDiversity in Higher Education, 15(5), 617–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe000035

Yao, C. W., & Mwangi, C. A. G. (2022). Yellow Peril and cash cows: The social positioning of Asian international students in the USA. Higher Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00814-y

Yoon, H. S., & Templeton, T. N. (2019). The practice of listening to children: The challenges of hearing children out in an adult-regulated world. Harvard Educational Review, 89(1), 55–84. https://doi.org/10 .17763/1943-5045-89.1.55

Yu, J. (2022). The racial learning of Chinese international students in the US: a transnational perspective. Race Ethnicity and Education, Online Advanced. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2022.2106878

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Educational change, Educational Policy, equity, Lead the Change

Relationship Building for Educational Advocacy: Lead the Change Interview with Nicole Patterson

Posted on August 17, 2023 by | Leave a comment

In this month’s Lead the Change (LtC) interview Nicole Patterson shares her experiences as a principal working to create equitable opportunities and sustain educational change for her students. Patterson recently completed her Doctoral degree in Educational Leadership at Saint Joseph’s University. She has worked as a teacher, instructional coach, assistant principal, and is currently a principal — all within inner-city communities.The LtC series is produced by Alex Lamb and colleagues from the Educational Change Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. A pdf of the fully formatted interview is available on the LtC website.

Lead the Change (LtC): The 2024 AERA theme is “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action.” This theme charges researchers and practitioners with confronting racial injustice directly while imagining new possibilities for liberation. The call urges scholars to look critically at our global past and look with hope and radicalism towards the future of education. What specific responsibility do educational change scholars have in this space? What steps are you taking to heed this call?

Nicole Patterson: Educational change scholars have a responsibility to ensure they operate with a sense of urgency as they advocate for sustainable change for those entrusted in our care. In short, this looks like educational scholars staying updated on the latest research on racial injustices, applying these findings to their everyday work, committing to the feeling of discomfort, and understanding change is often on the other side of this feeling. 

Nicole Patterson

My latest research titled, Taking a Knee (Patterson, 2022) is connected to the 2024 AERA theme of “Dismantling Racial Injustice and Constructing Educational Possibilities: A Call to Action” by examining the level of cultural competence and awareness of structural inequities educators used in their daily teaching practice of Black and Brown students. 

“Taking a Knee” is a phrase with various meanings. To some, taking a knee was perceived as a disrespectful act to the flag of the United States of America. To some, taking a knee was a stand against an American history of oppression and injustice. Forothers, the phrase represents the lack of regard for human life evidenced by the Minneapolis police officer’s murder of George Floyd. The difference between these aforementioned perspectivesis that oftentimes when Black and Brown people take a stand to uplift and overcome the plight and oppression that they’ve experienced for over 400 years by promoting their natural given birth right to live without oppression and within a life full of joy, opportunities, and advancement, the intent is misconstrued. Individuals without awareness of the plight of Black and Brown people, in turn, can intentionally or unintentionally use the same behavior of continuous oppression to crucify the dreams and ambitions of Black and Brown people, and this process can be defined as cognitive dissonance.

“Overt and covert acts of violence and disservice represent the need for increased levels of cultural competence for all educators.”

For me “Taking a Knee” represents the consistent murder of Black and Brown people through police brutality and how such events mirror the treatment of Black and Brown children in the United States’ educational system. We are currently amid two global pandemics, the COVID-19 pandemic and the pandemic of Social Injustice. The pandemic of Social Injustice in America begins in 1619 when chains were worn instead of masks and the only viable vaccine was the risk of traveling the underground railroad with Harriet Tubman. We see evidence of this pandemic in the field of education when educators unintentionally and intentionally “kneel” on the necks of Black and Brown students, sucking the breath of air, knowledge, passion, and opportunity from Black and Brown youth. These overt and covert acts of violence and disservice represent the need for increased levels of cultural competence for all educators including educators who mean well but show levels of cognitive dissonance by participating in actions they previously stated they would not. Educators need to engage in reflectionand engage in the process of unlearning and relearning or dismantling and constructing a system full of possibilities. 

LtC: As a principal and scholar, you bridge research and practice through your work in both spheres. What are some of the major lessons the field of Educational Change can learn from your work and experience? 

NP: It is truly a blessing to serve in the capacity as school principal and scholar. I truly did not understand the blessing until I was within my dissertation work. I felt such liberation in the access to relevant information to inform my practice as an educator.  Lessons I have acquired along the way are: 

●      Power of relationships

●      Advocacy

●      Consistent Action 

Relationships have been the greatest lesson in this sphere. Meeting like-minded individuals and others that challenge perspectives has been an asset to my overall paradigm in education. These relationships have afforded me the privilege to get into the spaces and places of those who came before me. These relationships have also allowed me to lift those up that come after me to bring them into the same spaces and places as I was. I often say, “relationships are worth more than money.” The power of a relationship can take you so much further than any dollar amount. My professional and personal relationships have allowed me to develop into the scholar- practitioner that I am today. I will continue to reach back and support those as was done for me. 

“Each day as scholar-practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away.”

As a scholar-practitioner I have found my voice as an advocate in my field. Understanding and having the level of discernment on when and what to advocate for is paramount. This season and growth in advocacy that did not occur until I realized the power and privilege I have as a Black female educator. In other words, although I have intersections of race and gender, I still have a privilege regarding access to educational advancement and financial means to attain schooling. Understanding this, I use my education to empower and educate others. On a daily basis, the power of advocacy is a lesson learned and utilized to ensure I continue to pave the way for the students and families that are so deserving of an educational and life experience that is oftentimes not equitable. 

Last, consistent action! One of my favorite quotes is, “What you do every day matters more than what you do every once in a while.” This quote applies to all areas of life, and while I typically reference this regarding my health and fitness journey, these words hold true in service in the educational field. Each day as scholar-practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away; I do not believe that anything stays the same. With this mindset, I am committed to ensuring consistency in all that I do for educational advancement. I am also cognizant of those who are constantly watching what I do and say. I need to model leadership to empower those in my care.

“Each day as scholar- practitioners we are either moving closer to a more equitable system or further away.”

LtC: In some of your recent work, you investigate how teachers and administrators lead for learning and cultural proficiency during times of disruption. How might your findings help inform our understanding of professional development, educational justice, and educational change more broadly? 

NP: My research allowed the space for educators to evaluate their sense of cultural competency on a pre-existing Cultural Competence Self-Assessment for Teachers (Adapted from Lindsey, Robins & Terrell [2009] Cultural Proficiency: A Manual for School Leaders). This survey paired teacher voices to the interpretation of their score to their daily instructional pedagogy. Once the teacher was provided their numerical cultural competence score, the teacher was able to answer a series of questions to bring life to that number. Their responses were able to transition a number to words and experience of current teaching practice based upon their belief systems and lived experiences. The findings and lived experiences display that there is a clear need for educators to be aware of their level of cultural competence and differences with those they interact with. My recent work reviewed cultural competence in the context of three structural inequities: healthcare, housing, and education and all three of these structural inequities show the need for cultural competence of educators and individuals.  

The implications for practice of school leaders and classroom teachers are as follows:

  1. use cultural competence as an umbrella for the development of teachers,
  2. provide consistent relationship building opportunities,
  3. fund programs focused on financial literacy and entrepreneurship to reach diverse populations of post-secondary student interest
  4. use embedded/required instructional materials that reflect student cultures and address current/future structural inequities that will mutate from current ones
  5. stay up to date on the digital world and provide students with needed resources
  6. mentor teachers in the field to address and develop understanding of their bias/feelings,
  7. codify a process to continue the work of educators self-assessing their cultural competence and awareness of structural inequities. 

Through the findings of this work, a new process emerged that will assist educators, researchers, and students to gain an understanding of their cultural competence level and awareness of structural inequities.

This process of authentic self-assessment must takeplace for sustainable change within the educational system. This process allows educators to self-assess where they currently stand with cultural competence and structural inequities and where they think they can continue to grow and develop to make a difference through their instructional practice.

From Patterson 2022

LtC: Educational Change expects those engaged in and with schools, schooling, and school systems to spearhead deep and often difficult transformation. How might those in the field of Educational Change best support these individuals and groups through these processes?

NP: Prior to supporting those who are in our care, we have to first understand and evaluate the change we are asked to spearhead and transform. Individuals in our care are in an organizational structure. It is important that teachers use this self-assessment on a continuous basis and that reflection take place at all levels to enact sustainable change. Connected to self-assessment, there must be collaboration and support systems for leaders facilitating these transformation efforts. Leaders are chameleons, and we must adapt to the needs of those we support but also use wisdom in the supports we are in need of. At times, support for leaders can be as simple and impactful as a listening ear, mentorship, and self-care,to name a few examples. 

Expectations, accountability, and support are the key ingredients to needed educational change of academic and life outcomes for marginalized communities. Additionally, in order to evoke change we must include those whom the change will impact in the conversation. I often think of the saying, “nothing for me, without me.” Courageous conversations must happen at the individual and group level to ensure we are uplifting the voices of those who are involved in the change process. Everyone wants to be heard. Everyone also wants to be a part of something bigger than themselves. This can be achieved through transparency, consistent communication, and partnership during the transformational process. 

LtC: Where do you perceive the field of Educational Change is going? What excites you about Educational Change now and in the future?

NP: Hope is amazing and the strongest thing to hold on to! I hope that with the rise of advocacy for cultural competence and access to relevant research, the field of education will truly become a space that benefits all the children we are blessed to serve. I am excited and encouraged by the youth! Working with such brilliant, bold, and brave students on a daily basis excites and inspires me to continue to work for educational change. The innovation, creativity, and relentlessness of our youth is a joy to experience as an educator and leader. I am encouraged by the advocacy I see young people engage in, by the multiple ways success is defined for them, and the no fear mindset that allows them to go for the goals they desire without a fear of failure. I am encouraged that as current scholar-practitioners we can contribute to the future success of students by keeping an open mind and holding onto hope. Hope is one of the most powerful things this world has to offer. Maintaining a growth mindset is needed to experience the true value of hope and dealing this hope to others. 

I foresee continuous growth in the areas of educational technology. I am curious to see how artificial intelligence will continue to influence education. Currently, there are several systems that are being used by scholar-practitioners and students regarding artificial intelligence. I can only hope that as the times continue to change, schools will be ahead of the curve by providing opportunities and spaces to educate students and educators on how to best use these various technologies. I hope to see a major change in the mandates regarding curriculum and instruction to focus on financial literacy requirements, fostering entrepreneurship, courses in social emotional well-being, and courses that teach conflict resolution/self-regulation. These courses are especially imperative in Black and Brown communities where we see and experience tragedy due to gun violence on a daily basis. 

Last, at the policy level, I hope to see change connected to continuous efforts to encourage and uplift the Black vote. These are the views of the silent majority and reflect the importance of the future of elections for us and our children. I am fully aware that this process is not an immediate one and will take strategic and intentional advocacy, collaboration, and resistance. I am also fully aware that the students, families, and individuals for whom we continue this heart work, will bring about a promising future for those that come after them.

References: 

Guerra, P. L., & Wubbena, Z. C. (2017). Teacher beliefs and classroom practices cognitive dissonance in high stakes test-influenced environments. Issues in Teacher Education, 26(1), 35-51.

Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (2009). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school leaders (3rd ed.). Corwin Press

McGrath, A. (2020). Bringing cognitive dissonance theory into the scholarship of teaching and learning: Topics and questions in need of investigation. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 6(1), 84-90. 10.1037/stl0000168

Patterson, N. (2022). Taking a knee: A mixed methods study evaluating awareness of structural inequities and levels of cultural competence of middle school in-service teachers of Black and Brown students (Publication No. 28967538) [Doctoral dissertation, Saint Joseph’s University]. Saint Joseph’s University ProQuest Dissertations Publishing

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Educational Leadership, Interviews, Lead the Change

Coherence and Alignment: Reflecting on Two Decades of Research on Educational Reform

Posted on December 19, 2019 by | Leave a comment

This week, Elizabeth Leisy Stosich discusses her interview with IEN’s Thomas Hatch, published in the new Cornerstone Series from the CPRE Research Minutes podcast.  This will be our last post of 2019, as we will be on hiatus until January 7th. Happy New Year!

Last week, I had the chance to speak with Thomas Hatch from Teachers College about  two articles that I have drawn on in my own work on coherence and standards-based reform. In the interview Hatch discusses his 2002 article “When Improvement Programs Collide” and his co-authored 2004 study, led by Meredith Honig, “Crafting Coherence: How Schools Strategically Manage Multiple, External Demands.”

I was interested in doing this interview to share it with the students in my course, Leading Educational Policy and Reform, for experienced educational leaders in Fordham’s Ed.D. program. Often, when discussing policy, we only consider one policy at a time rather than examining it in the complex policy environment that educational leaders must navigate on a daily basis. In the interview, we discuss how Hatch’s work on coherence has evolved, our common interests in the social process of interpreting and making sense of policy, and connections to the work of other scholars in the field including Richard Elmore and Karen Seashore Louis.

In our conversation, Hatch describes the challenge of policy alignment as “a technical issue”; whereas, policy coherence is an issue of meaning. He was motivated to pursue this line of research when working to support educational reform in the 1990s. As he explains, “Even if all of the efforts of systemic reform in the 1990s were successful and we produced all these aligned policies, there could be so much work and so many demands on people that they’d still feel overwhelmed and fragmented. And it’s that sense of overwhelmingness and fragmentation that we were trying to address, particularly in thinking about that article around crafting coherence where I think we really emphasize that this is an issue of learning and meaning making that people and organizations like schools are engaged in.” Over time, his work has reinforced the importance of understanding the challenge of “crafting coherence” among external policies and internal goals from a collective perspective, one that takes into account the fact that educators are engaged in this meaning making process simultaneously but from their own unique perspectives.

In the interview, Hatch also shares practical advice for educational leaders at the school- and district-level who face the difficult task of leading policy implementation. As he explains, educational leaders should “recognize this is a part of the job. It’s not a sign that you’re not doing well if you’re feeling overwhelmed. It’s a reality of the circumstances in which the work is done, and you have to recognize that you’re facing conflicting incentives.” My recent article, “Principals and Teachers ‘Craft Coherence’ Among Accountability Policies,” examines how educators respond to the demands of the Common Core and a new teacher evaluation policy and reinforces how challenging maintaining this balance can be in the face of high-stakes accountability policies. In fact, the pressure from standards-based accountability policies can lead some leaders to abandon their local school goals to focus on external demands. To be successful in the long run, leaders must both respond to the requirements imposed by external mandates but also maintain a focus on the goals that matter most to the community they serve.

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform

Leading Futures: Alternative Perspectives on Education Reform and Policy

Posted on July 26, 2017 by | Leave a comment

In this latest post in the Leading Futures Series, edited by Alma Harris and Michelle Jones, Jenny Gore and Geoff Whitty describe an alternative approach to improving teaching that challenges predominant forms of accountability. Drawing from their public lecture at Bath Spa University on May 17, 2017, with a focus on the potential of Gore’s work in Australia on Quality Teaching Rounds, they suggest that the approach should now be trialed elsewhere.  Jenny Gore is Professor of Education and Geoff Whitty holds a Global Innovation Chair at the University of Newcastle, Australia. 

Improving teaching: some lessons from Australia

Jenny Gore and Geoff Whitty

Why on earth would we look to Australia for lessons about education? After all, its PISA scores have dropped down the rankings where they now sit alongside those of many other OECD nations. What does Australia have to offer that differs from the apparently more successful countries in Scandinavia and East Asia that have often been the focus of policy tourism?

One answer is, of course, that PISA is not the be-all and end-all of educational assessment. But another reason is that other factors have overridden ‘PISA envy’ for countries like the US and UK, which are much more similar to each other than they are to either Finland or Shanghai-China. Their continuing mutual interest in each other’s reforms probably lies with shared social and political networks and assumptive worlds – and, of course, a common language with which to describe reforms.

Indeed, readers in the US and UK, and many others influenced by Anglo-Saxon policies, will readily recognize the major challenges identified by Bentley and Savage in a recent book on policies changes in Australia in recent years. These include:

  • a national curriculum
  • standardised national assessments in literacy and numeracy (NAPLAN)
  • national reporting on schools (through the My School website)
  • professional standards for teachers and school principals
  • a universally accessible year of pre-school
  • partial implementation of needs-based funding reforms (Gonski).

But they also point out that, despite these reforms, there is unfortunately very little sign of positive impacts or outcomes. For example:

  • The percentage of Australian students successfully completing Year 12 is not improving.
  • State and federal school funding policies are still reproducing a status quo that entrenches sectoral division and elitism.
  • New evidence-informed methods, such as clinical and targeted teaching models, are being taken up very slowly in teacher education degrees and schools.
  • The status and efficacy of vocational learning have shown little meaningful improvement.
  • NAPLAN and My School have not led to improvements in literacy and numeracy, with 2016 data showing either stagnation or decline.
  • The performance of Australian students in international assessments of maths, science and literacy skills has steadily declined.

Depressingly familiar stuff to many of us, isn’t it?  Similarly, take this recent statement by Geoff Masters, CEO of the Australian Council for Educational Research.

There is no shortage of challenges in school education. Some of the biggest challenges we face can appear frustratingly intractable. Despite reform efforts, regular government reviews and ongoing calls for change, progress in addressing our most significant challenges is often slow and solutions continue to elude us.

Equally familiar are the five key challenges he identifies as facing Australian education:

  1. Equipping students for the 21st Century, including by increasing reading, mathematical and scientific literacy levels.
  2. Reducing disparities between…schools, particularly along socioeconomic lines, by ensuring that every student has access to an excellent school and excellent teaching.
  3. Reducing the ‘long tail’ of underachieving students who fall behind year-level curriculum expectations and thus fail to meet minimum international standards.
  4. Getting all children off to a good start, by reducing the number of children who begin school with low levels of school readiness and so are at risk of ongoing low achievement.
  5. Raising the professional status of teaching, by increasing the number of highly able school leavers entering teaching.

While this last challenge resonates with the aspirations of many countries, and policy direction of initiatives like Teach for America, Gore et al. have demonstrated that the solution identified here by Masters may be misleading. Rather, the sort of approach we describe below may be a better way to enhance professionalism in teaching.

Bentley and Savage say of Australia, over the past decade ‘the policy landscape has become riddled with reform “solutions” that subject students, teachers, administrators and policymakers to mounting levels of pressure and stress’ and that ‘the short-term cyclical churn of today’s politics and media clearly exacerbates these problems.’

Although the policy context of other countries differs in detail, their actual policies have much in common. In many countries, regulation and accountability have taken a hold on government attitudes towards the teaching profession, alongside (though in different degrees) a belief in market forces as providing a way forward. Education academics (ourselves included) have been rather better at critique of such developments than in pointing to an alternative way forward. What we want to argue is that widely sought-after improvements in teaching will remain elusive unless teachers are afforded more respect, trust and, especially, professional support.

One tested example of such an approach lies in work conducted at the University of Newcastle, Australia, which puts down a challenge to policy makers who seek genuine improvement in teaching. The approach, known Quality Teaching Rounds (QTR), has produced measurable impact on the quality of teaching while simultaneously enhancing teachers’ morale and confidence.

QTR is a form of teacher professional development designed by Bowe and Gore to bring together the benefits of professional learning communities (PLCs), instructional ‘rounds’, and the Quality Teaching (QT) pedagogical framework (NSW Department of Education and Training [NSW DET], 2003). The framework centres on the three dimensions of Intellectual Quality, Quality Learning Environment, and Significance. QTR involves teachers working in PLCs of three or more teachers to observe and analyse each other’s teaching, using the QT framework, followed by extended conversation about their collective practice. QTR is a distinctive form of professional development which: is applicable across stages and subject areas; addresses teaching comprehensively; requires minimal external input; and is adaptable to the specific teaching context. This is in contrast to professional development that: is stage or subject-specific; addresses a part of teaching practice only; requires ongoing provision of external expertise; and is highly prescriptive of practice.

In a recent randomised controlled trial, 24 NSW public schools participated in an investigation of the impact of QTR. Eight teachers at each of the schools were involved in the study, with lesson observations carried out by researchers, who were blinded to group allocation, at three time points – baseline, post-intervention (6-months), and follow up (12- months). There were two intervention groups (QTR-Set and QTR-Choice) and a wait-list control group.

Participating in QTR was found to significantly impact on the quality of teaching (d =0.4-0.5) within the relatively short timeframe of this intervention (most teachers were involved for four days or less) across a diverse range of schools. Moderators of intervention effects were explored for: type of school, SES, location, teaching experience, and gender of teacher.

The key findings were that the quality of teaching improved for both intervention groups and these effects were sustained six months later, signaling the sustainability of impact into a new school year. Effects were independent of school type (primary/secondary) and location (urban/rural) and years of teaching experience. Effects on teacher morale and sense of recognition and appraisal yielded similar results for the two intervention groups, relative to control group. In interviews, teachers reported positive impacts on their own and their colleagues’ teaching and professional confidence, on collegiality and school culture, and on their students. The next study in this programme of work is another RCT designed to investigate further the impact of QTR on student learning outcomes.

The findings from the earlier study demonstrate the value of QTR in not only improving the quality of teaching but simultaneously enhancing teacher morale and teaching cultures across a range of schools and classroom settings in diverse communities. QTR was found to be an effective form of professional development, improving the quality of teaching in primary and secondary schools across subject areas and for teachers at different stages of their careers. The positive effects of QTR are thus highly generalisable across school contexts.

The approach not only builds on widely accepted ‘principles of effective PD,’ but can be implemented at scale and at a relatively low cost. It supports teachers in improving their practice while also developing their efficacy, well-being and professional engagement. This is in stark contrast to approaches that subject teachers to greater levels of accountability, evaluation, and performance review.

This Australian approach simultaneously, and ambitiously, provides evidence of a kind that is persuasive to governments and education systems that want to be sure their investments have pay-off and empower teachers. Such an approach is part of the jigsaw of educational improvement that has somehow been missing in many contexts. We argue that improving teaching in order to improve pupils’ learning depends, in large part, on teachers’ confidence in themselves and each other. This differs from prevailing approaches that seek to improve teaching through forms of accountability premised on a lack of confidence in and respect for teachers. In short, QTR is an alternative that can build public confidence in teachers from the ground up.

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform, Interviews, Leading Futures, Leading Futures Series

Tagged ,

Bringing Effective Instructional Practice to Scale

Posted on January 12, 2017 by | Leave a comment

10833The Journal of Educational Change publishes important ideas and evidence of educational change. Contributions represent a range of disciplines, including history, psychology, political science, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, and administrative and organizational theory. The journal also draws attention to a broad spectrum of methodologies, including quantitative and qualitative approaches, documentary study, action research, and conceptual development.

The journal’s most recent special issue, edited by Santiago Rincón-Gallardo and Brahm Fleisch, brings together articles by reform leaders and scholars who have developed and/or studied education change efforts in various contexts: Escuela Nueva in Colombia, the Learning Community Project in Mexico, the Gauteng Language and Mathematics Strategy in South Africa, Pratham’s Literacy Strategy in India, the Ontario Literacy Strategy in Canada, and Long Beach Unified School District’s system-wide instructional strategy in California, United States.

The editors also share two commentary papers by Richard Elmore and Michael Fullan. As the editors explain in their introduction to the special issue, “The two concluding essays pull together common and divergent threads across the six cases, derive key lessons, and articulate critical perspectives for the future of improvement in the education sector. While Elmore raises fundamental questions about the very project of policy-driven improvement, Fullan argues that, though elusive, whole system improvement centered around deep learning is doable.”

To read the complete introduction, click here:“Bringing effective instructional practice to scale: An introduction.”

To find the complete special issue, click here: The Journal of Educational Change.

To read IEN posts focusing on these reforms, click on the following links:

Attempting Change from Within: Student-Centered Change in Mexico

Bringing Effective Instructional Innovation to Scale through Social Movement in Mexico and Colombia

An interview with Vicky Colbert, co-founder of Escuela Nueva (Lead the Change)

Brahm Fleisch on building a new infrastructure for learning in Gauteng, South Africa

Learning from successful education reforms in Ontario

Learning from successful education reforms in Ontario: Part II

Leave a comment

Posted in education reform, Journal Articles

Life after levels: Is the new Year 6 Maths test changing the way teachers teach?

Posted on July 21, 2016 by | Leave a comment

This week we share a blog post written by Melanie Ehren and Nick Wollaston. Originally published on the IOE London Blog, of University College London, this blog is part of a Nuffield foundation funded research project Dr. Ehren coordinates. The research looks at the Key Stage 2 test in mathematics in England and how the test affects teaching of primary mathematics. The test is administered in year 6 (end of Primary school) and is considered to be high stakes as schools performing below the floor standard are monitored by Ofsted (the Inspectorate of Education), face potential forced academization, and test outcomes are used in (teachers’ and head teacher’s) performance management reviews. The test has undergone changes this year to reflect the new national curriculum, and the researchers have asked teachers (after the administration of the new test) how they are changing their teaching in response to the changes in the test. More info on the project (and a broader introduction) is on the website: www.highstakestesting.co.uk

Here we share the blog post in full. To read the post on the IOE London Blog, click here.

 

Life after levels: is the new Year 6 maths test changing the way teachers teach?

Earlier this month (5 July), the Department for Education published the results of the Key Stage 2 test for 10 and 11-year-olds. The publication was awaited with more anxiety than usual as this year’s test was the first one on the new national curriculum. One of the major changes in the test is the removal of the ‘old’ national curriculum levels 3, 4 and 5, where children were expected to reach at least a level 4. The level 6 paper for the most able children has also gone and results are now reported as ‘scaled scores[1]’. Each pupil now has to achieve at least a score of 100 to reach the expected standard. It seems like a minor change with little impact on how teachers teach mathematics and prepare children for the test, but recent findings from our Nuffield-funded study suggest otherwise.

We interviewed 30 Year 6 teachers in schools performing both below and above the floor standard in Mathematics. Interviews took place prior to the changes in the test in May/June 2015, and again after the changes in the test in May/June 2016. In the interviews in 2015, levels were one of the key topics teachers talked about when we asked them about notable features of the test that would inform their teaching. They explained how each of the two written Maths test papers would start with easy level 3 questions, have level 4 questions in the middle and finish with the difficult level 5 items at the end. This order of questions according to difficulty level would allow the lower attaining children to access the test, according to these teachers, and would build their confidence in answering the questions and their motivation to do well on the test. Teachers tell us in the second round of interviews, how all the questions are now ‘at level 5’ and how some of their lower attaining children stared at them in horror when opening their test booklet, asking them where the easy questions had gone.

Not only does the abolition of levels seem to have an impact on children’s motivation and confidence in test taking, it also appears to have a profound impact on how teachers come to understand and teach mathematics. Prior to the introduction of scaled scores, teachers would talk about gradually building up the level of difficulty when teaching specific mathematical content areas, such as ‘number sense and calculation’, ‘data handling’ or ‘shape and space’. Level 3, 4 and 5 test items on past Key Stage 2 test papers would help them understand the hierarchical nature of mathematics and how to introduce children to, for example, increasingly more difficult calculations (e.g. moving from one step to multistep problems, or from adding and subtracting whole numbers to adding and subtracting decimals). Resources such as Test Base would allow them to access available questions according to content area and difficulty level and they could simply download relevant questions when teaching a specific skill. Now that the levels have been removed, some of the teachers tell us that they just focus on getting all students to perform at level 5 in number and calculation as this is where most of the marks on the test are given and some hardly teach shape and space at all. These teachers also talk about moving towards a more ‘mastery style’ of teaching where they ensure that all students master the basics before they move on to teach more complex skills or other (more complex) content domains, such as algebra or geometry.

It is too early to know how widespread these changes are and the effect they will have on children’s understanding of mathematics. Our study, however, indicates that we need to keep a close eye on the breadth and depth of what our children are learning as some of these changes may be masked by an average single test score.

 

[1] A pupil’s scaled score is based on their raw score. The raw score is the total number of marks a pupil scores in a test, based on the number of questions they answered correctly. The Standard and Testing Agency develops tests each year to the same specification, but because the questions must be different, the difficulty of tests may vary slightly each year. This means that the raw scores pupils get in the tests need to be converted into a scaled score to be able make accurate comparisons of pupil performance over time. Every scaled score will represent the same level of attainment for a pupil each year, so a pupil who scores 103, for example, in 2016 will have demonstrated the same attainment as a pupil who scores 103 in 2017. A scaled score of 100 will always represent the expected standard on the test. Pupils scoring 100 or more will have met the expected standard on the test. In 2016, panels of teachers set the raw score required to meet the expected standard on each test.

Leave a comment

Posted in About K-12 International Education News, education reform

Tagged , , ,